Religion is a useless concept, there are no religions

Sirona · Jun 7, 2021

Marcion said:
The New age people of course also reject the authority of the religious concept. But those people most often don't follow any serious disciplined spiritual cult but think that they can shop around by reading inspiring commercial books or by going from one commercial course to the next instead of sticking to a serious socio-spiritual philosophy and practice.

RF has a new age sub-forum although there's probably not much happening there. And I don't see why this should give you any right to discriminate against them as you say that only "religions" to this and you allegedly don't. Third, I wondered who else adheres to your definition of a "spiritual cult" but you. Most tantrics keep their practice secret, BTW.

lewisnotmiller · Jun 7, 2021

Marcion said:
It is useful only as a general indiciation of the origins of the tradition.
But as a concept abused to fixate certain dogmatic ideas it is a curse.
You can see this in all kinds of (even very recent) topics on these 'religious' forums that are hateful against "heretic cults" (in their eyes).

The New age people of course also reject the authority of the religious concept. But those people most often don't follow any serious disciplined spiritual cult but think that they can shop around by reading inspiring commercial books or by going from one commercial course to the next instead of sticking to a serious socio-spiritual philosophy and practice. They have their own online forums that are very different in nature from these 'religious forums'.

You would appear to be arguing more against a dogmatic view of/by religion, and a belief that one is 'truth'. Is that a fair proximity of your position?

Vinayaka · Jun 7, 2021

Marcion said:
This disease of classing everything as religions has even spread among many Indians supporting Modi causing massive discrimination and suffering among minorities but is also typical in Israel, Myanmar, Saudi Arabia etc. etc.. Grouping together under the banner of religion is a human disease which people need to be vaccinated against.

Now you're saying we're all diseased? Whoa.

Spirit of Light · Jun 7, 2021

Marcion said:
In a different thread in a DIR I described why I don't feel attracted to (the concept of) religion.
I'm not interested in them and people who insist that they are in one and that "it" is superior to everything else are in my eyes funny or ignorant people.

In India for thousands of years people had all kinds of spiritual practices, more vedic (extroversive) ones and more tantric (introversive) ones and these were organized in all kinds of cults with an endless stream of newer ones building on what went before. The new cult started by Gautama the Buddha was not a religion although it was quite revolutionary and the same for the spiritual cults started by Mahavira (Jain) and the Sikh guru's. There was no awareness of leaving "Hinduism" because there was no concept of a religion called Hinduism. The whole idea of religion was absent.

Then came the Christian cults and the Islamic cults that became increasingly intolerant declaring others to be "non-believers" or "heretics" which led to the ridiculous idea of "different religions" that were not compatible or "fundamentally different" from each other. Also the Bahai's continued carrying this idea that it was the religion and not the spiritual cult that was the organizing principle, religions were supposedly started by prophets and the latest prophet had the more complete message for the modern age more or less replacing the need for older "religions".

From the West even the Indian and other groups of spiritual cults were declared to be religions which makes no sense at all. And all the rest of the spiritual cults in the world were simply declared to be primitive (and irrelevant)

For me there are no religions, there are just people practising (or not practising) spiritual cults (whether of the vedic type or the more tantric type).
So I hesitated long whether I should be on this forum. But I thought 'what the heck' there are also atheists here and people who in other ways don't feel they have anything to do with religions. So it's more the name and the set-up of the forum that is the problem and not my presence here. The name of the forum is biased towards the Western concept of religion(s) and implicitly discriminating the other half of humanity.

If you do not feel it is right to call something a religion you are of course free do do so. If you want to call it spirirual practice or just a belief, that is fine too.

Marcion · Jun 7, 2021

Conscious thoughts said:
If you do not feel it is right to call something a religion you are of course free do do so. If you want to call it spirirual practice or just a belief, that is fine too.

Not a belief, but spiritual cults. A spiritual cult is a system or set of spiritual practices such as in Sufism or in other tantric type of traditions. Yes, they are usually grouped under their common background, but this does not mean that they are themselves religions, they are certainly not. Religions are full of dogma and xenophobia whereas spiritual cults of a tantric nature are by nature syncretic and open traditions focussed on intuitive or introspective practices.

lewisnotmiller said:
You would appear to be arguing more against a dogmatic view of/by religion, and a belief that one is 'truth'. Is that a fair proximity of your position?

