Time Honored Tradition

[SigurdReginson]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

 

[sun rise]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition.

That is a distinguishing characteristic between religion and some on the spiritual path.

In the late 1960's and early 1970's, Philip Kapleau had a Zen center in Rochester NY. They did not follow the traditional practice of begging for food as it was not appropriate for the west. Rather they substituted picking up litter as a different practice with the same basic goal.

The Mother of the Sri Aurobindo ashram had this to say:

We are in a very special situation, extremely special, without precedent. We are now witnessing the birth of a new world
...
It is not a question of repeating spiritually what others have done before us, for our adventure begins beyond that. It is a question of a new creation, entirely new, with all the unforeseen events, the risks, the hazards it entails -- a *real adventure*, whose goal is certain victory, but the road to which is unknown and must be traced out step by step in the unexplored. Something that has never been in this present universe and that will *never* be again in the same way. If that interests you... well, let us embark. What will happen to you tomorrow --I have no idea.

One must put aside all that has been foreseen, all that has been devised, all that has been constructed, and then set off walking into the unknown. And -- come what may! There.

 

[Vinayaka]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

I think we distort reality somewhat, or make conjecture, often re-writing history for an agenda. A simple example is the idea that democracy originated in Greece. It's true, but the history books don't usually say that democracy was for citizens, and not the other 90% of the population who were slaves. So it wasn't a true democracy at all.

 

[JustGeorge]

I think in some ways, it is a connection. What that connection is may vary for the individual.

Yes, for some, it is a way to look back to what they find an age they find to be more pure. This could be because the past housed an individual they found holy or because they believe they admire the culture of those times. Yes, we have substantial amounts of knowledge now that likely didn't exist in the past, but this may not be enough to quiet a 'homesickness' for another time that some people feel.

For others, its a connection with people. We almost certainly never met our great great great grandmother. But, we owe her our life. By following a tradition she followed, we may feel as if we are building a connection with her(as an example).

Another connection is the link we share with people living today who may also participate in a tradition. There is a special feeling that comes from sharing in a practice that you find meaningful, and finding that others do, too.

 

[SigurdReginson]

I think in some ways, it is a connection. What that connection is may vary for the individual.

Yes, for some, it is a way to look back to what they find an age they find to be more pure. This could be because the past housed an individual they found holy or because they believe they admire the culture of those times. Yes, we have substantial amounts of knowledge now that likely didn't exist in the past, but this may not be enough to quiet a 'homesickness' for another time that some people feel.

For others, its a connection with people. We almost certainly never met our great great great grandmother. But, we owe her our life. By following a tradition she followed, we may feel as if we are building a connection with her(as an example).

Yah, that's pretty much what I gather as well. Sometimes it's rooted in wanting to cultivate a connection to something greater, and a lot of times we do romanticize and aggrandize/mythologize the past. Sometimes there are certain ancient wisdoms gleaned that do resonate with us as well. I've certainly experienced and lived both things myself.

Another connection is the link we share with people living today who may also participate in a tradition. There is a special feeling that comes from sharing in a practice that you find meaningful, and finding that others do, too.

This is a really interesting point... A lot of times when we take part of a community, that community evolves as well. It changes as certain concepts are adopted or removed. Do you think people use the ways of the past as a way to keep grounded and avoid straying too far from the original mission of that religion? I feel like religions that stray too far from their roots just end up becoming something else altogether - a brand new religion.

 

[Marcion]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

In my own tradition, although it is a combination of different older traditions, so it rather is syncretic and innovative instead of regressive, there is also a strong aspect of removing "distortions" and returning to the more original essence of teachings.
I guess my tradition is rather unusual in that both these elements have strongly been applied side by side, restoring the tantric purity of the past but also innovating by combining different improvements taken from later traditions.

When people try to restore early forms of their tradition, there usually seems to be a biased agenda or should I say a personal colouring by the founder of the new tradition.
Unless of course you believe that the founder really knows the past and how things evolved. But how can one be sure about that? This is an interesting but very complicated subject in itself.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

I dunno. The engineering skills of some of the ancients was utterly astounding.

They were just as intelligent then as we are now, just not advanced in every way save a few areas.

 

[Heyo]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

If you don't have a good argument for your way, "tradition" at least substitutes as a mediocre one.

 

[JustGeorge]

Do you think people use the ways of the past as a way to keep grounded and avoid straying too far from the original mission of that religion? I feel like religions that stray too far from their roots just end up becoming something else altogether - a brand new religion.

This very well could be!

Though there is something to say for a brand new religion as well... I see no problem with this, but many people view anything 'new' as 'false'. I think this is more of an Abrahamic dilemma, though. Dharmic and Pagan faiths tend to be open to new.

 

[1213]

...They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

For me it is about that the original message and teachings have been corrupted by human doctrines that really don’t belong to the “religion”. Those added human doctrines are not necessary and makes things just complicated and not useful.

