All Encompassing Philosophy and Religion Thread: Open to all discussions

[Darkspellmaster]

So basics here, as the title suggests this is a thread for discussion on all Philosophy and all Religion. Please keep in mind if you want to talk about the bible there is a thread already designed for that. Here you can debate issues and talk about different sects, beliefs, practices, as well as philosophical views.

Requests are: Please be civil with one another.
Limited discussion of politics as there is a thread for that unless it's part of the item at hand.
Example: Family murder on the steps of a Shinto shrine. Or the Vatican has a visit from a political person.
If you want to discuss about groups like Scientology please keep in mind the various issues people have with it and other similar religions.
Respect each others philosophical views.
Keep in mind that this is a discussion, so if someone disagrees with you on something be ready to defend your point.
Anyone pulling off being a bigot or acting like a jerk will be reported to a mod.


So Let's get started.

[Darkspellmaster]

So recently I've been reading more about the Shinto religion and how it works. The idea is that everything in nature has a spirit, or Kami, and this makes it easy to worship anything from rocks to people possible. What's interesting is that there are five main expressions of Shintoism that are distinguished: Shrine Shinto -local Shrine Worship, Imperial Household Shinto -rites that are preformed on the grounds that are considered imperial and can only be done by the imperial family (Emperor, his wife, his kids, grand kids, etc.), Folk Shinto -which focuses on the folk beliefs and practices in Japan that stretch back hundreds of years. Sect Shinto -which are sects with founders and sacred scriptures, and Koshinto -based on pre-Buddhism Shinto. Each of these seem to play a role in the lives of people in Japan, but a vast majority wouldn't consider their religion Shinto.

The text that Shintoism models itself on is called Shinten, and for going into folk Shinto there is no rules to become a practitioner so you can worship without having to do something to join. It's really kind of interesting to see that it's Japan's national religion, but most people don't really list religion, but it's frequently worshiped and used for festivals and other events. So much in the media from Japan covers actual things done when visiting Shrines and it's certainly different then the more well known and followed religions that are polytheistic in nature. Something to think about given how most of the west views religion in general.

[Soubhagya]

Great thread.

Spirit being present everywhere is something Vedas would agree. According to Bhagavad Gita 9.4,

"By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them."

It means God is all pervading. A crude example would be how sunshine is spread all over the solar system. At the same time God maintains a separate independent existence. Just as Sun also maintains its unique identity. This all pervasive form is spiritual in nature and can't be perceived by one's senses.

ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi
na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ

"Krsna, or God can't be perceived by one's senses."

-from Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu 1.2.234


This is part of the culture. People in India don't touch anyone by one's foot. If they do so accidentally, they would touch their hand to to their forehead and say Visnu. I was taught so when i was a kid. Its one of those small things people do without really thinking about it. Later, i came to know that one can't enter God's temple silently while reading the scriptures. As soon as you set foot on the temple you utter God's name. 'Hare Krsna'. 'Haribol', etc. When one sets foot at the temple, one shall touch the ground of the temple. And touch the same hand to one's forehead while saying that. That's exactly the same thing when one touches any person by foot. Because every living being's body is also a temple of God. 'Visnu' is one of the names of God. It means 'all pervading'.

[Orunmila-Oni]

Over the last year I've learned a lot about Shinto myself as part of research for the book I'm currently writing. One of the things I came across and am using as a huge element of my story are the Four Affirmations of Shinto: tradition and family, love of nature, ritual purity, and matsuri (worshiping/honoring gods and ancestral spirits). I think that a lot of the elements including these, as well as those you've described Darkspellmaster, have become more of a cultural norm/expectation then religious tenets; as does often happen with a predominant belief system within a culture over long periods of time. It becomes a part of the cultural behavior and identity. The more I've explored some of Japan and Shinto's practices, the more fascinating I find it all. And as much research as I've done over the last year, I know that I've only just barely scratched the surface.

[Orunmila-Oni]

Great thread. Question, so what do you think about not only the differences, but the many similarities that seem to be reoccurring, and all-pervasive, in unconnected cultures and belief systems around the world? I've become ever enthralled over the last few years by not only the numerous differences, but the just as frequent similarities found within the worlds many folklore, mythologies, and religions. As different as they are, I think I'm more intrigued by the many reoccurring themes and universal understandings. Excuse me if I'm a little long-winded today, allergies are killing me and I can barely think straight.

[Darkspellmaster]

Great thread.

Spirit being present everywhere is something Vedas would agree. According to Bhagavad Gita 9.4,

"By Me, in My unmanifested form, this entire universe is pervaded. All beings are in Me, but I am not in them."

