We call religion our friend?

[Feelings]

"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost children." - Ezekiel 25:17 (also featured in Pulp Fiction)

Beautifully crafted passage isn't it?? I feel biblical shit like this, I feel it dawg, even though I do not rationally have it all reasoned out. Weird.

"So we pray to as many different gods as there are flowers, but we call religion our friend. We're so worried about saving our souls, afraid that God will take his toll that we forget to begin." - Jewel

I went to a Buddhist temple today. I meditated with them, I prayed with them, chanted with them, and had vegan lunch with them. I listened to the head honcho's teachings. However, I have a million questions challenging his teachings. He seems ISTJ, but officially, as also posted on the temple website, Buddhism encourages free thought. My core question would be:

Where does Buddhism's values come from? What is the basis of the belief that there is an empirical universal good and evil? Why is causing other beings to suffer considered empirically bad? Why is life considered good, and death considered bad (therefore to save a life is considered virtuous), especially considering that reincarnation exists? Are concepts of good and evil not inventions of the human species?

I should go around and find the smartest religious leaders in the area (no matter the religion) and ask them these kinds of meaning of life questions. The most intelligent religious leaders surely would have well thought out answers to these questions right?

"The purpose of living an ethical life is to escape the suffering inherent in samsara. Skillful actions condition the mind in a positive way and lead to future happiness, while the opposite is true for unskillful actions. Ethical discipline also provides the mental stability and freedom to embark upon mental cultivation via meditation." - wiki

I WIN. I would phrase this as:

"Buddhism's values are designed to help people attain enlightenment. What we consider to be virtuous are actions that almost all people will benefit, psychologically, from following. There are the very few that are evil and happy to be evil, but that is the vast minority."

So Buddhism's ethics are not empirical universal truth. They are geared towards the vast majority of human beings' biological hardwiring.

There is no nobility in kindness. Every human being on the face of the planet is inherently completely 'selfish', in the rawest form of the word. Everything you do is to serve yourself. Your kindness is so that you can feel good about yourself.

Therefore, who are we to judge those who live by different values? They are completely selfish, just like us, only in a different way. Let us let go of pride, even in our kind and charitable pursuits.

"what are we going to do about karma? There's no point in pretending that karma hasn't become a problem for contemporary Buddhism . .Buddhism can fit quite nicely into modern ways of understanding. But not traditional views of karma."[97] Loy argues that the traditional view of karma is "fundamentalism" which Buddhism must "outgrow." -wiki

"Loy argues that the idea of accumulating merit too easily becomes "spirtitual materialism," a view echoed by other Buddhist modernists," -wiki

I guess karma, rebirth, and prayer are all just leaps of faith. Pierce don't do that.

 

[hk427f3]

Yeah, as a philosophy, Buddhism is cool, but religions are kind of lame.

 

[DrShephard]

I am not a Buddhist, but my spirituality would be closest to Zen Buddhism - but without the meditating all the time. With that being said, I may refer to my beliefs as Buddhist in this. That is to say that what I write will not be a representation of Buddhism, but would be closest to the understanding of the world that Buddhist teachings (along with those of Eckhart Tolle and, more than him, Adyashanti and, much more than either of them, Alan Watts) have helped me to grasp. It seems the Buddhism hasn't taught me much. What it has done is helped me to un-learn all of the messed up garbage that is taken as fact by the vast majority mindset of society.

This is my understanding: Buddhism has no real set of values. No real morals. Buddhism doesn't say "Killing is bad", it more says "If you go around killing people, you probably won't like yourself very much." What Buddhism really seeks to do is to aid in the experience of enlightenment. When we aren't attached to this or that - being happy or not being sad, being virtuous or not being evil, being successful or not being poor - When we aren't seeking those things, we experience a moment of clarity. Of "Nothing to do, nowhere to go." In this state, our natural being, or tendency, or whatever you'd like to call it, begins to make itself known through what you notice. You don't really think too much about it. You just see something and have a natural inclination to do X or Y, sort of automatically.

"There are the very few that are evil and happy to be evil, but that is the vast minority."

