#what is hinduism religion based on | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

tanadrin · 3 months

Text

Revised version of "polytheism vs elaborateness" religion chart. I started with a list of around 150 religions, sects, denominations, philosophies, and spiritual tendencies, whittled down to 100 based on what I could find information on and what meaningful differences would actually show up in a chart like this. Dark blue is Christianity and Christian-derived tendencies; light blue is Judaism and Jewish-derived tendencies; green is Islam and Islam-influenced tendencies; purple is ancient Mediterranean polytheism and related schools of thought; red is Dharmic/Hindu-influenced schools of thought; tan is Chinese religion and philosophy; orange is new religious movements; black is other, unaffiliated religions and movements.

Obviously, "what is a religion" is a complicated topic. Some of the things on this chart might strike you more as philosophical schools (Carvaka, Stoicism), epistemological approaches (Unitarian Universalism), or different ways of slicing the same tradition. The scholarly definition of "religion" is sort of fundamentally circular, and that's not something I'm interested in trying to untangle for this entirely non-scientific exercise.

Religions etc. are scored on two axis: polytheism vs elaborateness of practice. Polytheism is a rank from zero to 11, thus:

0. Strict atheist and materialist, denying the possibility of both gods and the supernatural, e.g., Carvaka.

1. Atheist. Denies the existence of significant supernatural agents worthy of worship, but may not deny all supernatural (or psychic, paranormal, etc.) beings and phenomena (e.g., Mimamsa).

2. Agnostic. This religion makes no dogmatic claims about the existence of supernatural beings worthy of worship, and it may not matter for this religion if such beings exist (e.g., Unitarian Universalists). It does not preclude--and may actually incorporate--other supernatural, psychic, or paranormal phenomena (e.g., Scientology).

3. Deist. This religion acknowledges at least one god or Supreme Being, but rejects this being's active intervention in the world after its creation (e.g., Christian Deism). Deism is marked with a gray line on the chart, in case you want to distinguish religions that specifically care about all this God business from ones that don't.

4. Tawhid monotheist. This religion acknowledges only a single transcendent god above all other natural or supernatural beings, who is usually the creator of the universe and the ground of being, and is without parts, division, or internal distinction (e.g., Islam).

5. Formal monotheism. This religion acknowledges a single god, usually transcendent above all other natural or supernatural beings, but who may have aspects, hypostases, or distinct parts (e.g., Trinitarian Christianity). Pantheism may be considered a special case of formal monotheism that identifies the universe and its many discrete phenomena with a single god or divine force.

6. Dualism. This religion acknowledges a single god worthy of worship, alongside a second inferior, often malevolent being that nevertheless wields great power in or over the world (e.g., Zoroastrianism or Gnosticism).

7. Monolatrist. This religion or practice acknowledges the existence of many gods or divine beings worthy of worship, but focuses on, or happens to be devoted to only one of them (e.g., ancient mystery cults; pre-exilic Judaism).

8. Oligotheist. This religion worships a small group of divine beings, who may function for devotional or rhetorical purposes as a single entity (e.g., Mormonism, Smartism).

9. Monogenic polytheism/Henotheism. This religion worships many gods, which it sees as proceeding from or owing their existence to, a single underlying or overarching force or supreme god (e.g., many forms of Hinduism).

10. Heterogenic polytheism. This religion worships many gods, who have diverse origins and/or natures. Though the number of gods is in practical terms probably unlimited, gods are discrete entities or personalities, i.e., they are "countably infinite" (e.g., many polytheistic traditions).

11. Animism. This religion worships many gods which may or may not be discrete entities, and which may or may not be innumerable even in principle, i.e., they are "uncountably infinite" (e.g., many animist traditions).

What counts as a god is naturally a bit of a judgement call, as is exactly where a religion falls on this scale.

Elaborateness of practice is based on assigning one point per feature from the following list of features:

Uses vs forbids accompanied music in worship

Saints or intermediary beings accept prayers/devotion

Liturgical calendar with specific rituals or festivals

Practices monasticism

Venerates relics or holy objects

Clerics have special, elaborate clothing

Clerics have special qualificiations, e.g., must be celibate or must go through elaborate initiation/training

Elaborate sacred art or architecture used in places of worship

Sites of pilgrimage, or other form of cult centralization

Sophisticated religious hierarchy beyond the congregational level

Mandatory periods of fasting and/or complex dietary rules

Specific clothing requirements for laypeople

Specific body modifications either required or forbidden for laypeople

Liturgical language

Complex ritual purity rules

Performs sacrifice

Performs human sacrifice (or cannibalism)

Uses entheogens

Uses meditation or engages in mystical practice

Additionally, a point is taken away for austerity for each of the following features:

Forbids secular music outside worship

Claims sola scriptura tradition

Practices pacifism or ahimsa

Requires vegetarianism of all adherents

These scores are probably pretty inexact, since I am not a scholar of world religion.

This chart is not scientific, it's just a goof based on that @apricops post.

Other fun dimensions along which to chart religions might be:

Orthodoxy vs orthopraxy

Authoritarianism/control of members. This would add some much needed distinctions to Christian sects in particular, and to the new religious movements.

Elaborateness of cosmological claims. Some religions (looking at you, Buddhism) really go hog-wild here.

Social egalitarianism. Even within the same framework/tradition/philosophy, some practices differ radically on how egalitarian they are.

991 notes · View notes

forevermore05 · 2 months

Text

1. I can't speak for other cultures that were represented in this show (I'm so sorry if your representation was ruined too), but since I'm a South Asian and specifically an Indian and Hindu. I think I have some credibility. Ok, so this may depend on the interpretations of Hinduism that you've grown up with if you're a Hindu reading this. Well, growing up, I was always taught that Chakras were so important. I learned that the GODS could not accomplish something unless they access all their Chakras (again, this is the interpretation I grew up with it might not be the same for you). So the fact that watching Aang just be able to live life without accessing all of his charkas properly was a big slap to the face. Let me just say this right now. If you were representing a culture, especially the culture that you base the entire show on you either do it correctly or you don't do it at all. Don't make it half-baked because that's just disrespecting the people who follow that religion. And you're emphasizing how insignificant their religious values are (mind you Hinduism is one of the oldest religions in the world). What little representation we had was also ruined.

2. I also want to talk about another point since I'm here. I think I've made it very clear that I'm a woman of color. Even though me and Katara Are not the same ethnicity. She was my representation through skin color. And it's so interesting. How even though I knew that she was not my ethnicity, I still grasped onto her as a representation. Now this is not a PSA for studios to say "Hey, let's have a person that is brown, and everyone will be okay with it because they will have a person of the same skin to relate to." No this is me criticizing the lack of diversity in the show. The fact that you can base an entire show on a culture but not be able to handle a main character from that culture. And also I think the reason why I like Zuko and Katara ( I've made this point before) But the amount of respect that they have. As a woman of color, I have not exactly received respect from other men whether that be because of my gender or my skin color. So seeing a woman of color be respected regardless it's just so refreshing to me.

3. Also I want people to be mindful that a lot of people who ship this ship. Are women of color and/or part of the LGBTQIA2S+ community. However, I'm going to talk specifically about women of color since I'm straight. A lot of us have come from countries that have been colonized and still face the repercussions of colonization to this day, so what I'm trying to say is. When woc ship this duo they know what they're doing and they're not doing anything wrong. It's disrespectful to insult them for being racist and misogynistic when in reality a lot of these women face misogyny and racism in their own lives. They understand why they ship this ship. They understand it very well because they able to see and understand what is truly going on.

4. If you have a problem with this post and want to potentially hunt me down. I'm only saying this because I've seen other women of color be harassed for liking Zutara. I need you to remember that I'm a teenager. I'm a kid. I don't think you want to beef with a kid. And no, it does not matter that I'm 18. You shouldn't be harassing anyone over a ship. In fact, accusing shippers of being racist but then being racist to that poc/woc shipper is insane. It kind of shows that those people are not on a moral high horse.

5. I'm a kid......don't even think about it.

#avatar the last airbender #hinduism #india #south asian #katara #zuko #zutara #zuko x katara #pls don't rip me apart im a teenager 💀#atla critical

64 notes · View notes

lilianasgrimoire · 1 month

Text

Witchcraft 101: An Introductory Post

What is Witchcraft?