That is indeed part of what defines religions. Without dogma you cannot speak of true religion, religions don't like openness. Buddhism therefore is not a religion because open enquiry is possible and there are no dogma's.

Sirona said:
RF has a new age sub-forum although there's probably not much happening there. And I don't see why this should give you any right to discriminate against them as you say that only "religions" to this and you allegedly don't. Third, I wondered who else adheres to your definition of a "spiritual cult" but you. Most tantrics keep their practice secret, BTW.

My practices are also secret.

But this is not about tantric practices but how I view the difference between religions and spiritual cults.
I did of course not think this up myself but I most certainly agree with this viewpoint.
You have to discriminate if you want to analyse traditions.
I am not commenting on people's personal practices, only on the concept of religion.

lovesong · Jun 7, 2021

Marcion said:
No it is not just a rant about a word, I dislike the concept.
A spiritual cult is another concept, it is not the same as a religion!

The debate between religion and spirituality is one that can be had, but regardless, both describe a person's set of beliefs around divinity, afterlife, spirit, and other metaphysical concepts. Everyone here has religious and/or spiritual beliefs, even if those beliefs refute some of these concepts. That's all religion is, any idea you have of it being some grand institutional dogmatic force is just that, an idea *you have,* and at best a description of some religious systems, but by no means is that what religion *is* conceptually.

Marcion said:
People are brainwashed with the idea that religion is the central, more important concept and that a spiritual cult is something heretic, weird or even dangerous.

That's not a reflection of religion as a whole, but specific religious traditions. Many, many religions do not look at others that way.

Marcion said:
I see no convincing support for the concept of religion, just like there is no convincing support for the concept of human races.

Just like religion is a term used to describe beliefs about metaphysical concepts, race is a term used to describe human physical features. We apply religious labels to help us better understand the beliefs of others, like we use race to help us better understand the appearance and potential ethnic backgrounds of others. Both terms can be abused to make others look bad or hurt others, but on their own they're just descriptors for things in our world so that we can all save a little time when communicating.

The support for religion is that people have religious beliefs, simple as that.

It's really not that deep.

MatthewA · Jun 7, 2021

My perception of Religion is that of

re·li·gion | \ ri-ˈli-jən \
Definition of religion

1a: the state of a religious a nun in her 20th year of religion
b(1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural
(2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2: a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

I believe that Religion can be abused however in the wrong hands of anyone who desires to dictate over other lives in a congregation.

Many people believe all kinds of things; and will follow others as though they have the answers but; I believe the answers of having peace with God are only found in the bible.

Twilight Hue · Jun 7, 2021

Vinayaka said:
For me, the term 'religion

Okra is delicious, if cooked correctly.

I had it in soup. Enjoyed it immensely.

Vinayaka · Jun 7, 2021

Twilight Hue said:
I had it in soup. Enjoyed it immensely.

Is it called ladyfingers in the US also, or is that only an Indian thing? I first encountered it at a Sri Lankan friend's place, not in southern US, or on my own.

Kooky · Jun 7, 2021

lovesong said:
Just like religion is a term used to describe beliefs about metaphysical concepts, race is a term used to describe human physical features. We apply religious labels to help us better understand the beliefs of others, like we use race to help us better understand the appearance and potential ethnic backgrounds of others. Both terms can be abused to make others look bad or hurt others, but on their own they're just descriptors for things in our world so that we can all save a little time when communicating.

I'm sorry, but the terms are not even remotely comparable. The concept of religion is based on the factually perceptible phenomenon of people organizing along spiritual beliefs and practices.

The concept of race has never been able to rise to the level of a useful descriptor for a factually occurring phenomenon - neither skin color nor ethnic background can be examined without the concept of race buckling under the pressure of facts and facticity, and in fact any such study would fare much more useful without the baggage of centuries of "race science" dragging us down.

Clara Tea · Jun 7, 2021

Religions, in theory, are wonderful. They eliminate wars, torture camps, hunger, environmental damage, aborted babies, etc.

However, religion was put into practice, and the Christians didn't follow Christ--"thou shalt not kill" is incompatible with war and somehow I think that torture camps were not part of God's plan.