That natural essence, in most people, is usually pretty cool. In the enlightened state, if someone saw a puppy stuck in a hole they'd most likely glance at it, walk over, pick the puppy up, and set him down outside of the hole - then maybe put something over the hole so it wouldn't fall back in. There aren't that many people whose natural essence would be to kick dirt in the hole to suffocate the puppy. That's not a right or wrong thing - it's just what tends to happen. Most people have a tendency to like to help. Focus on the word "Like". I've thought for a long time that Good and Evil aren't the best-fitting words for a value system. "

What is the basis of the belief that there is an empirical universal good and evil?

There is no universal good and evil. If life did not exist, the planets would spin around and sometimes meteors would hit them, sometimes suns would explode, sometimes rocks would float around in space. There is neither a good nor an evil in that. Good and evil are a purely human invention based on what we tend to like and dislike. Pain is generally "evil" for us - as we generally do not enjoy it. Feeling the sun's warmth on our skin is generally "good" for us, because we enjoy it. Things get more complicated sometimes though, like "You have an injury and we'll have to sew it up. It will hurt more right now, but you'll heal faster from it and it'll be better afterward."

Why is causing other beings to suffer considered empirically bad?

Because I generally don't like causing other beings to suffer. Most people don't either. There is a small portion of humans who tend to enjoy it, psycho/sociopaths for instance, and for them causing other beings to suffer is good because they enjoy it.

In an enlightened state, no problems are solved. What happens is that you realize that there aren't any problems. There are things that happen. Perhaps I might try to illustrate it by giving a few zen-like answers to problematic questions:

Question: Why is killing wrong?
Answer: Do you want to kill someone?

Question: Are our desires based on our nature or our past experiences or some value system we ascribe ourselves to? How should I live?
Answer: I have some ice cream in the freezer and I feel like having some. Would you like some too?

Question: I'm worried about my marriage. What should I do?
Answer: That's a shame. Your hair looks nice today. Here's your ice cream. It's rocky road.

I don't like the rules of Buddhism - the noble eightfold path. That's not to say that those things are bad, it is to say that they're misconstrued as being rules when they're more just a list of things that someone considered as being most likely in line with our natural expression. Not hurting people, etc etc. I'd personally rename them "The list of things that someone came up with that might help you, or might not."

If I had to write a list of rules for my line of spirituality, they'd be more frivolous - like "If you have a cold, nyquil usually helps you to sleep better" and "Isn't coffee pretty god damn good?" Incidentally, that reminds me of "The 10 Commandments you would write if you were God" I wrote in some other thread a while back.

Maybe I'll end with a few tidbits that have greatly helped me:

1. If you can't draw a picture of it, then it does not actually exist. (You cannot draw a picture of a tariff, or a government, or an idea. You can draw a picture of a person, a piece of paper with writing on it, a building. Most things we think are real do not actually exist. There is no such thing as a courthouse - it's just a building. Money is just paper, we've just conceptually ascribed value to it. The same with gold. Experts are just other humans. A diploma is a piece of paper with some meaning we've given to it. You can't draw a picture of Buddhism, or of Christianity, or of Politics, or of Testimony, or of Good or Evil.)

2. Drop all concepts. (To form a better view of the actual world, it's best to drop everything you know for a little while - everything you've learned and everything you've conceptualized. You'll see the world for what it is through fresh eyes.)

3. You already know the answer. (You already have all of the answers to your own questions. We all do. The conceptual past and future, laws and morals we place on ourselves, and conceptual desires and dislikes we place on ourselves help us to not listen to our answer that we already know though. So much of the time we're more apt to submit ourselves to others and to our concepts than we are to actually just say the answer we know and let that be that and allow ourselves to not need support for it - to let that answer stand by itself because it "is us".)

There's a quote that goes along the lines of that third one, which is this:

"Followers of the Way, if you wish to see this Dharma clearly, do not let yourselves be deceived. Whether you turn to the outside or to the inside, whatever you encounter, kill it. If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha; if you meet the patriarchs, kill the patriarchs; if you meet Arhats, kill Arhats; if you meet your parents, kill your parents; if you meet your relatives, kill your relatives; then for the first time you will see clearly. And if you do not depend on things, there is deliverance, there is freedom!"
-- 9th century Chinese zen master Lin Chi

Hmmm... Odds and ends...