 

[SigurdReginson]

For me it is about that the original message and teachings have been corrupted by human doctrines that really don’t belong to the “religion”. Those added human doctrines are not necessary and makes things just complicated and not useful.

Hmmm... Do you think that corruption could have begun with the written record of the teachings themselves? Jesus wrote nothing in the bible, and his words were instead written down from memory decades after his death (and resurrection/ascension) . Do you think that the corruption could have already been out of control even back then?

 

[epronovost]

A simple example is the idea that democracy originated in Greece. It's true, but the history books don't usually say that democracy was for citizens, and not the other 90% of the population who were slaves. So it wasn't a true democracy at all.

I have yet to find a k-12 textbook that doesn't mention it let alone a higher degree textbook. The article of wikipedia entry mentions it and explains it in detail. This is very common knowledge and not something obscure or occulted by any stretch of the term.

 

[Vinayaka]

I have yet to find a k-12 textbook that doesn't mention it let alone a higher degree textbook. The article of wikipedia entry mentions it and explains it in detail. This is very common knowledge and not something obscure or occulted by any stretch of the term.

Thanks. I guess I'm thinking 40 years ago when I taught it. I'm glad they've changed it. Curricula has been modernised. So it was a very poor example.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.
Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?
Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

I find Jesus warned against religious tradition or church customs outside of Scripture, but taught as being Scripture.
- Matthew 15:9

Jesus had the understanding of the old Hebrew Scriptures that is why he could explain or expound on them for us.
Self-help books are always updated, but the Bible's Golden Rule standards are the same.- Leviticus 19:18

 

[URAVIP2ME]

For me it is about that the original message and teachings have been corrupted by human doctrines that really don’t belong to the “religion”. Those added human doctrines are not necessary and makes things just complicated and not useful.

Yes, Jesus' message and teachings have been corrupted by human doctrines.....
The theme of Jesus' message was the 'good news of God's kingdom' (Luke 4:43; Daniel 2:44; Matthew 24:14)
That Kingdom governmental rule would be future according to Jesus at Luke 19:11-15.
Christendom (so-called Christian) has corrupted the teachings about God's Kingdom being a real government headed by Christ Jesus for a thousand years - 1 Corinthians 15:24-26

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

in Christianity, traditions from all kinds of people and customs have morphed into Christian holidays, while throwing out all the holidays that Christ observed

seems odd somewhat

perhaps tradition makes people comfortable, eliminating the need for thinking and reasoning?

 

[Brian2]

It seems like every religion or spiritual path gives credence to time honored tradition. Within many denominations of Christianity, much emphasis is placed on the early Christians and what they believed. In many branches of paganism, reconstructionists want to try and emulate the practices of historical pagans as much as the evidence left behind sheds light on. In salafism (a sect within Islam), the name derives from advocating a return to the traditions of the "ancestors" (salaf). I could keep going, but I hope you understand what I'm driving at.

Why do we give such credence to people who lived thousands of years before we did? We can only guess at what their lives were like so long ago, but still we try. Is it because they lived in a time that was closer to when these special events happened in our religious beliefs? Is it because their ways were more pure than what we understand now? Did they have some kind of special understanding that we don't have today?

Ultimately, these were people that lived in the distant past... They don't have the advantage of hindsight or accumulated knowledge like we have now. What makes their ways something to be sought after or seem more desirable than what we can take advantage of now?

Beliefs of the early Christians come from the apostles and Jesus and would be closer to the truth than ideas and interpretations of the Bible that are more recent.
I don't see that we have any advantage these days when looking back. What some people call advantage seems to me to be no more than scepticism about the truth of the Bible and the early beliefs.

 

[Jeremiah Ames]

Beliefs of the early Christians come from the apostles and Jesus and would be closer to the truth than ideas and interpretations of the Bible that are more recent.
I don't see that we have any advantage these days when looking back. What some people call advantage seems to me to be no more than scepticism about the truth of the Bible and the early beliefs.

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow Jesus?
(John 14 should give us a clue)

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow the apostles?
(the first few verses of 1 Corinthians 3 gives us a clue)

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow a bunch of doctrine pieced together 100’s of years later by a few powerful people in a room?
(the first 16 verses of Mark 7 give us a clue)

 

[Brian2]

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow Jesus?
(John 14 should give us a clue)

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow the apostles?
(the first few verses of 1 Corinthians 3 gives us a clue)

if one is a follower of Jesus, does it make sense to follow a bunch of doctrine pieced together 100’s of years later by a few powerful people in a room?
(the first 16 verses of Mark 7 give us a clue)

If Jesus is real then He is the one leading the person who is following.

 

[1213]

...
That Kingdom governmental rule would be future according to Jesus at Luke 19:11-15.
Christendom (so-called Christian) has corrupted the teachings about God's Kingdom being a real government headed by Christ Jesus for a thousand years - 1 Corinthians 15:24-26

I believe it is also a real kingdom and 1 Corinthians 15:24-26 is correct.