• 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!

Is There A Factor Common To All Religions?

Booko

Deviled Hen
sandy whitelinger said:
When did Taoism become a religion? It used to be a philosophy.

It's both. Google "religious Taoism."

Also, to view Taoism, or indeed any Eastern religion, with Western eyes can lead to serious mistakes.

We tend to view Buddhism, Taoism and Confucianism as seperate entities, with Buddhism as a religion, and the latter two as philosophies.

In reality in China these three belief systems/philosophies/whatever are so intertwined it makes more sense to refer to "Chinese religion" as if it were one thing.

It is not a contraction, to the Eastern mind, to simultaneously belong to two religions. In Japan, to be both Buddhist and Shinto is not a problem. As you can imagine, this makes enumerating adherents of religious groups worldwide *very* interesting (!), since Asians will happily answer "Yes" to more than one religion.

We Baha'is have some difficulties with those from the East, because people who are Buddhist join the Baha'i Faith and don't see it as a problem to follow both religions. The problem is, Baha'i law is pretty clear you need to decide which religion you are. You can't be Baha'i and something else.

We had a Buddhist monk and his wife in our community for years, and the institutions of the Baha'i Faith worked with them to help them understand what to them is a very foreign concept. Eventually came to the conclusion that he really did have to choose, and he did not want to be solely a Baha'i, so he withdrew from the Faith and remained a Buddhist monk. His wife is still a Baha'i, but for the sake of family unity, must stay away from Baha'i meetings.
 

Booko

Deviled Hen
lilithu said:
Actually, I think this quote encapsulates what all the major religions have in common to me:
1) an understanding of how the world is and how we are
2) a faith in how the world should be and how we should be
3) a practice to get us from where we are to where we should be

Since Sunstone can't frubal you twice, I'll toss in some in his name. :)

Yes, this is an excellent summary of essentials of religions.
 

Random

Well-Known Member
Jay said:
"the impulse for cohesion and meaning."​




Yes, that.

I would add that common to all religions are the elements of:

1) Home life and social conduct
2) A desire to know how the Universe works
3) Intelligence and morality
4) Entropy
5) The Paranormal
6) Artistic expression
7) Optimal living and Happiness
8) Iconoclasm

Just to name a few...
 

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
divine said:
because when we say 'buddhism' or 'taoism' it's blanket terms for a field of varying practices?
I'm not sure. There are a wide variety of practices for Christians and Hindus as well but faith is still a central component regardless.

I can't speak to philosophical Taoism. All I know is that Becky is right that religion requires faith. Not necessarily a faith in deity but a faith in the way things should be, a bigger picture than just what is. And Buddhism definately has that at its core.

If you look at the four noble truths in Buddhism, what the Buddha was basically doing was laying out a diagnosis - this is what is wrong with the situation that you're in - and a treatment - this is how to get out of it. Whatever variations it might exhibit from place to place, that is the cornerstone of the Buddhist faith, true for all types of Buddhism, East or West. Yet in the West people tend to deny that there's faith involved.

It seems to me that a lot of people are stuck in the idea that faith is believing in something that can't be proven. I think that's inaccurate. Faith is placing your trust in someone or something. Yes, there is an element of accepting something without proof, but it's not just about belief in some idea; it's about trust. Belief is passive; trust is active.

That is why Fa Tsang said, "Understanding without faith will not advance to practice."

If you just believe that something is true it does not by itself motivate you to do anything about it. That is not religion. But if you trust that something is true, if you trust that if you follow the 8-fold path it will lead you to the end of suffering, then you will practice the 8-fold path. If one's religion does not cause one to live differently than one would without the religion, then I would question "what's the point?"
 