Witchcraft is the practice of magick. It's a series of techniques one uses to harness and/or manipulate energies externally or internally to change one's surroundings of circumstances as well as themselves. This can be done through using herbs, stones, crystals, and other materials.

Witchcraft can, and is, performed in a plethora of ways. It can be done through meditation, spell work, rituals or even baking and cooking. Witchcraft is as unique as you are. To practice witchcraft you do not need a religion, however most people practice witchcraft to feel more connected to their chosen religion. Witchcraft is as unique as the individual demonstrating it.

What makes someone a witch?

A witch is a person who practices magick. Witches can come from any background, any age, race or gender and religion. The term 'witch' is a gender-neutral, universal name. A being who claims the title may do what they desire with the craft. There are many types of witches, all of which are nature based. Not all witches are interested in the same type practise, however. One may prefer the study and use of crystals, and another being drawn to divination or even one of the elements.

A witch is neither good or bad, as they are only human.

There aren't any rules to being a witch (unless your religion states otherwise). Whilst you don't have to be religious to be a witch, most witches who practise, are most commonly Wiccan.

What is Paganism?

Pagan is an umbrella term for the many non-Abrahamic religions. This included Hinduism, Wicca, Buddhism, Sikhism, etc. However, not a lot of people fall into a specific type of religion that comes under paganism but still believe in & worship more than one God/Goddess or Greater being such as the elements, for example. Many, if not most, witches, fall under the Wiccan religion.

Paganism, across all sub-genres, follow holidays/festivals, and in many religions, many they follow The Eight Sabbats, or Wheel of the Year. The Sabbats, depending on the religion, have slight variations in terms of rituals, timing and practicing of the holidays i.e. which God/Goddess is associated, traditional colours or foods. It also is up to the individual as to what they do and don't want to celebrate.

"All Wiccans are witches, but not all witches are wiccan. All Wiccans are Pagan, but not all Pagans are Witches."

Religion VS. Spirituality

Religion and spirituality are often meshed together and difficult to differentiate the two. Some people believe there is a blurred line between them, whereas another may believe they are two completely different topics.

So, how can we tell the two apart?

Religion is an institutionalised system of certain attitudes, practises and beliefs; often the service or worship of a greater being than ones self or the supernatural. A religion is often based upon life lessons and teachings of a historical or archetypal figure. Typically, there is a place of worship, such as churches, temples, mosques and cathedrals. Religion is a structured organised system that is heavily rule based with it's main focus on the faith of the religion (scriptures of being infallible and ultimate or truth. Acceptance and the surrender to the Divine are taught as the path to complete and ultimate salvation. Religion is one path for all to follow.

Spirituality is a connection that one has to something that is much larger than yourself. Spirituality is an aspect of humanity where an individual seeks and expresses meaning and purpose through the connection they experience to a moment. People who are spiritually awakened liv4e life in a reverent and sacred manner. Yoga, meditation and contemplation all help a person to start, progress and explore their journey. Many use these practices to reach out to their spirit guides, past lives and even advice from outside forces. Each journey is unique. Spirituality is often referred to as a "pathless path". Spirituality is about following your own path and learning, growing, loving and acceptance on a more personal level. Unlike religion, spiritualists do not follow a set of rules n regards to their inward journey but, faith is not dismissed and entirely acceptable to incorporate with spirituality.

52 notes · View notes

vorthosjay · 5 months

Note

Religious imagery in Kaladesh was actively avoided because Hinduism is a real religion, yet for Tarkir Nagas and Rakshasa were specifically remade to be closer to their representation in Hinduism. How and why?

Religious imagery was NOT actively avoided on Kaladesh. The angels evoked the imagery of Hindu gods. Which was a problem, but a simple art direction one.

Naga haven’t changed, they’re just getting the snake type eventually. I’m not sure what you’re referring to here. Some of them have new, less yellow-peril-y art though.

Rakshasa changed because the cat demon version was based on a half-remembered episode of Kolchak and bears no resemblance to Rakshasa. Which isn’t offensive, it’s just stupid. Rakshasa are not off-limits: I think we can all agree that depicting Christian angels and demons is different than say, crucifying Avacyn on a cross, yeah? Certain elements of religious mythology are as much cultural folklore as part of the religion.

72 notes · View notes

talonabraxas · 15 days

Text

Urna, Buddha's Third Eye Talon Abraxas

Third Eye Chakra Affirmations The third eye is the energy center of intuition and divine wisdom. I will show you how can quickly start energizing this chakra using my favorite 35 third eye chakra affirmations.

Third eye chakra affirmations encourage you to become more connected with your Third Eye or Ajna Chakra.

Affirmations empower and restore your chakra and as a result, you acquire greater self-awareness and razor-sharp intuition.

The Third Eye Chakra seats the eyes of your soul. You will be able to discern the world with greater perspectives when you activate your third eye using affirmations. You will be able to see, hear, and feel the energy around you. You may even be able to perceive psychically and with very strong intuition.

Awakening your Third Eye enables you to comprehend complex concepts and situations you may not have understood in the past.

You will see other angles of your circumstances with sharper vision. You will also be able to communicate thoughts and feelings easily.

Your Third Eye Chakra The word chakra originates from the Sanskrit word for circle or a spinning wheel.

At times, chakras are referred to as the wheels of life. Chakras are aligned in ascending order from the spine’s base to the top of your head.

Chakras have perpetually been referred to as a classical element, an aspect of consciousness and related to bodily functions.

The Third Eye Chakra emanates from between the eyebrows on your forehead.

Essentially, chakras are multiple subtle body focal points used in various ancient practices of meditation.

Denominated collectively as esoteric, inner traditions of Hinduism, also known as Tantra.

The area between the eyebrows is where we direct our attention when doing third eye affirmations.

Early traditions of Hinduism reveal the concept of chakras. Between religions of India, beliefs vary.

Buddhism texts mention five chakras consistently while sources of Hinduism offer six to seven chakras.

Regardless of belief, early Sanskrit text revels meditation visualizations combine mantras and flowers as the physical body’s physical entities.

35 Third Eye Chakra Affirmations

I listen to my deepest intuition

I am in touch with internal guidance

My intuition always works to serve my highest purpose.

I and my intuition are made with perfection

I am blessed with an inner voice.

I always know exactly what to do, all the time.

I am full of wisdom and knowledge.

I always look within when making decisions

My intuition always tells me what to do.

My intuition is never wrong.

I am complete with inner knowing.

We are all growing and learning. I am growing and learning

I was born to fulfill my God-given purpose.

I love discovering new things every day.

I see life everywhere I look.

I am here for a reason.

I accept that I have weaknesses. I accept that I have strengths.

I completely accept myself.

I accept everything my third eye tells me.

I accept the things I cannot change.

I can only control my reactions to things.

I can always see clearly

I am sensitive to the world around me.

I am shielded from harm by my intuition

I can see clearly.

I attract everything I have in my reality.

I am enough as I am

I always know the right thing to do

I live to serve my highest purpose

I was born to serve a greater purpose

I am born with everything I need to survive.

Everything I need to know, I already know

My inner-knowing never fails

I always know exactly what to do in every situation.

I trust my inner guidance

Why Are Affirmations So Powerful? The reason is that words are, like everything else, a type of energy with their own frequency.

There is tremendous power in spoken words.

Words can heal or they can wound. They are powerful and can be used as a powerful weapon. They have the power to recreate your world and alter your life.

The reason that positive affirmations work is because of neuroplasticity, which is a proven scientific principle. Neuroplasticity is the ability to rewire your brain with the power of words. There is a major role that affirmations play in actualizing our subconscious and manifesting desires.

Words can be used to balance your chakras and can have a significant impact on the outcome of your health. One example of the power of affirmations is when we have a positive attitude and feel good about ourselves.

The Energy of Words This raises the body’s vibration into something positive and attracts renewed health, stronger chakra, and as a result clarity of vision, perfect health, a relaxed mind, and total well-being. Holistic tradition suggests that positive affirmations raise your chakra’s frequency and make your energetic body stronger.

