Godless Religions

I've read the Silmarillion, of course. Several times. 'In the beginning there was Eru, called the One...' (something like that). Tolkien was an historical scholar, of course, and based his writings on Anglo-Saxon mythology, speech, and customs. It doesn't surprise me that he'd also borrow from the Mesopotamian cultures. Many of the artifacts that disappeared or were destroyed at the Museum of Baghdad at the start of the 'war' were Sumerian. Absolutely heartbreaking. I cried. 9000 years of human cultural history on the ground in pieces, or stolen and now residing on some rich bastard's mantelpiece.

There was Eru, the One, who in Arda is called Iluvatar; and he made the first Ainur... Yes, as you infer, similar to the Christian Mythology but with Melkor as a devilish singer :o)

I always liked Melkor. He was, apparently, the most beautiful of the Ainur. I pictured him as a kind of gigantic tar-baby. Wasn't Satan the most beautiful of the angels before he was cast out and burned by God's Light?

I've never been sure that Satan and Lucifer were the same. There were many devils and I think Satan is the one associated with the Earth (Job etc.) but I don't think Lucifer gets to Earth until just before Armaggedon.

You got me there. I've never done the Old Testament. I suppose I should try, if I'm going to argue about religion with people! :-)

You might find this fun then Ag, You should also read the Alphabet of Ben-Sira - you'll love it :o)

There were definitely some misogynists writing those old books, Smiley! :-D

Yeah, but that lilith was such a bitch ;oD

hahaha! In some circles she'd be called a 'strong woman'! One man's bitch is another man's babe... :-D Imagine! She resisted being 'forced' by Adam to lie with her. What a tart! The cheek! No wonder God made a new dishrag, er, wife for Adam.

Actually it was an arguement about who would be on top... no, really!

I need to go visit the park for some fresh air and exercise, Ag - so you can be on top for a while ;oP

Careful. The Thought Police are watching.... ;-D

Ooooh, spinning sufi's on chnl 4. I've been a whirlingless dervish ever since I mentioned I liked to whirl - but this has inspired me to start again.

Yes...more of those Godless and gutless religions!

They are better for not having a god. Human-centric gods are the most unhelpful invention in the universe, and, whatever the force out there that keeps this universe going, it certainly isn't one who takes an interest in our petty affairs. Buddhism is wonderful, because it's about making the world we live in a lovely and compassionate face. It's about making friends with all aspects of yourself. It's not about guilt. It's about being kind. Gods are just there to make us feel small and worthless. Buddhism is exactly the opposite.

I think you are mostly right Fergal, but something certainly DOES take an interest in our petty affairs - it could be a guardian angel or something but I've always felt it was divinely driven.

The last time you were on top Slimey was when they drew up a list of dickheads.

Strange, I thought my computer had somehow confused the identity of the last two posters :o)

I wonder if Yoga counts as a religion? Many years ago I abandoned Christianity for Raja Yoga, due in part to the Taoist influence of Kung Fu (the TV series not the martial art) making me more interested in Eastern philosophy - but mostly because Roman Catholicism just seemed so hypocritical and guilt ridden. I later took the short hop into zen Buddhism but I never really lost my faith in God. So, I think, as Maxwell says - almost at the start of the thread - 'There is God in all religions...' if you care to look.

So smiley, I'm wrong in thinking that kung-fu had anything to do with confucisisisism or whatever it's called? Which is a far shot from taoism? I'm not up on all this atall.

Confucius was supposed to be a contempary of Lao Tsu (who is credited with originating Taoism but may be imaginary) and there are even tales that they met. Confucius (551-479 BC K'ung-fu-tzu or Pinyin Kongfuzi), or Master K'ung, whose life defines the end of the Spring and Autumn Period in Chinese history originated Confucianism which is one of the "Three Ways," together with Taoism and Buddhism. Kwai Chang Caine was supposedly a Shaolin priest who often mentioned the Tao but may have been a Buddhist - but was certainly not a Confucian.

Here is a link to the TV series and you will see from note 1 that they used the TAO TE CHING (which is a Taoist text credited to Lao Tsu). [%sig%]

"Who am I to judge why you're on the web at a time when everyone else has gone to bed?" no one's gone to bed here so who are you to assert that everyone on the planet goes to bed before 23.30 uk time? but was i right?

bed. mmmm

Oh, good, someone being nasty in another part of the world. Visualise World Peace. Smiley, I'm not sure Yoga would be considered a religion, since there's no-one to 'worship', as it were. It would probably fall under the same heading as Buddhism, where one follows a teaching, but not a specific master or deity (although in countries where Buddhism is the majority religion, I've found there to be some idol worship as opposed to the self-reflection it's supposed to encourage). It's more of a practice, I guess, much the same as prayer is, but without the communication with a 'higher Being', unless one considers (as I do) that the 'higher Being' is, indeed, within oneself all along.