It means God is all pervading. A crude example would be how sunshine is spread all over the solar system. At the same time God maintains a separate independent existence. Just as Sun also maintains its unique identity. This all pervasive form is spiritual in nature and can't be perceived by one's senses.

ataḥ śrī-kṛṣṇa-nāmādi
na bhaved grāhyam indriyaiḥ

"Krsna, or God can't be perceived by one's senses."

-from Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu 1.2.234


This is part of the culture. People in India don't touch anyone by one's foot. If they do so accidentally, they would touch their hand to to their forehead and say Visnu. I was taught so when i was a kid. Its one of those small things people do without really thinking about it. Later, i came to know that one can't enter God's temple silently while reading the scriptures. As soon as you set foot on the temple you utter God's name. 'Hare Krsna'. 'Haribol', etc. When one sets foot at the temple, one shall touch the ground of the temple. And touch the same hand to one's forehead while saying that. That's exactly the same thing when one touches any person by foot. Because every living being's body is also a temple of God. 'Visnu' is one of the names of God. It means 'all pervading'.

Really really interesting there. I've read about the idea of not touching anyone by one's foot, and it's something that I've seen only in documentaries. But it's interesting to get a different view point on this as most don't go into detail as to why that happens. Which brings up the point of other versions of the name of God as well in the Hindi religion. Visnu being only one of them, and one lady I've spoken to about this, has stated that each name has different attributes that make that name just as powerful as other names, or more appropriate at different times to use.

I like your simple use of the sunshine metaphor connecting to the idea of the spirit. It actually connects to the ancient religion of Egypt with the idea of the sun being Ra and his watchful gaze, warmth and growth. As he was seen in some version of their religion as the creator of the sky, earth and underworld, thus being both the god of life and death. Really interesting there.

Over the last year I've learned a lot about Shinto myself as part of research for the book I'm currently writing. One of the things I came across and am using as a huge element of my story are the Four Affirmations of Shinto: tradition and family, love of nature, ritual purity, and matsuri (worshiping/honoring gods and ancestral spirits). I think that a lot of the elements including these, as well as those you've described Darkspellmaster, have become more of a cultural norm/expectation then religious tenets; as does often happen with a predominant belief system within a culture over long periods of time. It becomes a part of the cultural behavior and identity. The more I've explored some of Japan and Shinto's practices, the more fascinating I find it all. And as much research as I've done over the last year, I know that I've only just barely scratched the surface.

Yup there's so much built in there and their history with the idea of kami and how they interact with people and things. Something as simple as an umbrella that's 100 years old can become a spirit, but others can come from the fact that they were blessed or touched by someone who is considered blessed by the gods in various ways. Shinto Funeral rights are also interesting as they've been merged a lot with some Buddhist traditions, and a lot of Japanese people seem to mix and match them as they go. The Matsuri could also be seen as similar to the catholic or Christian idea of having a small picture, or making a shrine where a person passed on. It's also interesting how the Japanese never really look at the dead in a gloomy way, but it's not like where the Irish tend to have a celebration of the dead with their wakes.

Great thread. Question, so what do you think about not only the differences, but the many similarities that seem to be reoccurring, and all-pervasive, in unconnected cultures and belief systems around the world? I've become ever enthralled over the last few years by not only the numerous differences, but the just as frequent similarities found within the worlds many folklore, mythologies, and religions. As different as they are, I think I'm more intrigued by the many reoccurring themes and universal understandings. Excuse me if I'm a little long-winded today, allergies are killing me and I can barely think straight.

I think there's a ton of them! Honestly if you look back you can see that there's connections all over the place. From the Egyptian Monotheistic idea of the sun being a creator of all things, to the Shinto idea of performing rites in a way that seem to have ties to some very old Chinese customs. For me, at least, I've always thought that religions were connected to each other, just different people wound up writing different books about it and, again for me at least, I tend to buy into the idea that God might be a mix (or like a group) that works together to watch over things. I know it sounds weird but there are aspects of Western, Eastern, Southern and Northern Religions that seem to intersect at points. The most common one I can think of at the moment is the whole idea of plagues and the flood. The flood is all over the place in so many religions and they all speak about it in different ways.

No that's fine, I love reading long winded ideas of connections between religions and myths. I actually think learning about other religions and view points helps people understand cultures more and by doing that you can grow to form a peaceful relationship because you can see both differences and similarities in your beliefs.

[Darkspellmaster]

Some Protestant denominations consider Mormons and Unification Church as cults of Heretics. Ironically the Protestants were branded as heretics by the Catholics centuries ago.

