-
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!
Nature religions and poor culture.
- Thread starter Master Vigil
- Start date
Hirohito18200
Member
In response to your original question, i think that as far as enlightenment is concerned, it would all depend on the religion, because they can all fulfill themselves in their own ways. If you want to be more objective, i think it would be safe to say that the idea of being detached from nature has proved to be a powerful and influential concept in the development of different cultures. Sad to look and see where it's gotten ours...
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I didn't ask if it was poweful or influential in the development of a culture. A culture can develop prosperously and not be enlightening to anyone. I didn't generalize when I said enlightenment, take it within all of its forms.
I cannot say that he Jews could just make it all up the way that Neitzsche and other pagans did.
Example,
http://mynym.blogspot.com/2004/10/bible.html#comments
Example,
http://mynym.blogspot.com/2004/10/bible.html#comments
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
CJW perhaps you have the wrong forum for attacking Paganism? This is not the forum for that sort of thing, this is ment to be a discussion of paganism and paganist ideas.
and sorry to say but yes the jews could have just as easily 'made it all up' like any other group.
Also Neitzche is not a pagan he is Athiest.
Back on subject, the idea of enlightenment can be tricky. Does a religion need to teach enlightenment or can it just provide a framework for social responcibility and happyness? Is that enlightening in and of itself?
Does one need to feel conected to everything to be enlightend?
Personally I think it would be nice and help us with a lot of the problems that we have in modern society. But hey, I'm biased to the whole connected to nature thing.
wa:do
and sorry to say but yes the jews could have just as easily 'made it all up' like any other group.
Also Neitzche is not a pagan he is Athiest.
Back on subject, the idea of enlightenment can be tricky. Does a religion need to teach enlightenment or can it just provide a framework for social responcibility and happyness? Is that enlightening in and of itself?
Does one need to feel conected to everything to be enlightend?
Personally I think it would be nice and help us with a lot of the problems that we have in modern society. But hey, I'm biased to the whole connected to nature thing.
wa:do
Hirohito18200
Member
Ya, and I don't think we should attempt to define enlightment in this thread, because that is such a general term. Vigil, are you refering to your form of enlightenment or what? I don't want to have to generalize, but you didn't specify in the thread.painted wolf said:
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I didn't specify because I meant it in a general term. To wake up to some sort of realization (whatever that realization can differ with each religion). I do not even believe enlightenment is the same for every person in the same religion.
kreeden
Virus of the Mind
Why are you all talking only about Religion ? There is a difference between a Religion and Spiritualism you know ? Both can lead to " enlightment " , only one tells you how to find it , where the other allows you to find your own way . I think that before you answer the question about " nature based religions " you have to realize that most are / were not " religions " at all . They were / are Spiritual Paths . Which in it's self take a very different approach to ... the Spiritual . Not sure if that is the best term to use , but you should get my drift .
BTW many Religions do have Spiritualist sects , as Spiritaulism can have a Religious side . But they always take a somewhat different approach in their means of understanding . Judaism and the Kabbalah for excample .
Not sure if that is the best term to use , but you should get my drift . BTW many Religions do have Spiritualist sects , as Spiritaulism can have a Religious side . But they always take a somewhat different approach in their means of understanding . Judaism and the Kabbalah for excample .
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
Religion is basically the meeting of the divine. Most of the time with worship. I agree with you that there is a difference between religion and spirituality. But if one worships something, that is religion. And most nature based religions worshipped something. Be it the sun, the forest, the mountain, whatever. Also a religion would have moral codes, which many nature based religions possessed. One can be a spiritual person, and not worship anything, yes. But that is not what I am talking about. One can be spiritual by just building a motorcycle, or listening to music. But this is not what I am talking about.
Oh and by the way, spiritualism is a religion in which mediums are used to contact the dead. Originating in europe, but made popular in america by the fox sisters. Some spiritualist churches still exist today, one actually exists about 20 minutes from my home. But yes, spiritualism is still a religion. And the sects you speak of, are normally called the mystic sides. Mysticism is what transcends religion. It is like, spiritual feelings grow to be a religion. And religious feelings grow to be mysticism.
Oh and by the way, spiritualism is a religion in which mediums are used to contact the dead. Originating in europe, but made popular in america by the fox sisters. Some spiritualist churches still exist today, one actually exists about 20 minutes from my home. But yes, spiritualism is still a religion. And the sects you speak of, are normally called the mystic sides. Mysticism is what transcends religion. It is like, spiritual feelings grow to be a religion. And religious feelings grow to be mysticism.
kreeden
Virus of the Mind
Ok , there are older meaning for these terms . For excample , when one talks about Jewish Spiritualism , one is usually talking about the Kabbalah , something outside the standart Religion .
Religion implies a set standart of moral codes , worship , and the like . In other words , a Religion tends to have a dogma . A code set down by some authority .
Yes , listening to music can be spiritual , just like walking into a church can be considered by some as religious . But there is more to it then that . A Spiritual Path is one's own search for God . Without having others TELL you how to go about it . You find your own Way , with a little help from friends . Aleister Crowley has a Spiritual man , but I wouldn't call him Religious .
