A random reflection about someone's question to me, "Are you religious?"
I answered, "what do you know about Taoism and Zen Buddhism? Because it feels good to adopt and adapt their principles, and live according to what the clearly defined lessons they offer.
Like the 10 Commandments? LOL
So am i religious? Or is it "i never thought about it and really don't care."
Would be interested read if others have considered the question of the label "religious."? I for one love listening to music, and do so religiously inside and outside.
To my mind, one may find should they delve deeply enough, that ALL religious beliefs stem from a philosophical source, though not in the terminology/terminologies as we use the word today.
E.g. in times long times past and gone, a human sees and hears the strange whooshing/hissing sounds made by a bolt of electrical energy as it passes through the air in a thunderstorm.
He has no idea that it is merely a natural occurrence in such a situation so he speculates ( philosophises) that some unknown, unseen Great and Powerful Entity has thus created this flash of light and sounds, adds together the sounds and arrives at, possibly, the idea that this Great Entity is actually saying its name and so comes forth the belief that lightning is created by the Entity whose name is Zeus and is proclaim its name via this manner.
At least 90% of knowledge we have today has been derived by someone, somewhere offering up a kind of Philosophical idea in the first place just as have religions as well imo.
Though having said that, one can also 'offer up' a philosophy/philosophical idea as a kind of maxim on a subject, etc, concerning subjects as to how to live life, react/behave/respond in situations, etc, etc, but that is just one the nuances/differences inherent in Philosophy as we know it today.
Ergo, a Philosophy CAN often be turned into a Religion and vice versa.
Buddhism is easy to separate philosophy from supernatural components and there are many very secular sanghas (congregations). In theism it is impossible to separate the two without violation of basic religious principles and insulting the devine.
"Are you religious?" is the same as asking "Do you have an imaginary friend?"
All religions are bullshit!
But are their underlying principles also "bullshit?" Can we learn anything from some religious principles or have many "thrown out the baby with the bathwater?"
@josephr we don't need no stinking religious principles, just common sense principles, accepting this crap that only religions have "principles" is acceping that one cannot be moral without religion, a crapload of bullshit! wnat to meditate, do it, but don't call it a buddhist principle, want to live right, do it but do not call it taoist or zen, who made them "owners" of these common sense practices. I call bullshit when I see it.
@BruceAdrian a proof? I have plenty of evidence but don't be so fucking lazy and Google it. You didn't even post the original posting nor is your name Joseph, yet you stick your nose asking for "a proof"? Lufe ain't that easy dude!
I’m spiritual occasionally. Cuervo encourages me to be spiritual.
@Shawappa44820 Ah yes, the 'old making offerings to the Porcelain God rituals,' I remember doing many of those myself in my younger days.
Here Australia the 'Porcelain God' is often known as 'George' since that is sound made during the making of offerings to him, i.e. One is known to 'Calling out to George'....LOL
I try to follow the seven tenents of the Satanic Temple. They are basically a guide for being a decent human being without believing in supernatural nonsense. Taoism, to me is a little too simplistic, not everything conforms with Yin or Yang. Buddhism is fine, but the underlying principles are a bit too mystic for me.
Why do you think ancient people thousands of years ago would have a better grip on philosophical and "spiritual" thought than you do?
@Normanbites Starting from scratch says to me that nothing about what was is working the way i want it to work. Easy is best so i start with editing or adjusting, leaving reinvention as a final approach if everything else fails.
I also always remember that what i see may not be everything that is.
@josephr My immediate ancestors liked a dish called Haggis and taught me how to cook it.
It would have been "easy" to continue this tradition, but I didn't care for it. I "reinvented" my cuisine and I am much happier for it.
I expect, in fact know, that I've done the same with their "philosophical" teachings with a similar result.
I highly recommend "rolling your own".
And to fortify this recommendation, I would like to call to your mind the "Running of the Bulls" in Pamplona, Spain .... a long standing tradition. And I will remark, "Just because something has always been done that way, doesn't mean it isn't incredibly stupid".
@Normanbites From what you wrote i understood that you reacted to your dislike of Haggis (i agree with you about that) and responded by creating a new tradition to replace it. Am i mistaken?
When i evaluate something which doesn't feel right (or taste right LOL) i first focus on the principles, or what would be accomplished by my action(s). The genius may be in the details as Einstein suggested, but he also agreed that without underlying principles we have no map or directions.
I totally agree that "Because something has always been done that way, doesn't mean it isn't incredibly stupid." This is a theory which has defined much of my life, and to which i've responded since i was about 10. My questioning everything and anything made my parents and their friends observe that i was young to have such a chip on my shoulder. LOL Like i cared.