When you believe and act as if something you are saying is true, and that you have acquired the outcome you long for, then the more you actualize the affirmation.

Thus when you tell yourself “I am tranquil,” This will affect your energetic chakra body and you will, inevitably, become tranquil. Scientifically, affirmations have been proven to work. The fact that they have been around for centuries means that generations of human beings have reaped the benefits of using affirmations.

The best method of proving that affirmations work is to see for yourself first hand. After a few days, you will notice real results in your life and might finally understand what has made millions of people true believers in the power of affirmations.

42 notes · View notes

arcane-trail · 2 years

Photo

What is Paganism?

The term Paganism has been evolving for almost two millennia, so there is understandable confusion about what Paganism means. It has always been an umbrella term that includes within it many different faiths and practices. In this post, we are going to talk about what Paganism is (and isn’t) and explore some of the most important branches of modern Paganism (also known as Neopaganism).

Origins of the Term Paganism

The term Paganism was coined in the fourth century by Christians living in the Roman Empire for anyone who did not follow Christianity or Judaism. It comes from the Latin word paganus, which means country dweller. The implication was that these were “country bumpkins” stuck in old ways and not yet “wise” to the modern religion of Christianity. The Roman Empire officially converted to Christianity in 313 CE.

In the Middle Ages, while Islam was also viewed as a non-Pagan religion, the term Paganism continued to be used to refer to anyone who did not follow a religion based on a biblical god. It carried the derogatory connotation that Pagans worship false gods and are barbarians.

But in the 20th century, the term Paganism was reclaimed by various groups that follow religious beliefs or practices associated with pre-Christian religions. The group includes polytheists that continue to worship non-biblical pantheons, animists, magical practitioners, nature worshippers, and more.

The term Neopaganism is often used to distinguish these modern Pagans from our ancestors, who would have never referred to themselves as Pagans. Christians created the term Pagan to create “us” (biblical religions) and “them” (non-biblical religions) categories. This would not have been meaningful to our pre-Christian ancestors or to Norse warriors and Egyptian priests for whom Christianity was just one more religion.

It is worth noting that while Medieval Christians would have referred to religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism as Pagan, they aren’t included in the modern definition. These organized religions, which are dominant in many countries, fall into a class of their own.

Definition of Neopaganism

It is difficult to define Neopaganism because so many different people today identify with the term Paganism. It is possible to identify some characteristics that are common to most Neopagans, but don’t necessarily apply universally.

Pagan religions tend to be non-organized in that they are followed by an individual practitioner or small community rather than being a hierarchical institution like the Catholic church. But there are exceptions; for example, Hermetic orders tend to be small but very hierarchical organizations.

Pagan religions are often polytheistic, either drawing on ancient divine pantheons or following an animistic approach, which recognizes divinity in action within the world without necessarily naming it. Pagans can believe in these gods in a literal sense or as a metaphorical tool for relating to powers that are beyond our comprehension.

Pagans tend to believe that everything is sacred, especially nature, and that we can tap into the spiritual energy of the universe through meditation, invocation, rituals, witchcraft, and various other practices.

In most cases, it is an individualistic path. You choose which deities and beliefs speak to you personally, and you are responsible for creating and following your spiritual path. This very often links to a strong moral code, as you are responsible for your actions and their consequences. Pagans often identify with the idea that you can feed the universe with positive energy or diminish it with negative energy. You attract the kind of energy that you project, and what you receive mirrors what you give.

As we have already said, these characteristics do not hold true for all Pagans, but they are ideas that most Neopagans will identify with.

Branches of Neopaganism

So, if there are various branches of Neopaganism, what are they?

It is impossible to provide a complete and comprehensive list, first because we would be here forever, and second, since it is a personal and individualistic belief system, there is no limit to the number of variations that can exist.

But below, we will look at some of the most popular forms of Paganism that are most widely recognized in the Neopagan community today.

Reconstructionist Religions

Reconstructionist religions attempt to reconstruct ancient religions in the modern world. Pagans of this brand might choose to worship the Greek gods, follow the ritual practices of Egyptian priests, or walk in the footsteps of Druids.

Probably the most well-known reconstruction religion is Norse paganism, also known as Heathenry, which is the belief in the old Norse gods, including Odin, Thor, and Freyja. While exactly how this is done is individualistic, enough people identified with this type of Paganism that Asatru was created in Iceland in the 1970s to provide a common banner under which they could identify as an interest group. It is now recognized around the world.

Magic working is not a necessary part of modern Norse paganism, just as it was not in ancient times when only a few people were Volva (Seidr witches) or runemasters (workers of rune magic). But runic divination is a popular practice in modern Heathenry.

Wicca

Wicca is probably the type of Paganism most represented in pop culture (think The Craft and Charmed). It is a modern witchcraft practice, often but not always associated with the veneration of a great mother goddess and her consort, often but not always portrayed as a horned god. It can be followed by sole practitioners or coven groups led by a high priest or priestess.

Modern Wicca is credited as being founded by Gerald Gardner in the 1930s, and followers of his teachings are known as Gardnerian Wiccans. But today there are many different branches, both formal and informal.

Modern Wicca draws on what is known from historic witchcraft and magic rituals. But it is a thriving and evolving practice in which invention and following your intuition are encouraged.

Non-Wiccan Witchcraft

Not all Pagans who identify themselves as practitioners of witchcraft consider themselves Wiccan. Many follow a more shamanistic or nature-based approach to witchcraft without reference to organized elements such as covens or priests. These, usually sole practitioners, are often referred to as hedge witches.

These practitioners have a lot in common with Wiccans in their use of certain symbols and elements and closely following the cycle of the year and the phases of the moon. Grimoires and Books and Shadows are often used to record knowledge.

Hermeticism

The term Hermeticism originally referred to a religio-philosophical system based on a small number of writings known as Hermetica which gave birth to scientific approaches to magic in the form of practices such as alchemy. But Hermeticism has since become a term for those who engage in “high magic” or ritual magic, usually within a body or organization with specific teaching and hierarchies.

Probably the most famous example of these is the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, an organization dedicated to the study of the occult, metaphysical, and paranormal. It is a spin-off of Freemasonry and incorporates the hierarchies and secrecy of that order. There are tests to enter new parts of the order and learn new secrets. For a number of years, the famous occultist Aleister Crowley was associated with the order.

Animism

Animism differs from other types of polytheistic paganism in that it does not necessarily feel the need to name or identify deities. Animism accepts that there is a divine or spiritual force at work in the world and it can be seen in aspects of life. But they can appreciate and be thankful for these forces without anthropomorphizing them into deities.

Animists often believe that the gods of polytheistic religions are cultural constructions designed to help humans better understand and engage with these forces. They may choose to engage with certain traditional polytheistic gods as a way of engaging with the elements of the world they consider most important.

Secular Paganism

Secular paganism could also be called a nature-based religion. Secular pagans do not necessarily believe in certain deities and could be Polytheists, Christians, Atheists, or anything in between. The core belief is that we are part of nature, rather than masters of it, and that we should live our lives with an abiding love and respect for nature.

Secular Paganism often mixes meditative and ritual practices designed to better understand and control the self with a world view based on science.

Eclectic Paganism

Eclectic Paganism is kind of a “catch-all” term for those who don’t fit into other types of Paganism. This is for people who identify with the general principles of Paganism but haven’t tied themselves to a single belief system or set or practices.

For example, they might believe in the mother goddess, but not practice witchcraft. They may feel a deep spiritual connection with the universe, witch manifests in practices such as reading Tarot cards, and cleansing spaces with incense and herbs, but may not necessarily consider these practices linked with any kind of divinity.

Eclectic Pagans often have broad interests in terms of researching different new age practices and approaches. They may also identify with Paganism aesthetically through gothic-style fashion.

Meso-Paganism

Meso-Paganism is a term used for practices that are a result of mixing non-Christian religions with Christianity imposed by conquerors, missionaries, or both. Haitian Voodoo and Candomblé in Brazil are probably the best examples, in which African deities are syncretized with Christian Saints and elements of Christian religion are incorporated into traditional rituals.