Karma - I don't think the universe gives you what you give it. Karma, to me, is saying "If you live a life where you rob people, you're probably much more likely to run into a situation where you'll get hurt."

Rebirth - I haven't ever seen heaven, hell, or God. I have seen this life and this world. I just happen to be here. I don't remember where I was before. Based on that, I suppose that if there is something after this life, it's going to be my consciousness popping up somewhere else at a later date, and I won't remember any of this life at all.

Maybe that gave an alternate view of some things, or maybe not. Who knows!

I want some ice cream.

 

[Lark]

Religion provides an ethical framework and an object of devotion, I can only believe the monotheist religions, particularly Christianity and of the Christian creeds particuarly Roman Catholic, because they provide the proper subject for devotion. The ethical framework is totally contingent on the object of devotion for me.

I do not believe that man is hardwired for selfishness, I believe that is a distortion or confusion of correlation and causation of statistical or allegorical evidence. I believe that man can be either altruistic or selfish, the old testament describes this as a process of your heart hardening, as when Moses said that Pharoah had hardened his heart, or when God is cited as reminding individuals or the jewish people not to become hard hearted.

Now me personally, I am optimistic, I only believe that people become hard hearted and selfish if their normal development has been derailed or blocked some how, I do believe that under the best conditions human beings are not selfish. There are benefits to behaving with kindness but there can also be costs. Sometimes it is a costly venture for the individual, despite it being the most natural thing for them.

 

[TinyBubbles]

I believe we are living in samsara and that because of it we don't feel other people's pain as our own. That's the only reason people willingly hurt others. The illusion is of separation, the reality is a permanent connection.

 

[VH]

I'm a Christian minister. I teach at conferences across the country. One of my primary messages is how religion is something Christians should not do or be. It gets between you and God. There are countless (well, I'm sure someone could count them) passages in the bible insisting that religion is bad. It's a creation of man that limits our ability to follow God freely, creates division, and ultimately separates us from God.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

I'm a Christian minister. I teach at conferences across the country. One of my primary messages is how religion is something Christians should not do or be. It gets between you and God. There are countless (well, I'm sure someone could count them) passages in the bible insisting that religion is bad. It's a creation of man that limits our ability to follow God freely, creates division, and ultimately separates us from God.

Religion in most cases is a type of social construct.

Just to throw a curve ball in: In Catholicism, religion is understood as a virtue: the habit of willingly, and steadfastly rendering to God the honor and reverence due to Him. Catholicism is called a religion by non-catholics; but Catholics don't seem to spend much time assessing their practices, because we understand them to be customs/manners of honoring/reverencing God handed down of apostolic origin. I supose it is not significant if you stand, kneel, or sit to show reverence, but we just kneel because that is how Western Catholics have always shown reverence.

 

[Feelings]

I'm a Christian minister. I teach at conferences across the country. One of my primary messages is how religion is something Christians should not do or be. It gets between you and God. There are countless (well, I'm sure someone could count them) passages in the bible insisting that religion is bad. It's a creation of man that limits our ability to follow God freely, creates division, and ultimately separates us from God.

Do you think that I could believe in God? Do you think that this kind of faith would make sense to me?

 

[Feelings]

Religion in most cases is a type of social construct.

Just to throw a curve ball in: In Catholicism, religion is understood as a virtue: the habit of willingly, and steadfastly rendering to God the honor and reverence due to Him. Catholicism is called a religion by non-catholics; but Catholics don't seem to spend much time assessing their practices, because we understand them to be customs/manners of honoring/reverencing God handed down of apostolic origin. I supose it is not significant if you stand, kneel, or sit to show reverence, but we just kneel because that is how Western Catholics have always shown reverence.

Why would God care for your reverence? Do you think God created a creature so that He could be admired and worshiped? What vanity is this?

 

[VH]

Do you think that I could believe in God?

Anyone can believe in God.

Do you think that this kind of faith would make sense to me?

I don't know you well enough to make an assessment like that, but here are a few logical proofs.