I think Yoga is quite closely connected with Hinduism via the Upanishads which seems to part of the development of both Ag. However I found this interesting : The Upanishads only seek the inner truth exclusively in a philosophical manner. The real self (Atman in Sanskrit) is nothing but the Universal Self (Brahman in Sanskrit), and that rituals (and possibly meditation as well) exist only for the people who are not yet ready to abandon mundane things to go to this supreme truth. In this sense, spiritual seekers who cling to their body or vital force and indulge themselves in Hatha Yoga (Yoga of Body) or in psychic power, would be regarded as not yet ready to acquire the Real Knowledge. I didn't bother checking which Hindu sect it was but it did seem to address your points about gods and idol worship Ag. A bit controversial perhaps - don't meditate get straight to the truth :o) Now I remember why I swapped to Zen: if you're lazy like me you prefer forgetting things rather than learning even more about 'truth' and 'Real Knowledge'... I'm into idle worship ;o)

Don't know what's been done to the threads but it wants undoing - my beard grows faster than the screen refreshes... Still, I suppose it can be seen as a form of meditation and acceptance ;o)

hahaha! Yes, that's the one. I figure, the best philosophy is to take those parts that work for you, and forget about the rest. I don't think there's only 'one way' to reach enlightenment, and I don't think 'enlightenment' is necessarily something that is a constant; in other words, for most of us at least, enlightenment means moments of absolute, brilliant clarity, rather than a constant state. I don't much buy into teachings that say 'if you do this, or not that, then you will reach Brahma'. Teachings are as individual as people themselves, and what works for me will not necessarily work for you. The Upanishads have their good points; so does the Bhaghavad Gita; so do the teachings of Jesus, and Siddartha Gautama. They're all pointing in the same direction; they just take different roads!

Catch you later Ag... I'm off to the beach to see if the sea is running in slow motion too :o)

Well, you know what I'll say...I'll see what others say before I come out shooting...:-D

You might have to wait a while since religion isn't a topic of choice for most of those online at the moment. I don't suppose you've ever looked into the relationship between Buddhism and Hinduism have you Ag? I just wonder where God went :o)

God went inside and became human psychological archetypes, Smiley. Hence the pantheistic slant of Hinduism, and the deva/dhakini slant in Buddhism.

Panthestic slant? I thought it was a trinity like Christianity (or is the Trinity another RC dogma?).

Hinduism? No. It's a pantheon, or rather, there are several different 'incarnations' of each god; there is Shiva, and Indra, and Kali, Hanuman, Ganesh and thousands of others I can't think of offhand. They represent archetypal facets of the human psyche, manifest in god/animal form. A very interesting religion, separate from the caste system it's been so intertwined with.

ah there is God in all religions..including taoism, thar might add. It just depends at what slant you lookin at it! :) I prefer Buddhism and Taoism because you get the chance to change and experience the physical and mental benefits in the lifetime. Whereas, religions such as christianity just ask you to be a good doggy and you get your treat when you die..lol...peasant be goode!! or whatever. I don't give a fuck if truth be told :)

Not on topic but I suppose it's vaguely to do with reincarnation. Reason for getting rid of housemate on BB: she thinks she was an elephant in a previous life but she's got a rotten memory...

I think you are mixing up gods with God, Ag.

Buddhism and Taoism don't have a God per se, Maxwell. It can be argued that Buddha Nature is a form of Cosmic Intelligence or God - but Buddhists argue that people who believe in God have not gone far enough - which, perhaps paradoxically, is exactly what the Christians say about the Buddhists.

Christianity has been warped well away from Jesus' original teachings; jude will know about this. Christianity once had many different 'sects' with differing beliefs on what Jesus taught, but Emperor Constantine held a conference that basically took out all the 'outliers', including those teachings of Jesus which discussed reincarnation (and he -did- discuss this, often, if you read what he said), and presented a 'standardised' Christianity which placed the Church as an entity directly in the seat of power. Hence the 'loss' of the Gnostic gospels, the Gospel of Thomas, etc., which was very introspective and meditative stuff, much like the teachings of Buddha. I personally think that Buddha, Lao Tzu, Krishna, and Jesus were all incarnations of the same thing: God (but without the grey beard or heavy-handed judgments of later Xtianity).

Hinduism is a religion, which has a Trinity, as its core belief: in the Hindu philosophy Lord Brahma is the Supreme God of Creation, Lord Vishnu is the Sustainer and Lord Shiva is God of Destruction.

How do you get all that stuff into your brain and make it stay there?

Well, we're splitting hairs, but the thread says: -godless- religion, not -godsless- religion. :-) I'm not confusing gods with God, I don't think. Hinduism has many gods. What I hope I said was that the pantheon, like the Greek one, is actually a mirror of human Beingness. Jesus isn't a god, but people worship him as one. Same with some branches of Buddhism, like Theravada.

Isn't Lao Tsu seen as an imaginary figure?

You're right about the Trinity, Smiley, but unlike Christianity they also have a huge assortment of other gods and demi-gods. Perhaps the Trinity represents the Eternal Cycle, whilst the lesser Beings are the infinite expressions of that cycle. ..?

where's jasper, your one clown short of a full set

That's 'You're', smarty-pants.

I think Lao Tzu actually -did- exist, or maybe is an amalgamation of a few different philosophers wisping about at that period of time. Taoist teachings, although they appear quite simple, are rather too 'cerebral' for my taste; I much prefer the brightly-coloured imagery of Buddhism, although they teach basically the same thing, coming from different angles.

waits for the sexul inuendos to start

If you'll excuse me, I have to bow out for now. A 'discussion' is required with the Other in the house... see you tomorrow. Bye, Smarty-pants! *kiss kiss* *wink* Don't be mean to my friend Smiley!

seems like i've spoiled your little tit a tit smiley