While many of the characteristics of Neopaganism apply to Meso-Paganism, followers and practitioners are less likely to identify with the broader Pagan community. These are traditional religions passed down through communities, rather than sought out by individuals. So, while they may not be the dominant religion in a certain place, they have this in common with religions such as Hinduism.

What kind of Pagan are You?

While this whole post has been dedicated to trying to define and categorize Paganism, what it really equates to is following your own spiritual path outside of the biblical context. There are no rules about what you have to believe and practices that you have to engage in. It is all about finding your own spirituality and expressing it in a way that works for you.

But we would still love to know what Paganism means to you! Let us know in the comments section below.

[Full blog post here]

861 notes · View notes

a-witch-in-endor · 1 year

Note

i have a religon question. we all have indigenous gods, right? especially in 'the east.' do abrahamic religions see these gods as fake, or just another part of god, or djinn and demons? I know there are people who are jewish or muslim or christian living in places with a large population that follows the kind of religion that respects ancestors and hometown gods; do those people also get to pay respects to those deities? do they get a pass for that because they, too, are technically protected by those indigenous gods even though they technically converted, but they're still of that land?

(could that be applied to earth kingdom spirits, bc there's so many of them?)

Hi! You are going to get a MONSTER response here, and it might not even fully answer your question, so... apologies in advance.

I want to start with your premise about indigenous gods. I think there are two elements that strike me as needing some kind of definition or clarification.

The first is: what does "indigenous gods" mean?

Please keep in mind that I am going to discuss indigenous RELIGION here, not "indigenous" as a political term.

I think there is a faulty assumption often applied to conversations around indigenous vs global religions that assumes that "indigenous religion" is polytheistic and "global religion" is monotheistic. One issue with that, in my opinion, is that "polytheistic" and "monotheistic" just aren't as meaningful as Western academia has historically stated. They are, in my opinion (though not only my opinion!), terms laden with Protestant ideology.

Protestantism and "Polytheism vs Monotheism":

Protestant religious scholarship tends to want to divide religion into the more primal, physical religious expression vs the more otherworldly, spiritual expression. Polytheism is, in Protestant academic mindset - excuse my language here, I'm making a point - a kind of barbaric, pre-enlightened, base form of religious expression. When religion gets more refined and intelligent and articulate, it sheds those earthly elements and ends up being monotheistic. This is Protestant in origin, specifically, because it is not only about how Protestant academics viewed religions like Hinduism or European indigenous religion, it's also about how they felt about Catholics and Jews. Catholics and Jews, from that mindset, might be "monotheistic", but they're holding onto the base, unrefined physicality of the old world. Catholics and Jews like physical rituals, physical prayer, rules around eating, etc. So yes, sure, they're monotheistic, but they haven't quite understood monotheism yet.

This is obviously not a nice thing to think about other peoples, but that's not what is interesting for our purposes. What's interesting is that Protestant academia has left much of the West with the above as their understanding of how religion functions. Even many atheists, by the way, will describe atheism as just the next step on that wrung; religion starts with polytheism, which is steeped in physical ritual and is obsessed with the earth, etc, then people became monotheistic and slowly let go of those earthly things, and then people got truly enlightened and realised there's no God at all. You can hear this in how some atheists will talk about believing in "one fewer god" than monotheists - that sense of the arc of progress and development.

Now, I hope you've already realised that I don't believe that's true. But let's break it down a little:

What is monotheism, and what is polytheism?

Judaism often has ascribed to it being the first monotheists. In some ways, that's true; in some ways, it isn't. There were One-God-isms that occurred elsewhere, too. Famously, in Egypt, the pharaoh Akhenaten led a religious reformation which narrowed worship down to Aten, the sun god. Nobody can agree on exactly what this was, but it was at least a focused religious expression. Likewise, Zoroastrianism was talking about a dual nature of reality in a way that could be read as monotheistic before the Jews were.

And when the Jews began to worship God as One, it wasn't exactly a clean break. It's actually fairly clear that the worship of the one we now just call God was really a slow development of theological focus, which we might now call henotheism: belief that multiple gods exist, but only worshipping one. Then that God slowly came to represent a kind of universality, especially with the experience of worshipping a land-based deity while in exile (first exile, starting c.586BCE).

So the Jewish belief in One God is a bit like Atenism: a focusing in on a particular god. Except this time, instead of one big religious revolution, it was a very slow religious development.

And if we want to divide not only into "monotheist" and "polytheist", but also into "indigenous" and "global", we're in very murky waters.

Indigenous Religion and Global Religion

Noting again that this can get politically tense because classifications of indigeneity are politically fraught. I'm interested in what makes a religion or culture indigenous, not in what that means for us politically.

Indigenous religion is difficult to define in a sentence, and so I will not try to do that. Here are multiple things that come together in indigenous religion in general instead: Indigenous religiosity is not distinguishable from culture itself. It's born of a land and developed over time. It might have its own myths about its origin (it likely will!), but those are often contradictory in some ways, because they are descriptions of important cultural narratives rather than histories. It tends to be uncentralised and is often slightly different depending on where you are in the land. It tends toward agricultural spirituality and concepts of holy soil. It is tied to an ethnic group and is generally uninterested in ideas of conversion (either into the group or out of the group); it may even be hostile to outsiders joining.

Global religions, on the other hand, tend to be much more planned-out. A global religion is born from a person or a group of people. One can see its birthplace and origin. It is devised in order to spread, and therefore is not attached to one land or to one ethnic group (so that it can move both geographically and through conversion of others into the group). It tends toward centralisation in an organisational capacity.

So. Is Atenism indigenous? ... Well, kind of yes, kind of no. Worship of Aten is born from the land of Egypt, but having a specific historical revolution makes it seem a little outside the "indigenous" definition. But it's definitely not global either. So we've immediately located something that doesn't seem to work well in a binary sense.

Is Judaism indigenous? ... Pretty clearly "yes". It's a land-based agricultural religion born of a particular land, with strong ethnic ties, that developed over time (rather than being born of a historical moment), that isn't interested in spreading or converting and wants to be in its holy land, is uncentralised and disorganised in nature, etc. But people don't tend to talk about Judaism that way, because Judaism has survived a 2,000-year exile, which is pretty unheard of. Once you've been kicked out of the land that long, it feels like it should be a global religion. But it doesn't fit any of the critera for that.

I think that Judaism being an indigenous religion that learned to survive outside the land is part of the reason that people have such a hard time understanding what Judaism is. It seems, from the outside, like it should function more similarly to Christianity and Islam. But in most ways, it just doesn't.

(Also, it would be remiss of me not to note: there's also a lot of political discomfort around calling Judaism an indigenous religion, because most indigenous cultures haven't reclaimed sacred land after being colonised, and the Modern State of Israel a) exists and b) is acting as an oppressive force. Some people will define groups as indigenous specifically only if they are currently being oppressed within their land of origin. As an academic, I think that's a poor definition, and it's certainly not helpful for defining indigenous religion. But I understand the political discomfort.)

Hinduism is also a really interesting example of this. Hinduism is similar to Judaism in some ways, as it's an indigenous, land-based religion that learned to exist outside of the sacred land. It often gets miscategorised on the basis that it's spread geographically (and unlike Judaism, that spread was not simply by outside force). In some ways, Hinduism acts like a global religion, but it doesn't really fit the bill.

Therefore:

a) "Indigenous religion" isn't always polytheistic (if that's even a meaningful term)

b) Some religions fit into neither category (such as Atenism)

c) Some religions fit into one category but aren't categorised that way by outsiders for various reasons (such as Judaism)

And to add another point: Buddhism is a great example of a global religion. Born of a historical person and moment, ease to spread and convert, not tied intrinsically to land. But try defining Buddhism according to the Protestant theistic categories. I dare you. So:

d) Global religions aren't always monotheistic

"Monotheism" and Global Religions

With that in mind, let's talk about Christianity and Islam. They are the major religions of the world. Christians make up around 30% of the world, and Muslims make up around 25% of the world. And frankly, the 15% of the world who call themselves secular/atheist/etc... I think meaningfully belong to Christianity and Islam, too. I know people often don't like that, but the idea that you have to believe something to belong to a religion is a specific religious idea that I don't ascribe to.

