• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What do you get from discussion/debate

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
Sure. Most everyone who invests their time in an endeavor or activity derive meaning from it. Often it can be for the social aspect of it, like the weekly poker game a group of friends will play.
I can only speak from a spiritual point of view :) honestly i take part in very few activities that do not have something to do with spiritual way of life, or helping others.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
Is it also risky to make meaning in life on the teachings of Gautama Buddha? His promise of enlightenment might also be an illusion and "create a big crisis"?
The teachings are more practical than dogmatic. Buddhism offers a way for a person to manage their "monkey mind" and avoid letting emotions control their behavior. There is ritual if a person wants to do it, and if it helps. These practices aim to limit the ego, not offer a framework that exploits the ego by setting dogma that has to be accepted. Some forms, like Zen, will have certain "truths" to it that are somewhat ideological. That's more of an American thing.

Experience of the results of spiritual practice may start from day 1. People need faith or trust though to continue on the path, faith in the value and the direction of the teachings.
Well these aren't an emphasis in Buddhism. If anything it aims to help the person trust themselves by being more aware of what the mind is doing, how it reacts, what their intentions are, right action, facing fears, etc.

This contrasts with Western religions that require a belief in some external truth and being and the self is minimized and lost in that illusion. People need faith when they are absorbed in a dogma that often is contrary to what is observed of the actual world. Religion can exploit emotional weakness, and that creates a crisis that religion then suggests it can solve.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
I can only speak from a spiritual point of view :) honestly i take part in very few activities that do not have something to do with spiritual way of life, or helping others.
To my mind spirituality aims to find balance. There is a set of balance, and that is physical, intellectual, and emotional. I find very little that is spiritual about a head full of concepts that the ego can be absorbed by, and then has to defend and relate through. The person just becomes an agent for a given dogma, and there's no authentic self that experiences life or engages with others.

You mentioned playing games, and to my mind this absorption into dogma is very much a game played between religions and the people who invest their time in it. I don't mind a person being absorbed in religion if they are aware of what is going on, and if they have the freedom to walk away. Yet if they are so absorbed to a degree that they become emotionally dependent and lost the freedom of mind then it's not spirituality but bondage.
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
The teachings are more practical than dogmatic. Buddhism offers a way for a person to manage their "monkey mind" and avoid letting emotions control their behavior. There is ritual if a person wants to do it, and if it helps. These practices aim to limit the ego, not offer a framework that exploits the ego by setting dogma that has to be accepted. Some forms, like Zen, will have certain "truths" to it that are somewhat ideological. That's more of an American thing.


Well these aren't an emphasis in Buddhism. If anything it aims to help the person trust themselves by being more aware of what the mind is doing, how it reacts, what their intentions are, right action, facing fears, etc.

This contrasts with Western religions that require a belief in some external truth and being and the self is minimized and lost in that illusion. People need faith when they are absorbed in a dogma that often is contrary to what is observed of the actual world. Religion can exploit emotional weakness, and that creates a crisis that religion then suggests it can solve.
There are certain Buddhist practices in which they meditate on certain Buddhist gods or guru's (teachers).
So how is that different from Hindu type practices using God/Guru or gods for spiritual practice?
Why or how do you see any dogma involved in such practices?
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
To my mind spirituality aims to find balance. There is a set of balance, and that is physical, intellectual, and emotional. I find very little that is spiritual about a head full of concepts that the ego can be absorbed by, and then has to defend and relate through. The person just becomes an agent for a given dogma, and there's no authentic self that experiences life or engages with others.

You mentioned playing games, and to my mind this absorption into dogma is very much a game played between religions and the people who invest their time in it. I don't mind a person being absorbed in religion if they are aware of what is going on, and if they have the freedom to walk away. Yet if they are so absorbed to a degree that they become emotionally dependent and lost the freedom of mind then it's not spirituality but bondage.
For me as a sufi, I can walk away at any moment if I wanted, and sufism is very little dogmatic, because it is a journey within the practitioner to gain understanding of the ego/self, and reducing it, remove the vail of ignorance toward God, so that the teaching lead to unity between the practitioner and God.

But it is of course important to not be egoistic and think sufism is the only path that everyone must follow.
Actually sufism lead me to become much more open toward everyone from atheists to any religious practice.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
There are certain Buddhist practices in which they meditate on certain Buddhist gods or guru's (teachers).
There are forms that have deviated from the original Theravada, which is non-theistic. I'm not familiar with what the other forms will do. One thing to note about how Eastern religion approaches divinity is that it is seen as the essence of things that exist, including humans. Gods often represent real things or phenomenon, and are not seen as some independent force like the Abrahamic religions do.

So how is that different from Hindu type practices using God/Guru or gods for spiritual practice?
Why or how do you see any dogma involved in such practices?
I'm not very familiar with Hinduism. As noted many Hindu gods represent real things or phenomenon, and the gods are highly symbolic. Where a Christian might pray to Mary or Jesus these are seen as real people independent from the believer. Hindus see their gods as part of the world they are part of, with acknowledging the gods there is a way to coordinate with the world they are part of. So it's a different approach and different rituals and attitudes.
 

Marcion

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma
There are forms that have deviated from the original Theravada, which is non-theistic. I'm not familiar with what the other forms will do. One thing to note about how Eastern religion approaches divinity is that it is seen as the essence of things that exist, including humans. Gods often represent real things or phenomenon, and are not seen as some independent force like the Abrahamic religions do.


I'm not very familiar with Hinduism. As noted many Hindu gods represent real things or phenomenon, and the gods are highly symbolic. Where a Christian might pray to Mary or Jesus these are seen as real people independent from the believer. Hindus see their gods as part of the world they are part of, with acknowledging the gods there is a way to coordinate with the world they are part of. So it's a different approach and different rituals and attitudes.
So we can agree that it is not as black and white as you seemed to suggest earlier and that having a personal relationship with God or Guru need not be based on any religious dogma. It can be part of a practical spiritual cult which yields immediate results rather than make promises of a place in an illusionary religious heaven.
 
Last edited:

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I been thinking and I have to be honest and say I can not see anymore value of discussion or especially debate that is between people from different faith, where one person try to disprove or debunk the other persons faith or religious belief.

Is it difficult to accept that people are different and believe differently that our own belief?

I believe in acceptance of other people who believe different than me.
It helps my mental health and helps me get smarter.
 

F1fan

Veteran Member
So we can agree that it is not as black and white as you seemed to suggest earlier and that having a personal relationship with God or Guru need not be based on any religious dogma.
Well gods aren't known to exist. Gurus are humans and we can actually relate to them since they are independent beings. We can't distinguish any gods existing outside of imagination, so to say a person relates to a God suggests an inner dialog between two parties or personalities.

It can be part of a practical spiritual cult which yields immediate results rather than make promises of a place in an illusionary religious heaven.
Right. How a person adopts a set of concepts under the impression there is some authority behind it and then applies it can differ. Jimmy Carter takes his Christian faith seriously as behaves as a steward to others. On the other side we have anti-abortion protestors or the 9-11 hijackers who believe they are agents for an absent god and can do whatever they want.
 
Top