4 ms·

I think this is a misconception. I do think there’s a greater likelihood that someone with religious tendencies will pursue a path like this, but the religiosit

I think this is a misconception. I do think there’s a greater likelihood that someone with religious tendencies will pursue a path like this, but the religiosity is not the key. Sam Harris is the polar opposite of religious, but is arguably one of the leading meditators/teachers in western culture right now. I’m as allergic to religion as someone can probably be, but I’ve gotten serious about meditation and have made it a central habit in my life, because I’ve found that it works. The ultimate goal is to bring the “here-ness” of the present moment first experienced in meditation into ordinary waking moments as much as possible. Sitting is just a focused form of training that helps condition the mind and improve focus. When I discovered how impactful sitting was for me, it formed the motivation for deepening the practice. No religiosity here. The non-religious/non-sectarian meditators are a rapidly growing group, and this is encouraging because the religious part was never necessary, and the perception that it is kept people like me from exploring this sooner.

johndhi 3y ago
I suspect you just have a different definition of 'religious' than I do. Why are you so anti-religion?
- haswell 3y ago
  That’s possible! But that’s also why I’m calling attention to it here. Religiosity is a negative signal for many folks, and I think it’s important to debunk the need for religious thinking to gain the benefits of meditation. My stance comes from growing up in an extreme fundamentalist religious bubble. It set me up for a lifetime of unwinding unhealthy beliefs and patterns of thought, not the least of which was deep confusion about my self worth when hearing leaders of the church openly discuss stoning gay people as the truly appropriate consequence biblically. That kinda fucks with your head when you’re coming to terms with your own sexuality (I’m bisexual). I’ve seen first hand what these systems of belief do to families and communities, and while I’m not one to claim that all religion is awful, I do think it’s a bigger problem than help in the current social climate. The ideas of most religions also set up a fundamental misconception about our relationship with the world/environment (that we’re separate from it) that is an existential threat to reaching some kind of environmental balance. I’m curious what religious means to you.
  - johndhi 3y ago
    Makes sense. Thanks for sharing! I personally think human beings need some kind of central spiritual belief or identity to feel satisfied/happy/whole. I'm not sure, but in your case, it almost sounds like you might be getting that identity from REJECTING the shitty religious bubble you grew up in. Sounds like you feel like you're on a good track and moving somewhere with your life -- even if it's away from religion. So I guess in my book, you're religious. >>I’ve seen first hand what these systems of belief do to families and communities, and while I’m not one to claim that all religion is awful, I do think it’s a bigger problem than help in the current social climate. For me, this is really case-by-case, but my suspicion is that most religion is generally better for people than no religion -- so I suspect I disagree with you, but on limited data. >>The ideas of most religions also set up a fundamental misconception about our relationship with the world/environment (that we’re separate from it) that is an existential threat to reaching some kind of environmental balance. Hadn't heard this one before - huh. I think there are a lot of reasons we burn coal but IMO the fact that we're religious isn't one of the main ones. To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it.
    - haswell 3y ago
      Thanks for the perspective here as well. I do agree that people behave “religiously” more broadly, but I tend to think of this more as an overarching phenomena of meaning-making, with capital r “Religion” making up one major category of thought, and non-religious paths are distinct in that they don’t bring the baggage of beliefs in deities/spirits/etc. So while I understand the philosophical framing of religion in broader terms, In the context of meditation, I tend to avoid the religious connotation entirely because it’s overloaded and a lot of people immediately conflate the two. To draw a crude comparison, people go to the gym religiously. But people aren’t likely to misinterpret that comment as meaning going to the gym is “Religious” in the sense that people understand religion in the cultural zeitgeist. > Hadn't heard this one before - huh. I think there are a lot of reasons we burn coal but IMO the fact that we're religious isn't one of the main ones. To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it. Alan Watts explores this idea and I think it’s worth considering. Most people in the west - especially anyone raised around Judeo-Christian beliefs - are taught that they are born into this world, that they’re separate from it, that they’re here to have dominion over it, and that the real game is what comes after we die. Even though I left the Christian belief system behind, I had deep unexamined beliefs that everything would be fine, because how could it not be? If all of this was created, and I was made, it implies that something bigger is in control. This is at the heart of climate denialism in all of the circles I grew up in. The eastern framing is that we grow out of this world. We’re