A lot of the time, the way that religion is conceptualised is therefore through a Christian or Muslim lens. (See: my point just above about "faith" in religion.) This has completely muddied the waters of how we discuss and conceptualise our own religions and cultures, let alone other peoples.

Your original question was about Abrahamic religion, so I'm going to try to address that here, but please keep in mind: in a question about indigenous gods, putting Judaism in the same realm as Christianity and Islam is dodgy territory and we need to walk it carefully.

"we all have indigenous gods, right? especially in 'the east.' do abrahamic religions see these gods as fake, or just another part of god, or djinn and demons?"

Judaism: Judaism is an evolution that occurred within Canaanite religion. It started with narrow worship of a local god and slowly universalised, especially when the Israelites were trying to survive outside the place of the local god. The seeds of that universalisation already existed before the first exile, which is likely why it worked. It had a confused relationship with the other local gods; outright worship of those "other gods" was frowned upon but still existed among the peoples, and that worship kind of melded into the narrow worship of the One God. You can see this in how many of the names of God that appear in the Bible are actually the names of the local Canaanite gods.

After the first exile, Judaism became more solid in its sense of theological universalism. Jonah is a great example of this as a book; Jonah was written post-exile (though set pre-exile), and it starts with an Israelite trying to run away from God. It seems absurd to us now, because we know that the Jewish God is universal, but the character of Jonah seems to honestly think he can escape God by leaving the land. The rest of the book is about Jonah's struggle to understand how his god also has a relationship with the people of Nineveh. It's a great example of the struggle of universalising theology.

(By-the-by, I think "universal theology" is a much more useful term than "monotheism", but that's a rant for another day.)

What began as a narrowing ("henotheism"), which was both pushing out and incorporating other local traditions, then had to contend with the worship of the oppressive forces of outside religion. Assyrians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans are all peoples who attacked, colonised, exiled, etc - and they all came in with their gods. The Greeks even instituted worship of their gods in our Temple. Our worship was made illegal by the colonisers. Relationship with "idol worship" was about relationship with those outside forces.

In short, the literature itself is very confused about what those gods actually are. Jews were certainly not supposed to worship them, and should go to great lengths to avoid them. (If we didn't, we probably wouldn't still exist, so: good shout.) Sometimes they get talked about like neighbouring gods, which is a holdover from the narrowing-days (where those other gods existed, but we worshipped our own native land-based god). Sometimes they get talked about as false idols created by people who are either misunderstanding reality or deliberately trying to have control over the divine (which developed more as the God-worship was universalised). The more universalised our theology became, the more we started shrugging of ideas of neighbouring gods that actually existed, and the more it became about the latter.

(Note: When Jews met religions that call a universal God something else, they would then tend to conclude that it's not idol worship. This developed when Judaism met Islam in more peaceful moments. The idea that non-Jewish religions could be something other than idolatry then came to include Christianity - but only kind of, because of the worshipping-a-person issue - and then religions like Sikhism much more easily. It's even arguable that religions like Hinduism aren't exactly "idol worship" for non-Jews, because many Hindus will describe what they believe in in universal terms - Brahman is first cause and all emanates from him - even if their worship includes references to "multiple gods". This does not mean Jews are allowed to worship that way.)

Christianity: Christianity was born in a specific historical moment, utilising previous Jewish and Hellenistic thought. It almost immediately became a religion of conversion (I would put that distinction at the year 50, with the Council of Jerusalem). Since it was born from a universalised theology, it already had the bones of the idea of a universal God; now, it also had the will to spread, both geographically (shrugging off major religious ties to the Holy Land) and religiously (not only could people convert, but people should convert). While Judaism was all about avoiding worship of other gods, Christianity became about converting those peoples.

Islam: Islam was born in a specific historical moment, utilising previous Christian, Jewish, Zoroastrian, and pre-Islamic Arabian thought. It immediately became a religion of conversion. In this sense, it's a lot more like Christianity than anything else, except Christianity developed most significantly after the death of Jesus. Islam got a lot more time in development with Mohammed. In some ways, I think this really benefitted Islam (though that's not to say some things didn't get... complicated, upon his death). It inherited from Christianity the sense that worship of other gods was something to be responded to with conversion.

"I know there are people who are jewish or muslim or christian living in places with a large population that follows the kind of religion that respects ancestors and hometown gods; do those people also get to pay respects to those deities? do they get a pass for that because they, too, are technically protected by those indigenous gods even though they technically converted, but they're still of that land?"

Short answer: no. Jews, Christians, and Muslims do not believe that those deities exist as separate to the universal God.

Longer answer for Judaism, because... well, I know more about lived Judaism than lived Christianity or Islam*:

(I recently said to someone IRL: I do have a degree in Catholic Theology, but I don't know anything about what Catholics ACTUALLY believe.)

It would be absolutely disallowed in Judaism to participate in worship of "other gods". Modern Jews will not believe those gods exist (at least, I've never come across that either IRL or in studies). However, Judaism does still hold that worship is a powerful thing and that Jews are not allowed to participate in worship of "other gods". Many Jews will say it's not worship of "other gods", it's just worship of the one universal God that is understood differently by different cultures. This does not change the fact that Jews are not allowed to participate in it.

(In fact, it's one of the three things a Jew should rather die than participate in. It's a little murkier than this, but basically: even under duress, even on pain of death, a Jew should never murder, commit sexual violence, or worship an idol.)

"(could that be applied to earth kingdom spirits, bc there's so many of them?)"

Yes, I think the Earth Kingdom in ATLA is supposed to function in an indigenous manner, specifically in indigenous religion as it acts over a wide spread of land. That is to say, like Hinduism, or like when you compare different arctic indigenous cultures or African indigenous cultures. There isn't a centralised force (like with the FN); it's local gods - or here, spirits - that have their own myths, etc.

Please note, I have avoided talking about nomadic cultures here on purpose, because this would be twice as long! This is not exhaustive at all. I hope it makes at least some sense.

#jew on main #judaism #christianity #islam #buddhism #hinduism #it's a world religion extravaganza #canaanites #not the kindest post to protestants #atenism

115 notes · View notes

ruminativerabbi · 5 months

Text

Anti-Judaism Then and Now

On Sesame Street, they used to sing a song that challenged young viewers to decide “which of these things belong together.” The idea was that the youngsters would be presented with a group of things all but one of which belonged to the same group. But the trick, of course, was that the specific nature of the group wasn’t revealed—so the young viewer had to notice that there were three vegetables on the screen and one piece of fruit, or three garden tools and a frying pan. You get the idea. All of the things belonged together but one didn’t. It wasn’t that complicated. But the tune is still stuck in my head and I don’t think I’ve heard the song in at least thirty years.

In the grown-up world, there are also all sorts of groups made up of things that are presented as “belonging together.” Some are obvious and indisputable. But others are far more iffy.

Languages, for example, are in the first category. Danish, Japanese, Laotian, and Yiddish all belong in the same group; each is an artificial code devised by a specific national or ethnic group to label the things of the world. You really can compare the Japanese word for apple with the Danish word because both really are the same thing: a sound unrelated in any organic way to the thing it denotes that a specific group of people have decided to use nonetheless to denote that thing. Languages are all codes, all artificial, and all each other’s equals. The world’s languages, therefore, really are each other’s equivalents

Other groups, not so much. Religion comes right to mind in that regard: we regularly refer to the world’s religions as each other’s equivalents, but is that really so? In what sense, truly, is Judaism the Jewish version of Hinduism or Buddhism? Is Chanukah the Jewish Christmas? Is the New Testament the Christian version of the Koran in the same sense that the Danish word for cherry is the Danish version of the French word for that same thing? You see what I mean: the notion that the religions of the world are each other’s equivalents hardly makes any sense at all.

But what about prejudices of various sorts? Are racism and homophobia each other’s equivalents, distinguished only by the target of the bigot’s irrational dislike? Are sexism and ageism the same thing, only different with respect to the specific being discriminated against? And where does anti-Semitism, with its weird medial capital letter and its off-base etymology (because it denotes discrimination against Jews, not other Semites), where does anti-Semitism fit in? Is it the same as other forms of discrimination, differing only with respect to the target?

