What Form Of Spirituality Do You Study/practice These Days?

[Guest Valk0010]

*shrug*

 

My understanding of Buddhism is incredibly basic at this point so I have really no idea how karma and whatnot actually works. I am more interested in Buddhism for its teachings of compassion and helping to cope with anger and suffering. I wondered if it might help to deal with the anger I still have over my deconversion experience.

 

If you're into the idea of removing your suffering, then Buddhism is for you. Just don't go thinking that anything you do can ever matter.

That is like saying skydiving will be but don't think it will be anything other then boring.

[Antlerman]

*shrug*

 

My understanding of Buddhism is incredibly basic at this point so I have really no idea how karma and whatnot actually works. I am more interested in Buddhism for its teachings of compassion and helping to cope with anger and suffering. I wondered if it might help to deal with the anger I still have over my deconversion experience.

Oh yes, I believe your anxieties and anger issues will be helped. However I'll qualify this, I'm not saying converting to Buddhism and becoming a Buddhist is what to do. If anything I advocate is syncreticism. I could never really be a Buddhist as it is not my culture. However there are many of its teachings and practices that are light years beyond any spiritual practices in the West. Hinduism also has many attractive truths, but not all things fit. The key to me is to become aware in yourself of different approaches to your life, and through that you break the chains that the Christian West has on you, beginning with notions of some externalized reality that you have to try to conquer or be conquered through sheer force of will, or through petitioning external forces to do for you.

 

Through my adopting meditation practices it has pretty much eliminated anxiety in my life and opened me to see all of these religious systems in a very different light. None of this is anything you can reason theoretically and say, 'Oh, ok, now I get it. That makes me feel better thinking about it that way'. It's vastly beyond that approach. I can actually now even look at Christianity and recognize certain deeper truths within it that very few of its believers even see. The whole thing to them is some magical external truth controlled by supernatural beings. There is little self-awareness that occurs. There are certain orders that somewhat get it, like the Jesuits, but they are like a small burning flame, whereas that internal realization within Buddhist understanding is like a solar flare by comparison - not that all its practitioners get that either.

 

But again, being a child of the West I find being open to a syncretic approach to be far more beneficial. It's not that you're trying to find which one of them has the answers. No one has those, not even your own inner journey. The answer is to not ask such a question as that. It is about unfolding inner light. The answer is to you at that moment for that step on your path. Look into practices, whatever resonates with you, go with it, but don't look to them to give you anything. They are merely vehicles for yourself to find your way. They can and should be discarded when their purpose is done. As the Buddha said,

 

“To insist on a spiritual practice that served you in the past is to carry the raft on your back after you have crossed the river.”

 

~Siddhārtha Gautama

[Rev R]

It is incorrect to consider that Dependent Co-arising is some form of fatalism. I would pin that down to a misunderstanding of precisely what karma means in Buddhism. Karma translates as “action”. In Buddhism, it specifically refers to voluntary or intentional actions. Just as throwing stones into a pond creates ripples, our actions affect the world around us.

 

Dependent Co-arising builds upon this idea. In the Theravada view, the oldest extant textual tradition, D.C is tied directly to their teachings on rebirth. In short, it is an explanation of how suffering comes to be through one's actions in previous lives. The Mahayana takes a much broader view stating that D.C is an illustration of the interconnected and interpenetrated nature of all things and how the effects of our actions echo throughout existence. Put simply, D.C is not a statement of being bound to a fixed destiny. It is, in fact, a statement of cause and effect in an ethical sense. While our current circumstances are the result of previous actions, future circumstances are the result of that which we do now.

[Antlerman]

It is incorrect to consider that Dependent Co-arising is some form of fatalism. I would pin that down to a misunderstanding of precisely what karma means in Buddhism. Karma translates as “action”. In Buddhism, it specifically refers to voluntary or intentional actions. Just as throwing stones into a pond creates ripples, our actions affect the world around us.

 

Dependent Co-arising builds upon this idea. In the Theravada view, the oldest extant textual tradition, D.C is tied directly to their teachings on rebirth. In short, it is an explanation of how suffering comes to be through one's actions in previous lives. The Mahayana takes a much broader view stating that D.C is an illustration of the interconnected and interpenetrated nature of all things and how the effects of our actions echo throughout existence. Put simply, D.C is not a statement of being bound to a fixed destiny. It is, in fact, a statement of cause and effect in an ethical sense. While our current circumstances are the result of previous actions, future circumstances are the result of that which we do now.