intrinsically part of it, an expression of it, and not separate. This brings a much different set of implications, and at least for me personally and based on what others have shared about their own experience, cultivating this view drastically altered my engagement with environmental issues, how I think about food, decisions I make about how I spend my time, etc. The point isn’t that we burn coal because of religion, but that many popular religions instill a mindset that makes burning coal not a problem. > To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it. I love that this is your view, and I wish that more people held it. Unfortunately I’ve been exposed to the toxic alternative almost exclusively, spread across about a dozen churches throughout my youth. Moving beyond the message of love for a moment, I think religious organizations need to carefully examine the 2nd/3rd order effects of certain core beliefs. “Don’t look up” seems like an example of the ultimate failure mode of instilling a sense of “God will take care of things” into the generation that has to contend with the fact that this is not true. I should add that I say all of this while somewhat lamenting what has been lost in the breakdown of the church. A sense of community and belonging connected to a notion of something greater than oneself is sorely missing in modern society. I hope that better options emerge, or that major religious organizations can rehabilitate their image and mission effectively.
waterheater 3y ago
It seems you have a fairly narrow view of what constitutes a religion. Christian fundamentalism is particularly dogmatic and is one negative manifestation of religion which happens to be present in the West. From the book "God is Not One" by Stephen Prothero: "Philosopher of religion Ninian Smart has referred to these [shared religious] tendencies as the seven “dimensions” of religion: the ritual, narrative, experiential, institutional, ethical, doctrinal, and material dimensions. These family resemblances are just tendencies, however. Just as there are tall people in short families (none of the men in Michael Jordan’s family was over six feet tall), there are religions that deny the existence of God and religions that get along just fine without creeds. Something is a religion when it shares enough of this DNA to belong to the family of religions. What makes the members of this family different (and themselves) is how they mix and match these dimensions. Experience is central in Daoism and Buddhism. Hinduism and Judaism emphasize the narrative dimension. The ethical dimension is crucial in Confucianism. The Islamic and Yoruba traditions are to a great extent about ritual. And doctrine is particularly important to Christians. The world’s religious rivals are clearly related, but they are more like second cousins than identical twins. They do not teach the same doctrines. They do not perform the same rituals. And they do not share the same goals."
- haswell 3y ago
  > It seems you have a fairly narrow view of what constitutes a religion. Christian fundamentalism is particularly dogmatic and is one negative manifestation of religion which happens to be present in the West. The Christian dogmatic variety and its offshoots also happens to be quite popular. I understand the broader religious context after investing significant time and effort into trying to understand the phenomena of religion more generally. “The Evolution of God” is another interesting text in this category. The narrow view I’m representing here is the view that I spent most of my life holding, and the view that most people I know still hold. It’s also the view that kept me from exploring Buddhism and meditation for many years. Religion had been a very destructive force in my life, and I’m not alone in this experience. My point in this thread is that associating meditation with religion is unnecessary, and can be a problem for people who hold this narrow view. My attempts to expand my own understanding seems pretty rare in my social circles, and when I added a meditation practice as something very central to my life, it was clear that people around me hold all sorts of assumptions and misconceptions about it (as I did), and those associations don’t need to exist. “Real Christianity” - following the things that Jesus actually taught - is actually a pretty decent way to go about life. But this isn’t what most people experience, and it colors their views of the whole endeavor accordingly.
darthrupert 3y ago
Sam Harris is not religious, but he certainly has practiced meditation in a religious way. I'm not saying this as if it was a bad thing, or that it detracts from his scientificism or atheism, just an observation.
- haswell 3y ago
  Harris practices meditation religiously in the same way that professional athletes train religiously. The difference is that people don’t conclude that one must become a religious person to become an athlete. Describing training as religious evokes a definition of the word that has nothing to do with: > 1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity. > 2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion. Meditation is often (incorrectly) explicitly associated with religion and religiosity, which are orthogonal to a “religious” dedication to the practice, a practice that requires no adherence to religious ideas. I’m only splitting hairs here because the idea that there’s a religious connection remains pretty prevalent, and is a major misconception.
  - darthrupert 3y ago
    Well articulated, thank you.