If God is omniscient and omnipotent and loves everyone, then he knows us better than we know ourselves (omniscient), wants to reach us on our own level (loves everyone), and will (omnipotent). Therefore, the kind of faith I have might not make sense to everyone, but if God is real then God can reach you on your own level in a way that is personal to you. Your perspective won't change the nature of God, but God is perfectly willing to show you his nature in a way that works with you because he loves you - unconditionally.

I hope that made sense. I'm always happy to discuss this sort of thing, so feel free to ask me whatever you want. I don't get offended by probing questions or people who disagree.

Why would God care for your reverence? Do you think God created a creature so that He could be admired and worshiped? What vanity is this?

God doesn't want us to stroke his ego.

Even the phrase "Fear of God" doesn't mean fear. It means "The respect that is due a king", meaning submission to a benevolent ruler and respect for that ruler's power. The idea that God wants us to be cowering minions that blindly offer tribute to their overlord is completely backward. "Our king is awesome, and we back him up 100% no matter what he does because we know he is good and wise beyond measure!"

People often confuse what worship means. God wants us to be the best we can be, and to align ourselves with his benevolence. It's not about him. It's about us. The act of worship is to open ourselves to the love he offers us, the good that he wants to bestow upon us, and the blessings he wants to give us. Worship is saying on our deepest spiritual level "I want to be like you".

 

[Feelings]

1. If you can't draw a picture of it, then it does not actually exist. (You cannot draw a picture of a tariff, or a government, or an idea. You can draw a picture of a person, a piece of paper with writing on it, a building. Most things we think are real do not actually exist. There is no such thing as a courthouse - it's just a building. Money is just paper, we've just conceptually ascribed value to it. The same with gold. Experts are just other humans. A diploma is a piece of paper with some meaning we've given to it. You can't draw a picture of Buddhism, or of Christianity, or of Politics, or of Testimony, or of Good or Evil.)

I do not understand this. A tariff exists. If you pretend that it doesn't, and try to import something and NOT pay the tariff, you're not going to get your goods.

You believe that there is no government? Do you have any idea what kind of chaos would ensue if this was actually true?

Ideas don't exist? You got the idea to go eat ice cream and you probably acted on it. It seems to exist just fine.

And of course money has value. Why else would you be working for it?

It doesn't make sense to pretend that certain things don't exist. It just doesn't work.

"Followers of the Way, if you wish to see this Dharma clearly, do not let yourselves be deceived. Whether you turn to the outside or to the inside, whatever you encounter, kill it. If you meet the Buddha, kill the Buddha; if you meet the patriarchs, kill the patriarchs; if you meet Arhats, kill Arhats; if you meet your parents, kill your parents; if you meet your relatives, kill your relatives; then for the first time you will see clearly. And if you do not depend on things, there is deliverance, there is freedom!"
-- 9th century Chinese zen master Lin Chi

Does this mean to sever one's attachments?

 

[Lark]

I'm a Christian minister. I teach at conferences across the country. One of my primary messages is how religion is something Christians should not do or be. It gets between you and God. There are countless (well, I'm sure someone could count them) passages in the bible insisting that religion is bad. It's a creation of man that limits our ability to follow God freely, creates division, and ultimately separates us from God.

It can be those things, however, I would suggest that it is a necessary evil, some kind of institution is necessary for the transmission of learning and experience between generations and religion is it, it is insufficient to the kinds of spiritual uplifts which believers aim to achieve but it serves its purpose.

I would suggest that the idea of preaching against religion in favour of a personal jesus or whatever are messages which only really make sense or have an appeal to believers in a more or less secular culture, they arent immune to the hating on religion and therefore it gives them an excuse to do so too and remain faithful.

 

[Lark]

Why would God care for your reverence? Do you think God created a creature so that He could be admired and worshiped? What vanity is this?

That's anthropomorphic, projecting human notions on to God, the religions of the world have done this at various times in their history but many of their prominent leaders and teachers havent considered it correct at all.