Thank you. Yes, that's kind of how I have viewed that myself. We are in fact affected by our own actions in positive and negative ways, and those actions affect others as well as ourselves. To live life with intent towards doing good, we affect our own selves through others. We are not bound to any fate at all, and is in fact freedom. Freedom to change, but that doesn't mean freedom from the effects of previous actions.

[ConureDelSol]

*shrug*

 

My understanding of Buddhism is incredibly basic at this point so I have really no idea how karma and whatnot actually works. I am more interested in Buddhism for its teachings of compassion and helping to cope with anger and suffering. I wondered if it might help to deal with the anger I still have over my deconversion experience.

Oh yes, I believe your anxieties and anger issues will be helped. However I'll qualify this, I'm not saying converting to Buddhism and becoming a Buddhist is what to do. If anything I advocate is syncreticism. I could never really be a Buddhist as it is not my culture. However there are many of its teachings and practices that are light years beyond any spiritual practices in the West. Hinduism also has many attractive truths, but not all things fit. The key to me is to become aware in yourself of different approaches to your life, and through that you break the chains that the Christian West has on you, beginning with notions of some externalized reality that you have to try to conquer or be conquered through sheer force of will, or through petitioning external forces to do for you.

 

Through my adopting meditation practices it has pretty much eliminated anxiety in my life and opened me to see all of these religious systems in a very different light. None of this is anything you can reason theoretically and say, 'Oh, ok, now I get it. That makes me feel better thinking about it that way'. It's vastly beyond that approach. I can actually now even look at Christianity and recognize certain deeper truths within it that very few of its believers even see. The whole thing to them is some magical external truth controlled by supernatural beings. There is little self-awareness that occurs. There are certain orders that somewhat get it, like the Jesuits, but they are like a small burning flame, whereas that internal realization within Buddhist understanding is like a solar flare by comparison - not that all its practitioners get that either.

 

But again, being a child of the West I find being open to a syncretic approach to be far more beneficial. It's not that you're trying to find which one of them has the answers. No one has those, not even your own inner journey. The answer is to not ask such a question as that. It is about unfolding inner light. The answer is to you at that moment for that step on your path. Look into practices, whatever resonates with you, go with it, but don't look to them to give you anything. They are merely vehicles for yourself to find your way. They can and should be discarded when their purpose is done. As the Buddha said,

 

“To insist on a spiritual practice that served you in the past is to carry the raft on your back after you have crossed the river.”

 

~Siddhārtha Gautama

 

I agree about what you say about not necessarily converting to Buddhism. I'm not going into it with the intent to convert, just the intent to learn and apply some of the teachings to my everyday life. That's not to say I won't find that the teachings resonate with me and choose to adopt the Buddhism label, but I would remain a non-theist. I am also hoping that I can learn proper meditation techniques since I've been unsuccessful trying to learn myself.

[Antlerman]

That's not to say I won't find that the teachings resonate with me and choose to adopt the Buddhism label, but I would remain a non-theist.

Well that's the interesting thing. To me the term theist and non-theist don't really apply. I know that in certain types of Buddhism you can have and use various deities, but I believe they are more objects of meditation than any sort of thing you would imagine in Western thought of gods in the sky working on your behalf. I know myself within meditation various deity forms arise to me which are objects of meditation that have very specific effects, but I don't walk away from meditation saying, "White Tara met me today and she showed me this and that". I realize the nature of what those are and what role they play, without actually believing White Tara is following me around watching over me in the day. That's what traditional theism teaches.

 

I've shared this quote elsewhere but it says it the best so I'll quote it again here:

 

"But this is not God as an ontological other, set apart from the cosmos, from humans, and from creation at large. Rather, it is God as an archetypal summit of one's own Consciousness. ... By visualizing that identification 'we actually do become the deity. The subject is identified with the object of faith. The worship, the worshiper, and the worshiped, those three are not separate'. At its peak, the soul becomes one, literally one, with the deity-form, with the dhyani-buddha, with (choose whatever term one prefers) God. One dissolves into Deity, as Deity - that Deity which, from the beginning, has been one's own Self or highest Archetype."

 

~Ken Wilber, Eye to Eye, pg. 85

 

So, I don't think the term theist or atheist really applies.

 

I am also hoping that I can learn proper meditation techniques since I've been unsuccessful trying to learn myself.

I'm not sure I would approach it to find 'proper' techniques. You find what works, and exposure to various techniques will give you some room to find what works.

[Antlerman]

I'm going to add this about meditation. Really awesome: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/meditation-brain-rewire-study/story?id=15001280#.T3tEYdlZhNh

 

BTW, just let the video roll to the next one and the next one. It's a whole series on meditation. "Just in the brain". Of course it is! But wow! It's wonderful to see how people are getting this.