We can set our own moral codes , but that doesn't make us religious . We can worship our own version of a Creator , but that alone doesn't make us religious . Can one be Spiritual and not worship anything ? I don't think so . One would have to believe in something at the very lest . Perhaps not worship in the same way a religion worships , but that is the whole point . Spirituality is a personal Path .
Yes , some channelers / mediums call themselves Spiritaulist . But that does mean their way is the onlt Spiritual way . And is it a religion ? That would depend upon your defination of religion ...
For excample , when one talks about Jewish Spiritualism , one is usually talking about the Kabbalah , something outside the standart Religion . Religion implies a set standart of moral codes , worship , and the like . In other words , a Religion tends to have a dogma . A code set down by some authority .
Yes , listening to music can be spiritual , just like walking into a church can be considered by some as religious .
But there is more to it then that . A Spiritual Path is one's own search for God . Without having others TELL you how to go about it . You find your own Way , with a little help from friends . Aleister Crowley has a Spiritual man , but I wouldn't call him Religious . We can set our own moral codes , but that doesn't make us religious . We can worship our own version of a Creator , but that alone doesn't make us religious . Can one be Spiritual and not worship anything ? I don't think so . One would have to believe in something at the very lest . Perhaps not worship in the same way a religion worships , but that is the whole point .
Spirituality is a personal Path . Yes , some channelers / mediums call themselves Spiritaulist . But that does mean their way is the onlt Spiritual way . And is it a religion ? That would depend upon your defination of religion ...
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
"For excample , when one talks about Jewish Spiritualism , one is usually talking about the Kabbalah , something outside the standart Religion ."
Like I said, this is jewish mysticism, not spiritualism.
"Religion implies a set standart of moral codes , worship , and the like . In other words , a Religion tends to have a dogma . A code set down by some authority ."
Yes, but even if one worships in one's own way. The moral codes, dogma, and religious authority would be one's self.
"A Spiritual Path is one's own search for God ."
All religions are one's own search for god. There is no difference. No two catholics worship the same, nor do two jews, or hindu's, or buddhists. And why would you not want others to tell you about it, where do you learn anything from? Aleister Crowley and the Thelemic Order are by no means any different than the roman church.
"We can set our own moral codes , but that doesn't make us religious . We can worship our own version of a Creator , but that alone doesn't make us religious ."
I think it does, only if our moral codes bring us closer to god, or the divine. And any worship of any kind of creator would make you religious.
"Can one be Spiritual and not worship anything ? I don't think so ."
I do, spirituality does not rest on the belief of anything. It only rests on the emotion of said person. I believe you give spirituality too broad of a meaning.
"Spirituality is a personal Path ."
Only if nothing is worshipped, if something is, than it is a religion.
"Yes , some channelers / mediums call themselves Spiritaulist . But that does mean their way is the onlt Spiritual way . And is it a religion ? That would depend upon your defination of religion ..."
No, but they are known as spiritualists. Others can have difference spiritual attributes, but once something is worshipped, that is when religion occurs.
Like I said, this is jewish mysticism, not spiritualism.
"Religion implies a set standart of moral codes , worship , and the like . In other words , a Religion tends to have a dogma . A code set down by some authority ."
Yes, but even if one worships in one's own way. The moral codes, dogma, and religious authority would be one's self.
"A Spiritual Path is one's own search for God ."
All religions are one's own search for god. There is no difference. No two catholics worship the same, nor do two jews, or hindu's, or buddhists. And why would you not want others to tell you about it, where do you learn anything from? Aleister Crowley and the Thelemic Order are by no means any different than the roman church.
"We can set our own moral codes , but that doesn't make us religious . We can worship our own version of a Creator , but that alone doesn't make us religious ."
I think it does, only if our moral codes bring us closer to god, or the divine. And any worship of any kind of creator would make you religious.
"Can one be Spiritual and not worship anything ? I don't think so ."
I do, spirituality does not rest on the belief of anything. It only rests on the emotion of said person. I believe you give spirituality too broad of a meaning.
"Spirituality is a personal Path ."
Only if nothing is worshipped, if something is, than it is a religion.
"Yes , some channelers / mediums call themselves Spiritaulist . But that does mean their way is the onlt Spiritual way . And is it a religion ? That would depend upon your defination of religion ..."
No, but they are known as spiritualists. Others can have difference spiritual attributes, but once something is worshipped, that is when religion occurs.
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
Religion in latin means "to bind back." Whatever is being bound back to, makes it a religion. If your spirituality makes you meet the divine in some special way that is religion. When a divine is worshipped, that is religion.
kreeden
Virus of the Mind
We are arguing over terms , not the ideals behind them . Perhaps I do take a too board view on Spiritualism , but in my opinion , you would take too narrow a view . And that is my point . Personal views . A Church states what a dogma is . In my view , that is a Religion . And I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that , just that some chose a different way .
BTW one definition of of mysticism is " a religion based on mystical communion with an ultimate reality "
One definition of Spiritualism is " the view that spirit is a prime element of reality "
Is there really that much difference in the two ?