The thing about man is that he seems hardwired to search for God, while buddhism is non-theist and has no deity many of the rituals and practices of prayer or meditation closely mirror those of the theist faiths, there is reverence and veneration of the person of Buddha and others who have attained or come close to attaining buddha consciousness are similar to the congregation of saints in Christian, or at least Roman Catholic, traditions. God is the subject of devotion, the anchor, first and foremost, the ethical framework comes second.

However, in the Christian, and I would suggest the Jewish tradition before it, God is also in search of man, that is he has created man and is very much invested in his creation, radically so in the shape of Jesus Christ, that is become incarnate as man himself to experience all that life and death has to offer and can involve, without a shadow of a doubt Jesus' death involved the worst kinds of torture, suffering and abject despair a death could involve. That is bound to have tested God's faith in mankind, which is a theme which comes up again and again in the old and new testaments and is for me worthy, at least as worthy as asking should you have faith in God is asking does he have faith in you? With that answer it begins that you could think then what your purpose is.

 

[Flavus Aquila]

Why would God care for your reverence? Do you think God created a creature so that He could be admired and worshiped? What vanity is this?

@Princess Anastasia;
+ 1 to what @VH; said...

God is so perfect and eternal as to be unchangeable - He benefits nothing from having created and benefits nothing from worship, or reverence. Instead, we Christians see worshiping as being of benefit to us. The ability to recognise and love what is beautiful and lovable is to the perfection of the believer/worshiper.

 

[Feelings]

If God is omniscient and omnipotent and loves everyone, then he knows us better than we know ourselves (omniscient), wants to reach us on our own level (loves everyone), and will (omnipotent). Therefore, the kind of faith I have might not make sense to everyone, but if God is real then God can reach you on your own level in a way that is personal to you. Your perspective won't change the nature of God, but God is perfectly willing to show you his nature in a way that works with you because he loves you - unconditionally.

Sure, but this doesn't sound so much like religion to me. Religion is someone else's interpretation of God. You said that you discourage 'religion'; What, then, is 'Christianity'?

And, strangely, thoughts of "God" have been seeping through me for a while. When I think or write about my thoughts of "God" it's always just ramblings that come from somewhere within me that I don't understand. It just comes out of nowhere. I have these thoughts and intuitions that don't originate from and haven't been verified through logic. I guess the most important thing for me would be to define what I even mean by "God", what that entity is or represents to me.

God doesn't want us to stroke his ego.

Even the phrase "Fear of God" doesn't mean fear. It means "The respect that is due a king", meaning submission to a benevolent ruler and respect for that ruler's power. The idea that God wants us to be cowering minions that blindly offer tribute to their overlord is completely backward. "Our king is awesome, and we back him up 100% no matter what he does because we know he is good and wise beyond measure!"

People often confuse what worship means. God wants us to be the best we can be, and to align ourselves with his benevolence. It's not about him. It's about us. The act of worship is to open ourselves to the love he offers us, the good that he wants to bestow upon us, and the blessings he wants to give us. Worship is saying on our deepest spiritual level "I want to be like you".

I understand.

 

[DrShephard]

I do not understand this. A tariff exists. If you pretend that it doesn't, and try to import something and NOT pay the tariff, you're not going to get your goods.

You believe that there is no government? Do you have any idea what kind of chaos would ensue if this was actually true?

Ideas don't exist? You got the idea to go eat ice cream and you probably acted on it. It seems to exist just fine.

And of course money has value. Why else would you be working for it?

It doesn't make sense to pretend that certain things don't exist. It just doesn't work.

I do not understand this. Good and evil exist. If you pretend that they don't, then try to do an evil act and claim that it isn't evil, you're going to get arrested for doing bad things.

You believe that Zeus isn't real? Do you have any idea what kind of chaos would ensue if this was actually true?

Verbs don't exist? You can bring a thing to a party. If a "bring" didn't exist, then how did you get that bag of chips to the party? It seems to exist just fine.

And of course the every single law is completely valid. Why else would you be following them?

It doesn't make sense to pretend that certain things don't exist or are just dramas we play in our minds. It just doesn't work.

Does this mean to sever one's attachments?

It means that subjugating your thinking to a guru, to your parents, to a political leader, to anyone other than yourself is a surefire way to deny yourself and stray from a path of enlightenment. Liking and resonating with something that someone says is one thing - saying that you'll follow their teachings and that they should tell you what to think or do is another.