[Rev R]

I agree about what you say about not necessarily converting to Buddhism. I'm not going into it with the intent to convert, just the intent to learn and apply some of the teachings to my everyday life. That's not to say I won't find that the teachings resonate with me and choose to adopt the Buddhism label, but I would remain a non-theist. I am also hoping that I can learn proper meditation techniques since I've been unsuccessful trying to learn myself.

Bolded the important part.

 

A point about meditation, it has been extremely fetishized here in America. The vast majority of laypersons do not meditate. However, I did put together a little guide a while back that could get you started. A-man has a copy handy, I think.

[Deva]

Well that's the interesting thing. To me the term theist and non-theist don't really apply. I know that in certain types of Buddhism you can have and use various deities, but I believe they are more objects of meditation than any sort of thing you would imagine in Western thought of gods in the sky working on your behalf. I know myself within meditation various deity forms arise to me which are objects of meditation that have very specific effects, but I don't walk away from meditation saying, "White Tara met me today and she showed me this and that". I realize the nature of what those are and what role they play, without actually believing White Tara is following me around watching over me in the day. That's what traditional theism teaches.

 

As far as Tibetan Buddhism goes, everything I have heard indicates that the deities are not substantially existing entities. They are empty like everything else. They are symbolic expressions of the enlightened mind. They are not gods in the western sense of the word at all. They are not separate and apart from you.

 

There are gods, but they are thought to be beings in samsara like we are - just in better surroundings. Eventually they will fall back into the lower realms. That is what the tantric teachings say.

 

This idea of meditation being something exotic and apart from everyday life is a false one. In fact the whole duality view is mistaken. There is not the spiritual life over here, and the rest of life over there and the two don't meet or the spiritual life is sitting on a cushion cross legged and the interactions with your co-workers in the office are something less.

 

I was thinking about this on the way home when I saw a bumper sticker on a car "If God be with us who can be against us?"

 

There were also other stickers on this car, all pertaining to God being on "my side" as over against the world. The Buddhist view is so diametrically opposed to this that its hard to know where to begin.

[Rev R]

Deva,

 

one of these days I can retire

[Deva]

Deva,

 

one of these days I can retire

 

Nope, I won't let you!

[Antlerman]

Well that's the interesting thing. To me the term theist and non-theist don't really apply. I know that in certain types of Buddhism you can have and use various deities, but I believe they are more objects of meditation than any sort of thing you would imagine in Western thought of gods in the sky working on your behalf. I know myself within meditation various deity forms arise to me which are objects of meditation that have very specific effects, but I don't walk away from meditation saying, "White Tara met me today and she showed me this and that". I realize the nature of what those are and what role they play, without actually believing White Tara is following me around watching over me in the day. That's what traditional theism teaches.

 

As far as Tibetan Buddhism goes, everything I have heard indicates that the deities are not substantially existing entities. They are empty like everything else. They are symbolic expressions of the enlightened mind. They are not gods in the western sense of the word at all. They are not separate and apart from you.

 

There are gods, but they are thought to be beings in samsara like we are - just in better surroundings. Eventually they will fall back into the lower realms. That is what the tantric teachings say.

 

This idea of meditation being something exotic and apart from everyday life is a false one. In fact the whole duality view is mistaken. There is not the spiritual life over here, and the rest of life over there and the two don't meet or the spiritual life is sitting on a cushion cross legged and the interactions with your co-workers in the office are something less.

 

I was thinking about this on the way home when I saw a bumper sticker on a car "If God be with us who can be against us?"

 

There were also other stickers on this car, all pertaining to God being on "my side" as over against the world. The Buddhist view is so diametrically opposed to this that its hard to know where to begin.

That's perfect. Yes I agree with all of this. For me meditation is not some compartmentalized practice, but it transforms the whole life. It teaches us ourselves. It's something that evolves the mind. To call it exotic would be like calling physical exercise 'far out stuff'.

[bronxo]

For me meditation is not some compartmentalized practice, but it transforms the whole life. It teaches us ourselves. It's something that evolves the mind. To call it exotic would be like calling physical exercise 'far out stuff'.

 

Do you notice how you go from personal to dogmatic here?

[Noggy]

For me meditation is not some compartmentalized practice, but it transforms the whole life. It teaches us ourselves. It's something that evolves the mind. To call it exotic would be like calling physical exercise 'far out stuff'.

 

Do you notice how you go from personal to dogmatic here?

 

It's dogmatic to call meditation exercise? It's just exercise for your brain, brah. Try it sometime. Science supports everything he has said here except for maybe "teaches us ourselves", but any amount of intense mind awareness will do that, eh?