Yup and that was due to the fact that the Protestants really disliked the fact that the Catholic church at the time was practically selling getting into Heaven via absolving sins for a price. You pay and you're free and clear of your sins rather than working through them. Not to mention the various popes at the time that bought the seat through having a strong political and wealthy family in the region. It's interesting that for every new church that rises someone is branded by the older establishment as a heretic. It's actually kind of fascinating seeing the whole thing from a historical lens.

[Kirby101]

The Biblical rule for not eating pork made sense in the Middle east 2500 years ago, but not so much today. Raw meats in general are contaminated. 90% of chicken is and about 25% of beef. The answer is to cook it through, not abstain because God is a dietician.

As far as why Christians don't keep kosher. From what I have been told, Jesus brought a new covenant for his followers. Many of the old Torah rules no longer applied. But this is put in practice very selectively, with some laws still in place and others not. There is big discrepancies across different Christian sects. And even among Jewish people, the adherence to the Torah is widely varied. From Ultra-Orthidox to Reform.

[Kees_L]

Some Protestant denominations consider Mormons and Unification Church as cults of Heretics. Ironically the Protestants were branded as heretics by the Catholics centuries ago.

For good measure, Wikipedia notes the arising of the Protestant church versus the Catholic church out of the (Western or West-European) Christian church as amounting to a "schism":

Wikipedia: A schism (pronounced /ˈsɪzəm/ SIZ-əm, /ˈskɪzəm/ SKIZ-əm or, less commonly, /ˈʃɪzəm/ SHIZ-əm[1]) is a division between people, usually belonging to an organization, movement, or religious denomination. The word is most frequently applied to a split in what had previously been a single religious body, such as the East–West Schism or the Great Western Schism.

plus this:

Wikipedia: In religion, the charge of schism is distinguished from that of heresy, since the offence of schism concerns not differences of belief or doctrine but promotion of, or the state of, division.[2] However, schisms frequently involve mutual accusations of heresy. In Roman Catholic teaching, every heresy is a schism, while there may be some schisms free of the added guilt of heresy.[3] Liberal Protestantism, however, has often preferred heresy over schism. Presbyterian scholar James I. McCord (quoted with approval by the Episcopalian bishop of Virginia Peter Lee) drew a distinction between them, teaching: "If you must make a choice between heresy and schism, always choose heresy. As a schismatic, you have torn and divided the body of Christ. Choose heresy every time."

Religious arguments also reign rampant throughout the New Testament such as in Jesus' rants against for instance Zealots, Pharisees and (other) Judaic temple priests.

Where I live there exists what is called "the Bible-belt" full of villages where what used to be outside the municipal borders beyond water- or gas mains there'd be wooden housing for the likes of Catholics or non-Protestants. A situation occurring since the 1950s no longer, if only because housing without proper accommodation was made illegal.

And I would consider it true that specifically among (Protestant) churchgoers in my country such groups as Mennonites, Anabaptists, Adventists, Latter Day Saints as well as Jehova's Witnesses are not normally regarded as actual churches or only as the most distinct split-offs (leaving out Episcopal / Anglican / Presbytarian church denominations since overhere they'd hardly be known at all).
Similarly I feel to have never met a Dutch churchgoer or schoolmaster accepting for example the book of Mormon as actual (holy) scripture.

Also it appears normal for most (Protestant) churches where I live to require reverends / ministers to have a University doctoral degree in Theology for the possibility of becoming ordained or 'called' into office.

Which is all the same to me. Since if I consider my religious status I'm as church-less as Jesus, although I feel more rather a Heathen than an Atheist in that I hail Gods purely in order to be angry at them. Plus I find ancestors important who will have lived as Pagans moreso than as Christians for the longest time. Simply a matter of respect.

[Soubhagya]

Great thread. Question, so what do you think about not only the differences, but the many similarities that seem to be reoccurring, and all-pervasive, in unconnected cultures and belief systems around the world? I've become ever enthralled over the last few years by not only the numerous differences, but the just as frequent similarities found within the worlds many folklore, mythologies, and religions. As different as they are, I think I'm more intrigued by the many reoccurring themes and universal understandings. Excuse me if I'm a little long-winded today, allergies are killing me and I can barely think straight.

Sure there are differences. As well as similarities. There's only one God. Sun is called 'surya' in Sanskrit. You may call it sun, i may call it surya. But in the end we are indicating the same thing.

Differences in religions is mostly due to this. God's messengers, servants, prophets have appeared all over the world. And they have revealed the message according to their audience's ability to receive.