 

[bickelz]

It means that subjugating your thinking to a guru, to your parents, to a political leader, to anyone other than yourself is a surefire way to deny yourself and stray from a path of enlightenment. Liking and resonating with something that someone says is one thing - saying that you'll follow their teachings and that they should tell you what to think or do is another.

+1

Why is it that some feel their religion is not religion?

 

[Feelings]

You might do better with a more straightforward explanation.

I do not understand this. Good and evil exist. If you pretend that they don't, then try to do an evil act and claim that it isn't evil, you're going to get arrested for doing bad things.

That laws exist and are enforced does not prove anything about good or evil. There are laws and they are enforced.

You believe that Zeus isn't real? Do you have any idea what kind of chaos would ensue if this was actually true?

I don't think the analogy between Zeus and a government works at all. If you want to, you could see the physical workings of the government. People come together in an organized way. They make decisions, and those decisions are carried out. Whereas, a mythological figure can't be seen.

Verbs don't exist? You can bring a thing to a party. If a "bring" didn't exist, then how did you get that bag of chips to the party? It seems to exist just fine.

Verbs do exist. They exist in language, and the things that language represent can take place in physical reality.

And of course the every single law is completely valid. Why else would you be following them?

Because they are enforced.

It doesn't make sense to pretend that certain things don't exist or are just dramas we play in our minds. It just doesn't work.

There are patterns to physical reality that can be understood through mental abstraction.

 

[DrShephard]

You might do better with a more straightforward explanation.

That laws exist and are enforced does not prove anything about good or evil. There are laws and they are enforced.

I don't think the analogy between Zeus and a government works at all. If you want to, you could see the physical workings of the government. People come together in an organized way. They make decisions, and those decisions are carried out. Whereas, a mythological figure can't be seen.

Verbs do exist. They exist in language, and the things that language represent can take place in physical reality.

Because they are enforced.

There are patterns to physical reality that can be understood through mental abstraction.

To some of this: Exactly!

People following a certain set of morals does not prove that the morals exist objectively or are valid.

The government does not exist in the same way that society does not exist. It's a trick of language that gets lost in the translation to reality. We call a group of people society - and yet none of them individually is society. Language plays a dirty trick on us. It makes things sound more complex, more important, more official than they are.

"The government issued a new law prohibiting X" is made to sound official. Translated into reality, the statement would be "Somebody said that he doesn't like it when people do X, and he has several other people working for him who will put you in a locked room with bars on the door if they see you doing X."

Likewise, on the topic of language being confusing and complicating reality, a verb is not a noun. Someone can run, but a run doesn't exist. Someone can think, but an idea (or a "think") doesn't exist.

Only in the proper context of reality do terms and concepts make realistic sense. Cryptic language distorts and creates a separate reality in our minds that has absolutely nothing to do with the reality around us. Learning the reality around us relies on us realizing the distortions caused by language. At best, language can be poetic and colorful and enjoyable. At worst, it can lead us to be completely blind to reality.

 

[Feelings]

. . .

To some of this: Exactly!

People following a certain set of morals does not prove that the morals exist objectively or are valid.

no shit

The government does not exist in the same way that society does not exist. It's a trick of language that gets lost in the translation to reality. We call a group of people society - and yet none of them individually is society. Language plays a dirty trick on us. It makes things sound more complex, more important, more official than they are.

Just because a word commonly brings up false connotations and associations, does not mean that what the word refers to doesn't exist.

"The government issued a new law prohibiting X" is made to sound official. Translated into reality, the statement would be "Somebody said that he doesn't like it when people do X, and he has several other people working for him who will put you in a locked room with bars on the door if they see you doing X."

No shit. Obviously. INTJs have natural disrespect for authority because we see things this way.

Likewise, on the topic of language being confusing and complicating reality, a verb is not a noun. Someone can run, but a run doesn't exist. Someone can think, but an idea (or a "think") doesn't exist.

Yes it does. It exists in the person's mind, just like everything else. And once they communicate that idea, it exists in other people's minds too.