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
lilithu said:
If one's religion does not cause one to live differently than one would without the religion, then I would question "what's the point?"
I would suspect that people take up a given religion because they are unhappy with their lot in life. They want to change and simply "shop" for a religion that appeals to their sensibilities. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with doing so, but I do see it as being somewhat unoriginal. I will never quite understand why people cannot simply learn to be content with how they are created, to accept themselves as they are. My deep-seated belief is that ultimately they do themselves no favors by following the words and thoughts of others. They will never find "true" fulfillment although they certainly may convince themselves that that is exactly what they have found.

Trust is a fickle thing and amounts to little more than a best guess scenario. People trust in others and trust schools of thought because they are too frightened to trust themselves and dare to walk their own path. I have come to the conclusion that people, in general, are content being sheep, because they do not want to face the enormous responsibility that everything they experience is of their own creation.

If people understood that it was possible for them to reach out and touch the face of god they would not be content with keeping their noses firmly within the confines of their books. But, I do understand, that is a bit more radical than many will allow themselves to believe.

I would heartily recommend that people close their books, and learn to listen to that whisper of eternity, deep within themselves. It comes from what you once were and what you will be, all too soon, once again. Religion is the physical echo of that voice and is a sad, rather poor, alternative. That is all I am trying to say.
 

lilithu

The Devil's Advocate
YmirGF said:
Trust is a fickle thing and amounts to little more than a best guess scenario. People trust in others and trust schools of thought because they are too frightened to trust themselves and dare to walk their own path.
If you can't trust others then you can't love others. It's much easier to walk alone than it is to stay and work things out with people with whom you sometimes disagree. In the end what do you have to show for it?
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Godlike said:
Yes, that.

I would add that common to all religions are the elements of: ...
  1. Home life and social conduct
    Nonsense
  2. A desire to know how the Universe works
    Redundant
  3. Intelligence and morality
    Ridiculous
  4. Entropy
    Nonsense
  5. The Paranormal
    Nonsense
  6. Artistic expression
    Nonsense
  7. Optimal living and Happiness
    Nonsense
  8. Iconoclasm
    Absurd
You're batting less than zero.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
beckysoup61 said:
Jay, there's not need to belittle someone for what he sees with his eyes.
If that is what he sees with his own eyes, it is in his interest to correct the astigmatism. Education would help. It is certainly more fruittful than demonstrably preposterous babble. Explain, for example, how anyone can responsibly assert that iconoclasm is a factor common to all religions. And only one with a severely limited knowledge of theology would claim the paramormal as an ubiquitous factor.

I have no need to belittle him. His assertions, however, are irresponsibly uninformed.
 

Bishka

Veteran Member
Jay said:
If that is what he sees with his own eyes, it is in his interest to correct the astigmatism. Education would help. It is certainly more fruittful than demonstrably preposterous babble. Explain, for example, how anyone can responsibly assert that iconoclasm is a factor common to all religions. And only one with a severely limited knowledge of theology would claim the paramormal as an ubiquitous factor.

I have no need to belittle him. His assertions, however, are irresponsibly uninformed.
You use a lot of big words, some I don't, and some I do know, but still, there is no reason to make rude remarks for some who is unlearned. It's not like he is purposefully that way. Give him a break. We all make mistakes. :)

Remember Jay, not everyone has had the chance to be as learned and educated as yourself.
 

Hacker

Well-Known Member
YmirGF said:
I would heartily recommend that people close their books, and learn to listen to that whisper of eternity, deep within themselves.
Are you referring to meditation? :) Just what do you mean if you don't mind me asking? Did you ever succeed at listening to "that whisper of eternity?" And if so, what was it like?:D
YmirGF said:
Religion is the physical echo of that voice and is a sad, rather poor, alternative. That is all I am trying to say.
Very well said, and I agree, it is in fact very sad and primarily I'm referring to hellfire and brimstone.:(
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
beckysoup61 said:
Remember Jay, not everyone has had the chance to be as learned and educated as yourself.
What a load of ...