The teacher maybe a PhD in mathematics. But she teaches according to the level of the student. For an elementary student, 2-5 can't be done. But in high school does more complicated calculations. In college level the student studies stuff like calculus. All of this is mathematics. Whether subtracting two numbers, algebra or calculus. But the teacher teaches according to the capacity of the student to learn.

[Soubhagya]

Really really interesting there. I've read about the idea of not touching anyone by one's foot, and it's something that I've seen only in documentaries. But it's interesting to get a different view point on this as most don't go into detail as to why that happens. Which brings up the point of other versions of the name of God as well in the Hindi religion. Visnu being only one of them, and one lady I've spoken to about this, has stated that each name has different attributes that make that name just as powerful as other names, or more appropriate at different times to use.

Yes. That is the reason why people do this. Because God lives within the heart of every living being. But over time these can become rituals. Doing something without actually understanding the reason behind that. Loosing the associated benefits. For example trying to respect others would come naturally if they understand that other people's bodies are temples too.

I would point out that these are not versions of names. But rather names of God. And chanting God's names is the recommended process of self realization in this age according to the Vedas. There are no hard and fast rules for chanting God's names. One can simply sit anywhere and chant God's names. 'Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare/Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare'. Chanting these names don't cost a thing. Yet the benefits are great. Definitely worth trying.

And lest i contradict myself about rituals, let me add that by doing this one can realize one's eternal spiritual nature. By self realization i meant that. We are not the bodies according to Bhagavad Gita. But rather spirit souls. These names are of a transcendental nature. One can chant these names everyday but one won't tire. Something mundane can become tiring. Try chanting something like 'coco cola' for half an hour. That will become boring real soon. But that won't happen with 'Hare Krishna Hare Krishna Krishna Krishna Hare Hare/Hare Ram Hare Ram Ram Ram Hare Hare'.

I like your simple use of the sunshine metaphor connecting to the idea of the spirit. It actually connects to the ancient religion of Egypt with the idea of the sun being Ra and his watchful gaze, warmth and growth. As he was seen in some version of their religion as the creator of the sky, earth and underworld, thus being both the god of life and death. Really interesting there.

That was meant to be an analogy. I hope you understood what i meant to say by my analogy. Or else you ended up finding a connection but lost what i wanted to convey. I would be a bad communicator then.

Its said that God is all pervasive. So, a certain school of thought says because God is all pervasive, God won't be existing as an unique individual. God would be formless. It sounds sensible at first. I am an individual. I am not all pervading. I exist only in front of my laptop. So, if God is all pervading, God won't be able to exist as an unique individual.

For that the Vedic scriptures say God is all pervasive and yet exists as an unique individual. God is not formless. Sun pervades throughout the solar system by its light, And yet there's the form of the sun. Similarly, from God's divine body something called the 'brahman' emanates. That is formless. And that pervades all throughout the universe. That brahman is spiritual in nature. Indestructible. Imperceptible to the ordinary senses. Eternal. And that is the impersonal aspect of God. So, there's no contradiction if we say that everything has spirit. I meant to say that. (Though i think difference will arise if i ask whose spirit).

I am curious about what the Christians say about the Holy Spirit. Because what little i have heard about the Holy Spirit sounds like 'brahman'. But i don't know how they describe the Holy Spirit.

Darkspellmaster, I tend to feel the exact same way, kind of like we all see a fraction of the picture sort of deal, or that the way we see things is based on our ability to understand the whole picture. Or to put it a different way, a cultures understanding of the "truth" is determined by that cultures needs and ability to comprehend the small parts that are necessary for their needs at specific points in their mental and spiritual development. A child (even an adult) is not capable of understanding all things at once. They are introduced to concepts gradually and more so as they become better able to understand previous teachings. People are educated with fragments pertinent to their needs and roles (jobs etc), rarely able to see the whole "machine", let alone understand the numerous moving parts that make up the world allow it to continue moving. As above, so below they say; at least that's my perception and understanding of things.

Whoah! That's like the story of six blind men and the elephant.

There were six blind friends who never knew what an elephant looks like. Once an elephant arrived in their town and they wanted to 'see' that. Each friend touched one part of the elephant and said differently. One friend touched an ear. And said the elephant is like a fan. Another friend held the tail and came to the conclusion that the elephant is like a broom. Another friend touched one leg and concluded that the elephant is like a pillar. Thus, each of them came to a different conclusion. The story ends with a person who can see who explains the elephant so that they actually understand what an elephant is.

That is how there's a difference in philosophies. In India itself there are a number of schools of philosophy. The differences are explained by this, They are all searching for the 'Absolute Truth'. But the 'Absolute Truth' is multifaceted.