I suppose my readers know why this has been on my mind lately.

Last week I wrote about that grotesque congressional hearing in which the presidents of three of America’s most prestigious institutions of higher learning, including two of the so-called Ivies, could not bring themselves to label the most extreme form of anti-Semitism there is, the version that calls not for discrimination against Jews but for their actual murder—they could not bring themselves unequivocally and unambiguously to say that that calls for genocide directed against Jews have no place on their campuses. The president of the University of Pennsylvania paid with her position for her unwillingness to condemn genocide clearly and forcefully. But hundreds and hundreds of faculty members at Harvard, perhaps the nation’s most prestigious college, spoke out forcefully in support of their president despite her unwillingness to say clearly that calling for the murder of Jews is not the kind of speech that any normal person would imagine to be protected by the First Amendment.

At a time when anti-Semitism is surging, it strikes me that treating different versions of prejudice as each other’s equivalent is probably more harmful an approach than a realistic one. That is what led to the moral fog that apparently enveloped the leaders of three of our nation’s finest academies and made them unable simply and plainly to condemn calls for genocide directed against Jewish people.

I think we should probably begin to deal with this matter in our own backyard. And to that end, I would like to recommend three books and a fourth to my readers: the three are “about” anti-Semitism (and each is remarkable in its own way) and the fourth is a novel that I’ve mentioned many times in these letters, the one that led me to understand personally what anti-Semitism actually is and how it can thrive even in the ranks of the highly civilized, educated, and cultured.

The first book is by the late Rosemary Ruether, known as a feminist and as a Catholic theologian, but also the author of Faith and Fratricide: The Theological Roots of Anti-Semitism, published by Seabury Press in 1974 and still in print. This was not the first serious study of anti-Semitism I read—that would have been Léon Poliakoff’s four-volume work, The History of Anti-Semitism, which also had a formative effect on my adolescent self. But Ruether’s book was different: less about anti-Semitism itself and more about the way that anti-Jewish prejudice was such a basic part of the theological worldview of so many of the most formative Christian authors that the task of eliminating it from Western culture would require a repudiation of some of the basic tenets set forth by some of the most famous early Christian authors. I was stunned by her book when I read it: stunned, but also truly challenged. In think, even, that my decision to specialize in the history of the early Church as one of my sub-specialties when I completed by doctorate in ancient Judaism was a function of reading that book and needing—and wanting—to know these texts (and, through them, their authors) personally and up close. Jewish readers—or any readers—concerned about anti-Semitism could do a lot worse than to start with Ruether’s book.

And from there I’d go on to David Nirenberg’s book, Anti-Judaism: The Western Tradition, published by W.W. Norton in 2013. This too is something anyone even marginally concerned about anti-Semitism in the world should read. The book is not that long, but it is rich and exceptionally thought-provoking; its author describes his thesis clearly in one sentence, however: “Anti-Judaism should not be understood as some archaic or irrational closet in the vast edifices of Western thought,” but rather as one of the “basic tools with which that edifice was constructed.” Using detailed, thoughtful, and deliberate prose, Nirenberg lays out his argument that Western civilization rests on a foundation of anti-Judaism so deeply embedded in the Western psyche as to make it possible for people who have doctorates from Harvard to feel uncertain about condemning genocide—the ultimate anti-Semitic gesture—unequivocally and forcefully. This would be a good book too for every Jewish citizen—and for all who consider themselves allies of the Jewish people—to read and take to heart. Anti-Judaism is deeply engrained in Western culture. To eradicate it—even temporarily, let alone permanently—will require a serious realignment of Western values and beliefs. Can it be done? Other features of Western culture have fallen away over the centuries, so I suppose it can be. But how to accomplish such a feat—the best ideas will come from people who have read books like Nirenberg’s and taken them to heart.

And the final book I would like to recommend is James Carroll’s, Constantine’s Sword: The Church and the Jews, published by Mariner Books in 2001. The author, a former Roman Catholic priest, makes a compelling argument that the roots of anti-Semitism are to be found in the basic Christian belief that the redemption of the world will follow the conversion of the world’s Jews to Christianity. I was surprised when I read the book by a lot of things, but not least how convincingly the author presses his argument that the belief that the redemption of the world is being impeded by the phenomenon of stubborn Jews refusing to abandon Judaism is the soil in which all Western anti-Semitism is rooted. It’s an easier book to read than either Ruether’s or Nirenberg’s—written more for a lay audience and clearly intended by its author to be a bestseller, which it indeed became—but no less an interesting and enlightening one.

So that is my counsel for American Jews feeling uncertain how to respond to this surge of anti-Semitic incidents on our nation’s streets and particularly on the campuses of even our most prestigious universities. Read these books. Learn the history that is, even today, legitimizing anti-Jewish sentiments even among people who themselves are not sufficiently educated to understand what is motivating their feelings about Jews and about Judaism. None of these reads will be especially pleasant. But all will be stirring and inspiring. And from understanding will come, perhaps, a path forward. Any physician will tell you that even the greatest doctor has to know what’s wrong with a patient before attempting to initiate the healing process. Perhaps that is what is needed now: not rallies or White House dinners (or not just those things), but a slow, painstaking analysis of where this all is coming from and an equally well-thought-out plan for combatting anti-Jewish prejudice rooted in the nature of the beast we would all like to see fenced in, tamed, and then ultimately slain.

And the novel? My go-to piece of Jewish literature, André Schwarz-Bart’s The Last of the Just, was published in Stephen Becker’s English translation by Athenaeum in 1960, just one year after the publication of the French original. A novel that spans a full millennium, the book traces the history of a single Jewish family, the Levys, and tells the specific story of the individual member of the family in each generation who serves as one of the thirty-six just people for whose sake the world exists. (The book begins in eleventh century England and ends at Auschwitz, where the last of the just perishes.) I read the book when I was a boy and have returned to it a dozen times over the years. No book that I can think of explains anti-Semitism from the inside—from within the bosom of a Jewish family that is defined by the prejudice directed against it—more intensely, more movingly, or more devastatingly. This is definitely not a book for children. I was probably too young to encounter such a book when I did, but it is also true that, more than anything else, it was that book that set me on the path that I followed into adulthood. (And that is probably just as true spiritually and emotionally, as it is professionally.) I was too young, perhaps, to process the story correctly. But when I was done reading even that first time as a sixteen-year-old, I knew what path I wished to follow. The Last of the Just is not a book I would exactly characterize as enjoyable reading. But it is riveting, challenging, and galvanizing. To face the future with courage and resolve, the American Jewish community needs to look far back into the past so as to understand the challenges it now faces. And then, armed with that knowledge, to find a path forward into a brighter and better world.

#anti-Semitism #anti-Judaism #Rosemary Ruether #David Nirenberg #Andre Schwarz-Bart

37 notes · View notes

writerbuddha · 11 months

Text

On George Lucas identifying as "Buddhist Methodist" and why that's perfectly fine

So, recently I encountered with someone on Tumblr who insisted on the idea that George Lucas identifying as "Buddhist Methodist" is a form of white-washing and that he is just picking up the things he likes from Buddhism and by doing so he is disrespectful to a more than two thousand year old spiritual tradition and if these claims are coming from an Asian then that means it's true. In general, I avoid participating in discussions like this, but I think these assertions should be addressed.

Buddhism is essentially a set of methods that helps us to develop our full human potential by understand the true nature of reality. It is a practical doctrine, addressing the problem of human suffering and it doesn't insist on a single solution - since human beings differ greatly in their needs, dispositions and abilities, Buddhism acknowledges that the paths to peace and happiness are many. Buddha showed us a path we can follow in order to free ourselves of life's problems and develop the good qualities of our minds, love, compassion, kindness, non-attachment, mindfulness, generosity and wisdom and more.

Although there are many different traditions within Buddhism, non-sectarianism is very much a characteristic of it: practitioners are encouraged to receive teachings and explanations not just from the tradition they follow but all the other traditions as well, and to put them in practice, so we will have a better understanding of different teachings. Giving exaggerated importance to one or another of the different schools and traditions within Buddhism can end up being harmful to the goal of the Buddhist path itself.

