KiBa wrote:First post with lots of stuff
This was actually a pretty good post.
I don't really have any problem whatsoever with traditional empirical based scientific study, or the study of quantum physics. Indeed I believe both forms of study can provide us with insight. But what I think Kiba's post puts across quite well, is 1. how very little we can
actually say we fully understand about our universe through the use of the logical and rational parts of our brain alone. And 2. Just how political and contradictory the world of "science" can be. It certainly isn't as simple as the "OK this is good science and this is bad science" that some will try have you believe. In fact it's that very attitude that hampers the true spirit of scientific study and discovery. The world is crammed full of intellectual arrogance and selfish motivations.
they have always maintained that theomorphism is with respect to the mind alone.
This is interesting, as this idea sounds almost as unbelievable to me as does the idea that God actually looks like us. God thinks in the same manner as our mind's of matter think? Our minds that cause us so much trouble? It doesn't quite hang together for me. I find the teaching found in many eastern spiritual philosophies that in actually fact, we all
are a part of God, but not in our flesh or our minds, but our souls- to resonate more with me.
My question about religion is simply "why are there so many?". They can't all be correct, yet the followers of each one believe their specific doctrine, and no other.
Of course they can all be correct. Just different paths up the same mountain. In fact, if you look at all of the worlds spiritual faiths, you will find an incredible amount of parallels between them all. They usually just worded slightly differently. Look at the concept that a life (as lived through the senses) is suffering as found in Buddhism and so many strains of Hindu spiritual philosophy, and then compare that to the Catholic teaching of original sin, and how bodily temptations should be resisted. See the similarities. Same thing roughly with the belief that this world is an illusion and the idea of Heaven as a truer reality, I guess. Indeed these ideas in Catholicism are often credited as coming from dear old Plato (who if I recall correctly, believed in a form of reincarnation, funnily enough), but you can find these same ideas everywhere. Though in my opinion the Catholic church lost touch with the truth in many of it's ancient teachings, while remaining annoyingly dogmatic about things which should of long been done away with, and so ended up with a kind of worst of both worlds situation. But my complaints with Catholicism are of a practical kind mainly.
This is not to say that you must now believe in idea of original sin or that life is suffering or anything. But you can see that this concept was perhaps helpful for some (though I'm not going to lie, I don't actually think it's very helpful when considered in context of Catholicism, it's why we ended up with so many pedo priests...though there are plenty of well recorded cases of Buddhist sexual scandals too to be fair. So that idea of rejecting your senses can really go very wrong if taught incorrectly. ) Other faiths like esoteric Shinto (while sharing many other similarities with Buddhism, Indian spiritual philosophies, and the old pagan faiths) reject the idea of life as suffering, but they still get one to the same place, through their own rituals and practises. The core ideas are all usually incredibly similar and overlap, it's just differences in method and terminology mostly. And then people start arguing about pointless nonsense and then people get distracted, and so on.
They are just different paths to the same place as far as I see. Some people may reach advances in the spiritual journey in different ways. Some may achieve success through using the body and practising Yoga, some may reach it through studying certain ideas, or some through meditation, or some through compassion, or whatever the hell works for you. I don't think we really need large organised religions personally, I think we can all get there our own ways, but I can understand they can be helpful to some (And very unhelpful to others). It's just about what liberates you.
or we exist as modes of Pure Being (pantheism/Hinduism). The third possibility is not rational per se, and that is Buddhism, which states that every experience is an illusion, and the truth is an ultimate abstraction. You could call this infinite Pure Being, but the Buddhist would say that our rational conclusions are illusions too, so you can't think anything at all
Well, your not entirely accurate here. As most of the oldest "Hindu" spiritual philosophies that I am familiar with, would agree with Buddhists that this physical world is an illusion, but they just often happen to believe that we are indeed all part of an ultimate "pure being/ conciousness"" or "god". And much like Buddhists they often believe that this unification can only come about through a complete transcendence of the mind and all forms of thought. Hence Yoga was originally developed and codified as a practical means of achieving this aim.
I think a proper long and rambling mue post has overdue for a while now