[Antlerman]

For me meditation is not some compartmentalized practice, but it transforms the whole life. It teaches us ourselves. It's something that evolves the mind. To call it exotic would be like calling physical exercise 'far out stuff'.

 

Do you notice how you go from personal to dogmatic here?

No. How? What is dogmatic about anything I said here?

[bronxo]

I'd call it exotic, since I am not familiar with it, but I don't call physical exercise far out stuff, since I do practice that. Because following your logic there makes my viewpoints look inconsistent, which I think they're not in this regard, I find that part to be a little dogmatic. Maybe you meant exotic in another sense though?

[Antlerman]

I'd call it exotic, since I am not familiar with it, but I don't call physical exercise far out stuff, since I do practice that. Because following your logic there makes my viewpoints look inconsistent, which I think they're not in this regard, I find that part to be a little dogmatic. Maybe you meant exotic in another sense though?

I was responding to what Deva mentioned how some people see meditation as exotic. Being a practitioner of meditation, I can tell you it is no more exotic than physical exercise. It is mind training. I don't think calling something you are unfamiliar with qualifies it as exotic. It's simply unfamiliar. My comparison would be then for those who have never practiced any physical training discipline, is that exotic?

 

I still don't see how anything I said can be understood as dogmatic. What does the word dogma mean to you?

[bronxo]

So basically what you are saying is that there's nothing magical about meditation, correct?

[Antlerman]

So basically what you are saying is that there's nothing magical about meditation, correct?

Well.... Not in and of itself. What it opens you to in yourself can be called magical. But that's not magic per se'. It's who were are buried underneath the layers of flab and blubber in our minds. It's like tuning your body to its hidden potentials. We don't realize that potential without clearing the debris. What we find is pretty powerful.

[bronxo]

Ah, I can agree with you there. I have the same experience when lifting weights and seeing strength progress. It's nothing magical in itself, as you say about meditation, but the experience is wonderful and it really opens up your perspective about potential. Perhaps weightlifting means something similar to me as meditation does to you.

[Antlerman]

I'll bet it does. What would be great for me is to focus on my physical body the same way. It all works together.

[bronxo]

Or as the Romans used to say: Mens sana in corpore sano

 

A sound mind in a healthy body.

[LightForce]

The idea of 'higher power' is a crock.

 

For you it is. Quantum Physics says we are the beginning, the present and the end. We are everything so that means we choose our destiny also. It is not clear if we are the higher power or if there is a higher power that is separate than us. I know that the Universe, that something has my back. I can tell by when things don't go as I think they should, then I see another option that is more fitting. It happens to me all of the time.

 

It isn't a mistake that Christians believe in a higher power because they have, indeed experienced HeartSpace where they lose themselves to something. It exists, just as we exist. Jesus doesn't exist. That I am pretty certain of.

[Noggy]

The idea of 'higher power' is a crock.

 

For you it is. Quantum Physics says we are the beginning, the present and the end. We are everything so that means we choose our destiny also. It is not clear if we are the higher power or if there is a higher power that is separate than us. I know that the Universe, that something has my back. I can tell by when things don't go as I think they should, then I see another option that is more fitting. It happens to me all of the time.

 

It isn't a mistake that Christians believe in a higher power because they have, indeed experienced HeartSpace where they lose themselves to something. It exists, just as we exist. Jesus doesn't exist. That I am pretty certain of.

 

This isn't what QM says. I'm not going to be real critical here, and I'm not going to bash what you believe, but QM does not say anything of the sort. I get annoyed seeing so many people say "QUANTUM MECHANICS SAYS" and they validate whatever they want to say. Because so many people have no idea what QM actually is, like you, people just believe that shit. If you want to talk about your spiritual experience, I will gladly discuss them with you, and I will discuss how science intertwines itself with spiritual experience, but I don't think it is against the rules of this forum to tell people when their science is wrong. So... Your science is wrong.

[SoftIce]

I enjoy reading about near death experiences, out of body experiences, and testimonies of reincarnation. I believe in the idea of a 'Higher Self', and that all people can tap into it. I also think that there's some sort of higher power/energy/vibration/consciousness. Jesus is still part of my belief system, in some form, although how he fits into my beliefs is complicated and messy. I am extremely wary of the Bible in general.

 

I've been attending my local Unity church since 2006. Most traditional christians view them as a cult, most likely. They interpret things different than traditional christianity does. I find a lot of their views resonate with my own, although not all of them do. But, they have given me a lot of support throughout the years, and I never have felt pressured to believe something I wasn't sure about. It feels like a safe and supportive environment for me, which is what I needed in these past few years.

 

I always say I want to take up meditation. But I never seem to find the time to do it.