The Buddhists teachings on how to develop good qualities of our minds are open to everyone – regardless of cultural background or religion. All spiritual and religious traditions are essentially teach the same practice: love, compassion and tolerance. For this shared core, it's all right to adopt some methods from Buddhism and keeping your original tradition, whether it to be Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Hindu - some Buddhist explanations, particularly those based on reason, can be very beneficial to practitioners of other traditions.

You're encouraged to "cherry-pick." For example, a Christian would likely find the Buddhist methods of non-attachment, mindfulness and meditation to be very beneficial, but in the same time, they would most likely be confused about the non-theistic absolute in Buddhism. Thus, it's best to study and use the methods that they deem to be useful to evolve as a follower of the Christian tradition.

Furthermore, if calling yourself a "Christian Buddhist" or a "Muslim Buddhist" or a "Hindu Buddhist", or a "Taoist Buddhist", or a "Wiccan Buddhist", or anything, really, benefits to your spiritual practice and helps you to evolve, you're perfectly free to do so.

The Buddha gave many instructions. If some of them help you live to better, to solve your problems and become kinder, then you are free to practice them. You do not have to be a Buddhist to be able to practice what the Buddha taught and there is no need accept the Buddha as your guide or to become an actual Buddhist or to call yourself Buddhist. The purpose of the Buddha's teachings is to benefit us, and if putting some of them into practice helps us live more peacefully with ourselves and others, that is what's important.

When it comes to Buddhism, the notions of race and ethnicity must be reconsidered. Probably the best example of this is the fact that Tibetan Buddhists are recognizing a number of Western children as the reincarnations of highly elevated Tibetan Buddhist teachers (for example, Tenzin Ösel Hita). There is the example of Alan Watts, who was influenced by all kinds of religious and spiritual traditions and interpreted many of them to Westerners, including Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism, and who was called "a great bodhisattva" by one of the greatest Zen masters, Shunryu Suzuki.

There are some who may be very opinionated, may have very strong feelings about what disrespects Buddhism and what the fact that it originates from Asia means. In the same time, they don't practice Buddhism, don't have any idea about what Buddhism is and why the Buddha gave his teachings. They might go as far to assert, it belongs to a particular group of humans or to a particular location on Earth, that's it's somehow intellectual property which is copyrighted or whatnot. They can actually end up undermining, if not assaulting Buddhism itself. So, if you have questions about what is and isn't compatible with Buddhism, you should look to those - Asians like the Dalai, Lama, Thich Nhat Hanh, Shunryu Suzuki or Western Buddhists like Tenzin Palmo or Thubten Chödrön - who dedicate their lives to practice, study, preserve and teach the Buddhist path, to bring the Great Healer to as many beings as possible. And not to those who - regardless to cultural, racial, ethnic, religious etc. background - latest hot take is "gate-keeping Buddhism is woke."

#george lucas #buddhism #western buddhism #religion #philosophy #methodism #spirituality

92 notes · View notes

crazycatsiren · 1 year

Text

Chakras - What they really are

(I managed to salvage this post written by @rue-cimon from an old deactivated account. I copied it down here because this was too good a post to lose.)

Chakra literally means "wheel" or "circle" in Sanskrit. The concept of chakras originates from Hinduism in ancient India. These are focal points used in a variety of ancient meditation or yoga practices. These practices are collectively called "tantra".

Although the concept is frequently found in early traditions of Hinduism and are often mentioned in the Vedas, beliefs around chakras differ between various Indian religions. Buddhist texts consistently mention 5 chakras, whereas Hindu texts and sources speak of 6 or 7 chakras.

Early Sanskrit texts speak of them both as meditative visualizations combining flowers and mantras and as physical entities in the body. Within kundalini yoga, various breath exercises, visualizations, mudras, kriyas, and mantras are focused on manipulating the flow of subtle energy through chakras.

Chakras are also present in Ayurvedic traditions.

The belief behind chakras is that human life simultaneously exists in two parallel dimensions, one is the physical body and the other is psychological, emotional, mind, non physical (the subtle body).

The aforementioned subtle body is energy, while the physical body is mass. The psyche or mind plane corresponds to and interacts with the body plane, and the belief holds that the body and the mind mutually affect each other. The subtle body consists of energy channels connected by nodes of psychic energy called chakras.

The chakras - in Hindu and Buddhist texts - are said to be arranged in a column along the spinal cord, from its base to the top of the head, connected by vertical channels. Tantric traditions strive to awaken, master, and energize these chakras through yoga and often with the help of a teacher.

The esoteric traditions in Buddhism generally teach four chakras. In some early Buddhist sources, these chakras are termed as manipura (navel), anahata (heart), vishuddha (throat), and ushnisha kamala (crown). However, a system of five chakras is common among classes of tantra in Tibetan Buddhism. These five chakras are basal, abdominal, heart, throat, and crown, and each chakra corresponds with an element, a Buddha, and a bija mantra.

The more common and most studied chakra system incorporates six major chakras along with a seventh center generally not regarded as a chakra.

The chakras are traditionally considered meditation aids. The yogi starts from lower chakras and progresses to the highest chakra located in the crown of the head, in the journey of spiritual ascent.

In the Hindu kundalini and Buddhist candali traditions, the chakras are pierced by a dormant energy residing near or in the lowest chakra. in Hindu texts she is known as Kundalini, while in Buddhist texts she is called Candali or Tummo.

Some terms and definitions:

Tantra: Esoteric traditions in Hinduism and Buddhism that developed in India mainly during the middle of the 1st millennium CE. The term tantra, in the Indian traditions, also means text, theory, system, method, instrument, technique, or practice. A key feature of these traditions is the use of mantras.

Kundalini yoga: A type of yoga focused on channeling energy through the chakras.

Mudra: A symbolic or ritual gesture or pose in Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism. Mudras have meaning in many forms of Indian dance and yoga. In hatha yoga, mudras are used in conjunction with pranayama (yogic breathing exercises), generally while in a seated posture, to stimulate different parts of the body involved with breathing and to affect the flow of prana and is associated with consciousness in the body. Mudras are also used in tantric practices.

Kriya: Practice within a yoga discipline meant to achieve a specific result. The Yoga Sutra of Patanjali defines three types of kriya, namely asceticism, study, and devotion. Such yoga is called kriya yoga. Kriya is a Sanskrit word that literally means "to do" or "to work".

Mantra: A sacred utterance, a sound, a syllable, word, or phonemes, or group of words in Sanskrit, Pali, and other languages. They hold spiritual and religious significance. At its simplest, the word "om" serves as a mantra. It is believed to be the first sound which was originated on earth. It creates a reverberation in the body which helps the body and mind to be calm. In more sophisticated forms, mantras are melodic phrases with spiritual interpretations such as a human longing for truth, reality, light, immortality, peace, love, knowledge, and action. Not all mantras have literal meanings but rather are simply uplifting.

Ayurveda: An alternative medicine system with historical roots in ancient India.

#chakras #hinduism #buddhism #witches of color #asian religions #eastern spirituality #ancient india #asian witches #buddhist witches

268 notes · View notes

thewitcheslibrary · 2 months

Text

Closed Practices

Please make sure that you do additional research, this post is just the basics of closed practices! - if you arent part of the culture that practices or you arent invited to practice a practice listed, then dont practice it! - it is not for you and can be considered cultural appropriation

What is a closed practice? There have been many damaging misconceptions regarding what constituted a "closed practice" in spirituality. Simply described, a closed practice in witchcraft and the occult is one in which you can only participate if you were born into it or underwent an initiation procedure. One of the most popular misconceptions about closed practices is that if you were not born into the group, you would never be allowed to practise. This can be true in a number of situations, but there are certain exceptions. It is critical to remember that these practices remain locked until the individual has been verified and the authorised start process has been completed.

There is always a cause for some religions to be closed. Some reasons may include that it is founded on specific cultural values and beliefs that would never be understood by outsiders who were not truly immersed in the community. Brujería and Santería are examples of this.