Christianity, as practiced today, is divisive. It tears apart theists. Roman Catholics are not compatible with Irish Catholics. There are numerous bible versions for the various versions of Christians.

God sees us all as his children. Perhaps we are supposed to see each other as God sees us? Maybe a wall at the Mexican border was the wrong idea, though it keeps out undesirables? And, how is Trump, at his age, going to climb that wall to get back into the United States?

Clara Tea · Jun 7, 2021

Kooky said:
I'm sorry, but the terms are not even remotely comparable. The concept of religion is based on the factually perceptible phenomenon of people organizing along spiritual beliefs and practices.

The concept of race has never been able to rise to the level of a useful descriptor for a factually occurring phenomenon - neither skin color nor ethnic background can be examined without the concept of race buckling under the pressure of facts and facticity, and in fact any such study would fare much more useful without the baggage of centuries of "race science" dragging us down.

Some cross bearing Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan would be surprised if God turned out to be a 40 foot tall Black woman (with a shoe that should completely cover him). Some are already shocked by their DNA results, and realize that they have to beat themselves over the head with billy clubs.

Spirit of Light · Jun 8, 2021

Marcion said:
Not a belief, but spiritual cults. A spiritual cult is a system or set of spiritual practices such as in Sufism or in other tantric type of traditions. Yes, they are usually grouped under their common background, but this does not mean that they are themselves religions, they are certainly not. Religions are full of dogma and xenophobia whereas spiritual cults of a tantric nature are by nature syncretic and open traditions focussed on intuitive or introspective practices.

That is indeed part of what defines religions. Without dogma you cannot speak of true religion, religions don't like openness. Buddhism therefore is not a religion because open enquiry is possible and there are no dogma's.

My practices are also secret.
But this is not about tantric practices but how I view the difference between religions and spiritual cults.
I did of course not think this up myself but I most certainly agree with this viewpoint.
You have to discriminate if you want to analyse traditions.
I am not commenting on people's personal practices, only on the concept of religion.

Cult is actually a more negative charged word than Religion.

Marcion · Jun 8, 2021

Conscious thoughts said:
Cult is actually a more negative charged word than Religion.

The original use of the word cult is still valid. The words sect and cult have come to mean 'dangerous heretical groups with abusive leaders'. This suits the folk who cultivate the superiority of the religious concept very well.
Conservative Christians in my country have written thick books full of what they consider to be cults.
In evangelical circles all the eastern traditions have been branded as dangerous cults even on national television.
Demonizing the other is what makes religions into religions.
If you take away their books against heretics (the "dangerous other"), their dogmatic forced way of believing sectarian stuff, their whole concept of religion crumbles.

Even some hindu's on this forum have adopted the religious mentality of demonizing other paths.
Needless to say they are supporters of Modi.

lovesong said:
The support for religion is that people have religious beliefs, simple as that.

It's really not that deep.

Why call them religious beliefs at all, if they are just beliefs?
Just because people associate all kinds of spiritual practices with the concept of religion does not mean that we need that concept. The people of India and most places on earth lived happily without it for many thousands of years. It was forced upon them by the English.

Just like in my country many catholics and protestants have started to have shared services in the same building, the boundaries between so-called religions are also unnecessary.
A Christian can do zen-meditation and still be a devotee of Jesus, a Muslim can become a vegetarian Sufi without any problem. There is no need for irrational boundaries.

Spirit of Light · Jun 8, 2021

Marcion said:
The original use of the word cult is still valid. The words sect and cult have come to mean 'dangerous heretical groups with abusive leaders'. This suits the folk who cultivate the superiority of the religious concept very well.
Conservative Christians in my country have written thick books full of what they consider to be cults.
In evangelical circles all the eastern traditions have been branded as dangerous cults even on national television.
Demonizing the other is what makes religions into religions.
If you take away their books against heretics (the "dangerous other"), their dogmatic forced way of believing sectarian stuff, their whole concept of religion crumbles.

Even some hindu's on this forum have adopted the religious mentality of demonizing other paths.
Needless to say they are supporters of Modi.

Why call them religious beliefs at all, if they are just beliefs?
Just because people associate all kinds of spiritual practices with the concept of religion does not mean that we need that concept. The people of India and most places on earth lived happily without it for many thousands of years. It was forced upon them by the English.