One does not have to be particularly "learned and educated" to know that iconoclasm is not "a factor common to all religion" - one need merely approach the subject responsibly.
 

retrorich

SUPER NOT-A-MOD
Jay said:
That is simply ignorant. Where was/is the fantasy in the views of Shirley Jackson Case, Mordecai Kaplan, Henry Nelson Wieman, Alfred North Whitehead, Paul Tillich and others?
I don't know. Why don't you tell poor ignorant me, Mr. know-it-all? ;)
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
I can only think of one aspect that ALL religions share - speculation.

As far as i'm aware all forms of religion, and most philosophies, are built around speculation. Speculation on the existence and nature of deity/ies. Speculation on the existence/nature of the human souls and/or human experience in general.

Theistic religions are built upon the speculation that there is a God/s and that this God/s can interact with us.

Buddhism is founded on the speculation that a human being can free themselves of attachment through meditation. It also includes speculation concerning the reincarnation of speculative souls.

Taoism speculates on the existence and nature of the Tao, giving it qualities of balance eg. Yin Yang.
 

d.

_______
Halcyon said:
Taoism speculates on the existence and nature of the Tao, giving it qualities of balance eg. Yin Yang.

i don't agree, but that's admittedly a matter of interpretation...in my reading, the TTC strives to avoid speculation as much as possible.

it's also important to note that the yin/yang dichotomy wasn't invented by taoism, but an already present symbol in chinese cosmology. as i remember it, the TTC uses yin/yang in relation to the 'ten thousand things' not the tao itself.
 

Halcyon

Lord of the Badgers
divine said:
i don't agree, but that's admittedly a matter of interpretation...in my reading, the TTC strives to avoid speculation as much as possible.

it's also important to note that the yin/yang dichotomy wasn't invented by taoism, but an already present symbol in chinese cosmology. as i remember it, the TTC uses yin/yang in relation to the 'ten thousand things' not the tao itself.
It's not really important where a concept originates, if it is still adhered too. And yes, i agree that Taoism is one of the least speculative religions out there. But i'd suggest it's impossible for a religion not to speculate, as we're dealing with so many unknowns.
 

michel

Administrator Emeritus
Staff member
YmirGF said:
I would suspect that people take up a given religion because they are unhappy with their lot in life. They want to change and simply "shop" for a religion that appeals to their sensibilities. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with doing so, but I do see it as being somewhat unoriginal. I will never quite understand why people cannot simply learn to be content with how they are created, to accept themselves as they are. My deep-seated belief is that ultimately they do themselves no favors by following the words and thoughts of others. They will never find "true" fulfillment although they certainly may convince themselves that that is exactly what they have found.

Trust is a fickle thing and amounts to little more than a best guess scenario. People trust in others and trust schools of thought because they are too frightened to trust themselves and dare to walk their own path. I have come to the conclusion that people, in general, are content being sheep, because they do not want to face the enormous responsibility that everything they experience is of their own creation.

If people understood that it was possible for them to reach out and touch the face of god they would not be content with keeping their noses firmly within the confines of their books. But, I do understand, that is a bit more radical than many will allow themselves to believe.

I would heartily recommend that people close their books, and learn to listen to that whisper of eternity, deep within themselves. It comes from what you once were and what you will be, all too soon, once again. Religion is the physical echo of that voice and is a sad, rather poor, alternative. That is all I am trying to say.

Although I think you may well be right in that you give "The searching for a prop" as a reason why some seek out a religion, I think there are many (and I honestly believe that I am one of those) who "Tuned in" the Religion to fit in with what they know is there.

I don't think I have ever seriously doubted that there is a 'God' (whatever he/she/it might be); my problem has always been trying to find a religion which allowed me incorporate the God I know.

Religion per se can be shallow, it can be pomp and ceremony, rituals, - I'll grant you that; it can be a refuge or a prop. But for me, it is a way of looking at the beauty which is everywhere, and rejoicing at the fact that I have been fortunate enough to have seen through the shallow humdrum existence, to the far, far greater picture.
 
Top