--- In [email protected], "metoostill" <metoost...@...> wrote: > > [...] > Lawson, thanks for writing back. First sentence of first google hit on > Universalist Unitarian Church: "Unitarian Universalism, a liberal religious > tradition..." [...] > 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, ..."
Well, lits dissect that second definition in light of the first: Unitarian Universalism is a liberal religious tradition ONLY if it fits in with the defintion of "religion" that you provide... So firstly, just how organized is the Unitarian Universalist approach, and who says its about "human spirituality?" Secondly, which narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices are UU Church members required or even expected to follow? Thirdly, WHICH UU church are we talking about. Every 3 years, each church has a steering committee more or less come to a concensus about what narratives, symbols, beliefs and practices are going to be acceptable to the majority of members. If someone doesn't like one of those, they are free to not follow them and, in extreme cases, go found their own church or even their own official CHurch with complete legal independence from the federal religious status license that the UU church holds. > > 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. > WHich fact are we talking about there? I accept that the mantras are used in Hindu traditions. Many/most of the mantras are NOT "names" in the usual sense, and certainly, for people who don't give a damn about hinduism, to insist that that is the reason THEY are using them is, well, silly. They're using them because their TM teacher taught them that way. L.