In time, i also learned that i could learn from others, including what they did both right and wrong, so i didn't have to always reinvent the wheel.
Many have observed that there are no new ideas, only new perspectives on old ideas. I love how Mark Twain put it.
@josephr Adapting prior ideas is fine with me. It is the concept of "gurus" or "wise men not to be questioned" that stirs my ire.
You mentioned the 10 commandments .... about 1/2 of them are based on the most pure fertilizer I can imagine.
I have had very religious people ask me that. Are you religious? ME: "You do realize your God had nothing to do with religion don't you?" they look at me sort of puzzled ME: "Man created religion, God had little to do with it and frankly with all the good religion has done there are some truly horrible things that have been done in the name of religion by man." Then they let me alone.
Buddha Shakyamuni was born as a royal prince in 624 BC in a place called Lumbini, in what is now Nepal. His mother’s name was Queen Mayadevi and his father’s name was King Shuddhodana. One night, Queen Mayadevi dreamed that a white elephant descended from heaven and entered her womb.
So Buddha was born from Beastiality. Is that one of the Principles of Buddhism you wish to emulate
As for the 10 commandments
You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain
So we should be careful what we say about our celestial dictator in the sky or he won't be happy.
When are we going to take this bronze age bullshit and call it out for what it is.
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord in vain. That is very wise. Just look at all those Evangelists who do just that and who do such harm. This form of egotism is one of the scourges of our country.
I think religion is any practice that helps the practitioner modify instinctual impulses that would otherwise diminish the individual’s ability to function constructively in a social context.
So you think we need religion to curb our bad instinctual impulses that would otherwise diminish us.
And religion helps people function constructively in a social context. That's TOTALLY NUTS
It's totally nuts if you allow the corruptors of religion, the religious literalists, to define what religion is. But if you look at religion from an anthropological, that is to say, a scientific rather than a popular view, you can see it in a less polarized light. To say we need it is way too teleological for science. To say that is how it has been used by H.sapiens, I think, is a scientifically accurate statement.
What principles of Taoism and Zen Buddhism that you "adopted and adapted" are the essence of these philosophies?
Wow, what a broad question. I'm not sure i can encapsulate the answer.
Off the top of my head where hair used to grow, these came to me.
I live life without a plan but with self-directives.
I accept that whatever happens to me is meant to happen.
There are opportunities in everything and anything.
I do what i can to ensure a satisfying life.
If something feels good after, ican do it again.
Do no harm.
And finally, and as attributed to many others, "f**k 'em if they can't take a joke. LOL
That's the best i can do before coffee. LOL
A simple one: Cause and effect. Therefore, we are responsible for our reality.
Then - problems are our gifts. Meeting them head on and overcoming makes us stronger. You can't solve my problem for me. That belongs to me. But you can support me. You can cheer me on.
We never slander anyone...especially ourselves.
We speak and think positively, thereby creating the reality we strive for.
For me, music has been my religion. I had the supreme experience to live for two summers with the Boston Symphony and many glorious music-makers. Music was spiritual for them, too. I, also, feel at home with Eastern philosophy. My husband, who was worldy, (in Who's Who), also followed the Eastern Tao and also was touched by the teachings of Christ...without being a so-called Christian. He was just open to wisdom and beauty. I grew up in a world colored by Gandhi, Schweitzer and FDR. Their influence was pervasive as was Martin Luther King Jr. and Congressman Lewis. Great leaders and great people do make a difference. They inspire us to be better.
I prefer the teachings of the men that actually changed the world, like Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., and Congressman Lewis.
You don't think happy thoughts, you find injustice then you go face it, you challenge authority with peace because they'll fail unless they're just.
They aren't just yet.
It stops when they are.
That's an interesting perspective, but peaceful protests have not always succeeded, and two of your three examples were murdered. I believe in peaceful protest and effecting positive change, but we've also had the Stonewall riots, the Watts riots, a Revolution, and a Civil War to establish the rights we are slowly losing.
I know Woody Guthrie claimed his guitar was a facist killing machine, but may I suggest that the M-1 Garand, SMLE, and Mosin-Nagant 91-31 were much more effective.
A wise leader once said, "Those who make peaceful protest impossible, make violent revolution inevitable."
@JimG "but peaceful protests have not always failed" is a confusing comment since I never claimed a failure or success rate.
Other then that I agree.
@Willow_Wisp Yes, it was confusing because I am a addle-brained dolt. Now, it says what I meant.
Thanks. Interesting group and discussion. Notice many subject similarities between groups. LOL