Closed Communities and Race Locked Spirituality:

While it is critical to analyze specific practices within some religions, it is even more vital to address, on a larger scale, how entire communities can be closed. Differentiating between closed communities and closed practices reduces the likelihood of gatekeeping and reinforced marginalization. Some closed communities include the Amish, the Roma, Judaism (along with their type of mysticism, Kabbalah), Hoodoo, and Haitian Vodou. A reason a variety of communities may close their practices is that they are deemed as “race locked”, indicating that these communities were created as an attempt to unify together during times of hardship, with their beliefs formed around their shared experiences.

Region Locked religion: While some religions are closed because they are "race locked," others are closed because they are "region locked". This indicates they are closed since they are based on variables unique to the place. Many of these numbers are based on local factors that would make little sense to someone from another place. This is why some (but not all!) minor Shintō sects are considered closed.

Poached practices:

Because of the huge quantity of misinformation propagated by uneducated internet users, there has been a significant surge in Native cultural appropriation and improper usage of Indigenous spirituality. There are other holy Indigenous rituals that are considered closed, like white sage smudging and the usage of palo santo. To survive, marginalised groups were traditionally mistreated and even punished for their beliefs, therefore these communities had to keep their religion hidden from outsiders. As restricted practices such as smudging gain popularity, the quantity of holy plants intended for Indigenous groups gets depleted. The colonizer's economic gains harm not just the environment, but also the purity of Native practices. Exploring safe, effective, and courteous alternatives to smoke cleaning are an excellent method to express direct gratitude to people who sacrificed their livelihood for spiritual freedom

Closed cultures:

Many Native American cultures

Many African cultures

Saami (in Finland)

Closed religions:

Shinto (Some branches of Shinto practice are open, although they should be approached with caution, while some are completely closed. Jinja Shinto would be the most visible example of an open denomination.

Druidism (proper not neo)

Gardnerian and Alexandrian Wicca

Haitian Vodou

Hawaiian

African Vodou

Hinduism (There are open and accessible Hindu denominations, as well as closed sects. Some "open sects" are quite troublesome, thus one should proceed with caution when considering joining a Hindu sect. Dharmic law is part of what makes this difficult to traverse, so proceed with caution.

Hopi

Inuit

Judaism (You must earn the right to be called Jewish)

Raastafari Movement

Tribal (almost all)

Voodoo (Dependent on the group which you decide to learn from)

Voudon

Zoroastrianism *some of these you can be invited to practice, but please research into which ones you can and can't. I as the author do not know much about these practices, as I don't personally practice them. People who do practices will have more correct answers*

#witchcraft #witchcore #witchblr #witch #pagan witch #closed practices #beginner witch #for beginners

19 notes · View notes

felinelord-bowbeforemepeasant · 10 months

Text

Something that been on my mind

Warning: I'm not an analyst (theorist) or anything and english is not my first language so there might be some grammar mistakes

Is the third eyes in chapter 109 is indicate about something

Cause when dazai get shot in the middle of his head the wound in the middle kind of resemble a third eyes

And then we switch to scene where fukuchi is opening the one order, it also has a third eyes

Do you think it kinda weird that after dazai getting shot in the head we switched to one order form revealed

And it also being hint in volume 22 too

Here a close up if you didn't notice it

See if you look at the eyes in the middle and count dazai and fyodor eyes too It will made a third eyes

It might be hinting about what the one order will be like but I think there will be more than that

The one order I quite understand how it work that it can control somebody to do something (am I describing it ability right I'm just writing this based on what I remember lol)

For dazai well when I thought about it my mind just came up with this image

But why, why my mind just came up with this image, so I search the meaning of third eyes and the meaning of angel (Credit to wiki also I don't know if anything it say it's accurate so if there anything wrong sorry)

Here the meaning of third eyes:

The third eye (also called the mind's eye or inner eye) is a mystical invisible eye, usually depicted as located on the forehead, which provides perception beyond ordinary sight. In Hinduism, the third eye refers to the ajna (or brow) chakra. In both Hinduism and Buddhism, the third eye is said to be located around the middle of the forehead, slightly above the junction of the eyebrows, representing the enlightenment one achieves through meditation

The third eye refers to the gate that leads to the inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness. In spirituality, the third eye often symbolizes a state of enlightenment. The third eye is often associated with religious visions, clairvoyance, the ability to observe chakras and auras, precognition, and out-of-body experiences.

Here is the meaning of angel (actually there are more but it just about what angel mean in different country so I just put in the general one, you can go on wiki to search if you like):

In various theistic religious traditions, an angel is a supernatural spiritual being who serves God.

Abrahamic religions often depict angels as benevolent celestial intermediaries between God (or Heaven) and humanity. Other roles include protectors and guides for humans, such as guardian angels, and servants of God. Abrahamic religions describe angelic hierarchies, which vary by religion and sect. Some angels have specific names (such as Gabriel or Michael) or titles (such as seraph or archangel). Those expelled from Heaven are called fallen angels, distinct from the heavenly host.

Angels in art are usually shaped like humans of extraordinary beauty, though this is not always the case—sometimes, they can be portrayed in a frightening, inhuman manner. They are often identified in Christian artwork with bird wings, halos, and divine light.

And uh I did found out some similarities

"The third eye refers to the gate that leads to the inner realms and spaces of higher consciousness."

"Abrahamic religions often depict angels as benevolent celestial intermediaries between God (or Heaven) and humanity."

The third eyes are like a gate to inner realms while angel are like an intermediaries between God or heaven in humanity aren't they like kinda work the same

Does that mean that there are a third-party involve or this is a hint for something big is gonna happen

Now who is the angel that dazai mention, I did see someone already did an analysis on this and say it ango

Here the link

But I want to look more deeper into this and I found this post

They are discussing about are atsushi and dazai connected in a psychic way that make me think "interesting"

Also are there any mention of "an angel" before

The answer is yes

(Credit for burahai translation)

(Credit for the dead apple movie cause I can't find the manga part)

The angel that shibusawa and dazai say here is atsushi and with the theory that atsushi and dazai is connected in psychic way, it gonna be quite a surprise when if it true

And dazai is also holding atsushi as a trump card in the volume 22 cover too

But what or who are connecting them, some say it the book some say it someone else that hasn't been revealed yet

So in conclusion there are three option of who is the angel that dazai is talking about :

1. Ango

2.Atsushi

3.some unknown person that hasn't been revealed yet

(There are a post say that the time manipulation ability thief is the angel but it just doesn't make sense to me sorry)

Also I was also focusing on this

"Angels in art are usually shaped like humans of extraordinary beauty, though this is not always the case—sometimes, they can be portrayed in a frightening, inhuman manner"

The part where they say angel can be portrayed in a frightening, inhuman manner make think of the one order cause of it design

But it also can describe this person here

(I noticed this because I was scrolling through some bsd analysis and found this

You can check if you like, it an in-depth analysis for bsd official Twitter layout and they mention this person too)

And i want you to focus on the T/N part

Is this some clue about who he could be, to be honest I don't know cause I'm not an expert about famous author(writer) in real life but I think so

It also say that angel usually shaped like human so how about we combine it with "frightening, inhuman manner" then we get something quite creepy indeed

And this person was shrouded in complete darkness and also using imperfect Japanese which is also kind of creepy if you think about it

I don't know if it gonna be right when there is a revealed though I just remember about this guy when I was going through some bsd analysis (but this is just a bsd theory so there gonna be some right or wrong)

I know that there something else there but I can't explain it, something that tick me off

Or maybe that there is somehow someway that dazai is connected to the one order

Also dazai actually kinda tampered with the one order when fukuchi received it so maybe he did tampered with something else too

(I don't know if the tampering thing is correct, it just the description part about angel just tick me off about something but I can't think of it.)

Well I guess that is all, you can discuss about this if you want, this thing it just in my mind for a while and I just want to get it out

Thank you for reading and hope you have a nice day

#bungou stray dogs #bsd #bsd analysis #bad theory #bsd 109 #bsd one order #bsd dazai #dazai osamu #bsd atsushi #bsd ango #there must be some foreshadowing about something big gonna happen #it just that we have to wait for September for it to happen #never in my life that i hate a cliffhanger so much #there so many unresolved thing in bsd #and iam desperate to know #something that been on my mind #bsd theory

57 notes · View notes