--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <lengli...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "metoostill" <metoostill@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Is some aspect of ayurvedic medicine religious because tradition says it 
> > > was 
> > > presented to some vaidya by a god?
> > > 
> > Umm, uh, well...huh??  Not sure where you are going with that one :)
> > 
> > (smiley face added to reduce f-word road rage, as we are probably friends) 
> > 
> > > And, as I pointed out, what the f- are you doing telling me what is 
> > > religiously 
> > > significant about any practice I choose to indulge in?
> > > 
> > There are many things we don't self assign.  One of them is whether or not 
> > what we are doing has religious significance.  Because words have meanings 
> > (no pun intended, I swear).  We don't get to self determine whether what we 
> > are doing is religious or not religious.  I suppose you could make a 
> > strained case that chanting the names of Hindu gods was not religious.  I 
> > could maybe somehow get my head around that, just a rest technique, I 
> > didn't know the meaning, etc.  But a major determinate between philosophy 
> > and religion is the presence of soteriological content.  Notions relating 
> > to salvation.  Our community is undeniably shot through with that one.
> > 
> 
> We don't get to determine whehter what we are doing is religious or
> not religious?
> 
> 
> Goodness. Seldom have I encountered someone whose world-view is so
> far removed from my won. Even most fundamentalists can accept that *for me*
> TM practice isn't religious.
> 
> and which community do you think I belong to? As a proud, card carrying member
> of the Unitarian Universalist Church, I take pride in my ability to truely 
> understand 
> and live "The Unitarian Universalist Way" (TM). ;-)
> 
> 
> > Not sure what is so shameful about being religious.  Well actually it does 
> > have a troubled association, both cultural and political, so maybe I can 
> > see the politics involved.
> >
> 
> 
> Like as not, you've missed the point about the Unitarian Universalist Church,
> which is that while it lays claim to being a legally established church with 
> all
> the constitutional protections that provides, it doesn't require that its 
> members
> embrace or eschew any particular religious or philosophical dogma.
> 
> IOW, legally it is a church, but few religious scholars would insist that it 
> is a religion,
> organized or otherwise.
> 
> L
>
Lawson, thanks for writing back.  First sentence of first google hit on 
Universalist Unitarian Church: "Unitarian Universalism, a liberal religious 
tradition..." Didn't bother to read past there. Religion is a word, not meant 
to be pejorative, not sure why you shun it.  Maybe because religion carries the 
meaning of ones having adopted a learned perspective or belief, Maharishi's 
rose colored glasses analogy, and if you take your views to be "true" rather 
than "beliefs", to be told you are religious is unnerving.  Or maybe wanting to 
appear neutral to facilitate making conversions.  Wow that sounded evangelical, 
and so that it is not misunderstood to be sarcasm, I am just looking for a way 
to say it.

The broader issue has to do with meaning.  Words have meaning.  There is the 
famous quote "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength". 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four  "Orwellian" can also refer 
generally to twisted language which says the opposite of what it truly means, 
or specifically governmental propagandizing by the misnaming of things; hence 
the "Ministry of Peace" in the novel actually deals with war and the "Ministry 
of Love" actually tortures people.

Religion has a meaning.  Google it.  OK I just took my own advice.  First 
sentence of first google hit on Religion.  "A religion is an organized approach 
to human spirituality which usually encompasses a set of narratives, symbols, 
beliefs and practices, ..."

I have done TM for 40 years and I have gone back and forth on this question.  I 
have come down on both sides of it, but generally leaned towards it is, 
tempered with my TM teacher desire to tip toe through the herds of sleeping 
elephants, to not have the wisdom crash on the rocks of ignorance of the lower 
consciousness... well you know the quote even if I got it slightly wrong.  
Admittedly the internet is not the place to tip toe, but it is here, whether we 
like it or not.

But we digress.  This string is about Keith D's article that the mantra's are 
meaningless but essential (to TM) sounds, and the discussion was about how, if 
at all, that relates to the fact that they are the names of Hindu gods.


Reply via email to