Perhaps I do take a too board view on Spiritualism , but in my opinion , you would take too narrow a view . And that is my point . Personal views . A Church states what a dogma is . In my view , that is a Religion . And I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with that , just that some chose a different way . BTW one definition of of mysticism is " a religion based on mystical communion with an ultimate reality "
One definition of Spiritualism is " the view that spirit is a prime element of reality "
Is there really that much difference in the two ?
Regarding the statement about nature religions and "poor" culture- I think that those who subscribe to nature religions have priorities that are simply different than the current (current being at the time, and not necessarially right now. If someone is talking about religion during the Roman era or if they're talking about religion today. I'm simply using the term "current" as a general idea of the culture) idea of wealth. Someone who has fields of crops and herds of animals is just as wealthy, in their own right, as someone who has piles of gold. Likewise with someone who has a clear cut view of how to attain access to the ultimate reality. Wealth is relative. Wheather someone who subscribes to a nature religion is poor because their religious views don't put an emphasis on material gain or because their lack of material success causes them to reorder their priorities doesn't matter. So long as they are comfortable within their situations, why should anyone else judge them?
Religions today have the same basic principles and ideas as their foundations, but the smaller details are so different from where they began. Hindus, though their caste system is so important to the religious order, have only recently begun to break the system and claim that those of the lower caste or women can become enlightened. At the birthtime of Jainism, it was mandatory for people to walk around naked, but now Jains have the option of wearing clothing. Look at the differences between Theravada and Mahayana (or Hiniyana... and forgive my spelling. I don't have any books around me to refer to... lol) Buddhism. Even Christianity is incredibly different from where it began. The arguement over mysticism and spiritualism and whatnot is just displaying different aspects of a perticular religion, but at the foundation that religion is always the same.
I hope this makes sense.... ( ;
Religions today have the same basic principles and ideas as their foundations, but the smaller details are so different from where they began. Hindus, though their caste system is so important to the religious order, have only recently begun to break the system and claim that those of the lower caste or women can become enlightened. At the birthtime of Jainism, it was mandatory for people to walk around naked, but now Jains have the option of wearing clothing. Look at the differences between Theravada and Mahayana (or Hiniyana... and forgive my spelling. I don't have any books around me to refer to... lol) Buddhism. Even Christianity is incredibly different from where it began. The arguement over mysticism and spiritualism and whatnot is just displaying different aspects of a perticular religion, but at the foundation that religion is always the same.
I hope this makes sense.... ( ;
kreeden
Virus of the Mind
Well , I still don;t like the term " religion ". :bonk: But you are correct Aide . Vigil has answered my question , and I have tried to answer his , anything now is just an arguement . BTW Vigil , you may be interested to know that I walked away from religion in 1969 . I returned to it for a few months once because it had something I had to learn at the time , but only for six months max . The thing is , I walked away from religion , not God . And God has never walked away from me nor even turned his back . And I still have the same God that I always had , only I understand him a little differently .
Master Vigil
Well-Known Member
I do agree that we are disagreeing over terms. I'm just trying to use the terms that I find are regularly used in the scholarly world. I may be wrong, but that is what I am trying to do. I also believe in a difference between organized religion and religion. And I believe in a difference between religion and theology. And I also believe a difference between religion and spirituality. But the distinction as is plainly seen by our discussion is not distinct at all. Here are my definitions...
Religion - action taken towards the spiritual or divine. (worship, theoretical views, sociological attributes.)
Theology - of course the study of, or about religion.
Spirituality - recognization of the spiritual or divine but with no action.
Perhaps that will help with our discussion here.
Religion - action taken towards the spiritual or divine. (worship, theoretical views, sociological attributes.)
Theology - of course the study of, or about religion.
Spirituality - recognization of the spiritual or divine but with no action.
Perhaps that will help with our discussion here.
I do believe that much of humanity has become detatched from nature. Most of us don't even know what the current moon phase is without looking at a calendar.
IMO, being detatched from the natural rythms of this world has contributed to the sense that humans are seperate from, not only plants and animals, but each other. Realizing that we are all interconnected would go a long way towards fostering peace.
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I don't think that thinking you are above nature nessisarily hinders enlightenment.
There have been a great number of enlightened/at peace Christians for example.
I agree Kay that we need to work on forming connections again. We have become to seperate for our own good.
wa:do
There have been a great number of enlightened/at peace Christians for example.
I agree Kay that we need to work on forming connections again. We have become to seperate for our own good.
wa:do
Kay said:
A lovely post! Through learning (from the moment we are born) we lose touch with that "oneness"; the more we grow, the further back we burry those thoughts and abilities that we have to "connect" with nature - Unless (for some wonderful reason) we try to stay on that original path.
kreeden
Virus of the Mind
And anyone who thinks that humans are " egotistical " has never met a Raven . Or a Cat .
I don't know , but I do not see Nature as " peaceful ". It can be . But it also can be very cruel and unforgiving . That is not to say that much can be achieved by understanding our place in Nature . By forming " connections ". But there is more to it then that I believe .
I don't know , but I do not see Nature as " peaceful ". It can be . But it also can be very cruel and unforgiving . That is not to say that much can be achieved by understanding our place in Nature . By forming " connections ". But there is more to it then that I believe .