johndhi 3y ago

I suspect you just have a different definition of 'religious' than I do. Why are you so anti-religion?

haswell 3y ago
That’s possible! But that’s also why I’m calling attention to it here. Religiosity is a negative signal for many folks, and I think it’s important to debunk the need for religious thinking to gain the benefits of meditation. My stance comes from growing up in an extreme fundamentalist religious bubble. It set me up for a lifetime of unwinding unhealthy beliefs and patterns of thought, not the least of which was deep confusion about my self worth when hearing leaders of the church openly discuss stoning gay people as the truly appropriate consequence biblically. That kinda fucks with your head when you’re coming to terms with your own sexuality (I’m bisexual). I’ve seen first hand what these systems of belief do to families and communities, and while I’m not one to claim that all religion is awful, I do think it’s a bigger problem than help in the current social climate. The ideas of most religions also set up a fundamental misconception about our relationship with the world/environment (that we’re separate from it) that is an existential threat to reaching some kind of environmental balance. I’m curious what religious means to you.
- johndhi 3y ago
  Makes sense. Thanks for sharing! I personally think human beings need some kind of central spiritual belief or identity to feel satisfied/happy/whole. I'm not sure, but in your case, it almost sounds like you might be getting that identity from REJECTING the shitty religious bubble you grew up in. Sounds like you feel like you're on a good track and moving somewhere with your life -- even if it's away from religion. So I guess in my book, you're religious. >>I’ve seen first hand what these systems of belief do to families and communities, and while I’m not one to claim that all religion is awful, I do think it’s a bigger problem than help in the current social climate. For me, this is really case-by-case, but my suspicion is that most religion is generally better for people than no religion -- so I suspect I disagree with you, but on limited data. >>The ideas of most religions also set up a fundamental misconception about our relationship with the world/environment (that we’re separate from it) that is an existential threat to reaching some kind of environmental balance. Hadn't heard this one before - huh. I think there are a lot of reasons we burn coal but IMO the fact that we're religious isn't one of the main ones. To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it.
  - haswell 3y ago
    Thanks for the perspective here as well. I do agree that people behave “religiously” more broadly, but I tend to think of this more as an overarching phenomena of meaning-making, with capital r “Religion” making up one major category of thought, and non-religious paths are distinct in that they don’t bring the baggage of beliefs in deities/spirits/etc. So while I understand the philosophical framing of religion in broader terms, In the context of meditation, I tend to avoid the religious connotation entirely because it’s overloaded and a lot of people immediately conflate the two. To draw a crude comparison, people go to the gym religiously. But people aren’t likely to misinterpret that comment as meaning going to the gym is “Religious” in the sense that people understand religion in the cultural zeitgeist. > Hadn't heard this one before - huh. I think there are a lot of reasons we burn coal but IMO the fact that we're religious isn't one of the main ones. To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it. Alan Watts explores this idea and I think it’s worth considering. Most people in the west - especially anyone raised around Judeo-Christian beliefs - are taught that they are born into this world, that they’re separate from it, that they’re here to have dominion over it, and that the real game is what comes after we die. Even though I left the Christian belief system behind, I had deep unexamined beliefs that everything would be fine, because how could it not be? If all of this was created, and I was made, it implies that something bigger is in control. This is at the heart of climate denialism in all of the circles I grew up in. The eastern framing is that we grow out of this world. We’re intrinsically part of it, an expression of it, and not separate. This brings a much different set of implications, and at least for me personally and based on what others have shared about their own experience, cultivating this view drastically altered my engagement with environmental issues, how I think about food, decisions I make about how I spend my time, etc. The point isn’t that we burn coal because of religion, but that many popular religions instill a mindset that makes burning coal not a problem. > To me, religion is a great path toward loving others and the world such that we'd want to conserve them and it. I love that this is your view, and I wish that more people held it. Unfortunately I’ve been exposed to the toxic alternative almost exclusively, spread across about a dozen churches throughout my youth. Moving beyond the message of love for a moment, I think religious organizations need to carefully examine the 2nd/3rd order effects of certain core beliefs. “Don’t look up” seems like an example of the ultimate failure mode of instilling a sense of “God will take care of things” into the generation that has to contend with the fact that this is not true. I should add that I say all of this while somewhat lamenting what has been lost in the breakdown of the church. A sense of community and belonging connected to a notion of something greater than oneself is sorely missing in modern society. I hope that better options emerge, or that major religious organizations can rehabilitate their image and mission effectively.