Just like in my country many catholics and protestants have started to have shared services in the same building, the boundaries between so-called religions are also unnecessary.
A Christian can do zen-meditation and still be a devotee of Jesus, a Muslim can become a vegetarian Sufi without any problem. There is no need for irrational boundaries.

As a sufi i do not hold anything against other religious or spiritual practice. They can have their belief as they wish.
Sufism is an inward path, not worrying about others peoples belief

Marcion · Jun 8, 2021

Conscious thoughts said:
As a sufi i do not hold anything against other religious or spiritual practice. They can have their belief as they wish.
Sufism is an inward path, not worrying about others peoples belief

I have no objections to anyone's beliefs or practices.
It is the concept religion I have objections to, or rather I dislike it and don't see the need for it.
Sufism is not a religion, it is a way of life, just like Buddhism or my tantra-yoga path are.
I have more in common with a Sufi than with a fundamentalist Hindu or Christian, people who stress the differences between so-called religions are going against the unity of humanity and causing all sorts of troubles in the world.

RestlessSoul · Jun 8, 2021

The religions of the world have a lot to answer for, certainly. But they also answer a profound need in many of their adherents; as others have observed on this thread, there has never been a culture, in any time or place, where some form of spiritual belief and practice hasn’t been widespread.

It’s possible that this pattern is undergoing a seismic shift, in many parts of the world. I am grateful to live in modern, secular Europe, where everyone is genuinely free to believe or not believe according to personal preference, conviction or yearning.

I am also grateful to the generations who built the magnificent cathedrals, basilicas, monasteries, and the thousands of small churches, most of which are still free to enter for silent or public prayer.

I’m grateful to those anonymous parishioners of a local church, who during the long Covid lockdown, provided and cared for a small public space outside the church, for people of all faiths and none to stop by and pray, or just to sit in quiet contemplation.

I should add that I would personally be as happy to pray in a Synagogue, Mosque, Buddhist, Sikh or Hindu temple as a Christian church. Pretty much every place of worship I have entered, I have been grateful for the experience.

syo · Jun 8, 2021

Religions aren't useless. Cults are.

Kooky · Jun 8, 2021

Clara Tea said:
Some cross bearing Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan would be surprised if God turned out to be a 40 foot tall Black woman (with a shoe that should completely cover him). Some are already shocked by their DNA results, and realize that they have to beat themselves over the head with billy clubs.

See, that would only work if racism was logically consistent. Modern Euro-American racism (and its "scientific" components) was largely invented to justify the oppression of dark skinned people after the fact. It is neither coherent nor consistent, and certainly has no connection to any kind of factual phenomenon.

Marcion · Jun 8, 2021

cult

noun
1 a particular system of religious worship, especially with reference to its rites and ceremonies.
2 an instance of great veneration of a person, ideal, or thing, especially as manifested by a body of admirers:
the physical fitness cult.
3 the object of such devotion.
4 a group or sect bound together by veneration of the same thing, person, ideal, etc.
Sociology. a group having a sacred ideology and a set of rites centering around their sacred symbols.
5 a religion or sect considered to be false, unorthodox, or extremist, with members often living outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader.
6 the members of such a religion or sect.
7 any system for treating human sickness that originated by a person usually claiming to have sole insight into the nature of disease, and that employs methods regarded as unorthodox or unscientific.

It is especially the meaning given under 5 and 6 that shows how xenophobic the original religions were and partly still are.
It is their scriptures and dogmatic truths that "rule" and all the rest is demonized.
If it wasn't for those religions, the spiritual cult would still be the accepted norm as it was for thousands of years.
In fact religions are nothing but ideological dictatorships started by autocrats.

Anyone who bashes Christianity and Islam for their proselytizing fundamentalism and dares to pat themselves on the back for having another "better religion" is in fact a hypocrite.

Religion is a useless concept, there are no religions

Hindu Wannabe

Grand Hat

devotee

Be who ever you want

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma

:D

Active Member

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

devotee

Freedom from Sanity

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Be who ever you want

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma

Be who ever you want

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Freedom from Sanity

gopa of humanity's controversial Taraka Brahma