waterheater 3y ago

It seems you have a fairly narrow view of what constitutes a religion. Christian fundamentalism is particularly dogmatic and is one negative manifestation of religion which happens to be present in the West. From the book "God is Not One" by Stephen Prothero: "Philosopher of religion Ninian Smart has referred to these [shared religious] tendencies as the seven “dimensions” of religion: the ritual, narrative, experiential, institutional, ethical, doctrinal, and material dimensions. These family resemblances are just tendencies, however. Just as there are tall people in short families (none of the men in Michael Jordan’s family was over six feet tall), there are religions that deny the existence of God and religions that get along just fine without creeds. Something is a religion when it shares enough of this DNA to belong to the family of religions. What makes the members of this family different (and themselves) is how they mix and match these dimensions. Experience is central in Daoism and Buddhism. Hinduism and Judaism emphasize the narrative dimension. The ethical dimension is crucial in Confucianism. The Islamic and Yoruba traditions are to a great extent about ritual. And doctrine is particularly important to Christians. The world’s religious rivals are clearly related, but they are more like second cousins than identical twins. They do not teach the same doctrines. They do not perform the same rituals. And they do not share the same goals."

haswell 3y ago
> It seems you have a fairly narrow view of what constitutes a religion. Christian fundamentalism is particularly dogmatic and is one negative manifestation of religion which happens to be present in the West. The Christian dogmatic variety and its offshoots also happens to be quite popular. I understand the broader religious context after investing significant time and effort into trying to understand the phenomena of religion more generally. “The Evolution of God” is another interesting text in this category. The narrow view I’m representing here is the view that I spent most of my life holding, and the view that most people I know still hold. It’s also the view that kept me from exploring Buddhism and meditation for many years. Religion had been a very destructive force in my life, and I’m not alone in this experience. My point in this thread is that associating meditation with religion is unnecessary, and can be a problem for people who hold this narrow view. My attempts to expand my own understanding seems pretty rare in my social circles, and when I added a meditation practice as something very central to my life, it was clear that people around me hold all sorts of assumptions and misconceptions about it (as I did), and those associations don’t need to exist. “Real Christianity” - following the things that Jesus actually taught - is actually a pretty decent way to go about life. But this isn’t what most people experience, and it colors their views of the whole endeavor accordingly.

darthrupert 3y ago

Sam Harris is not religious, but he certainly has practiced meditation in a religious way. I'm not saying this as if it was a bad thing, or that it detracts from his scientificism or atheism, just an observation.

haswell 3y ago
Harris practices meditation religiously in the same way that professional athletes train religiously. The difference is that people don’t conclude that one must become a religious person to become an athlete. Describing training as religious evokes a definition of the word that has nothing to do with: > 1. Having or showing belief in and reverence for God or a deity. > 2. Of, concerned with, or teaching religion. Meditation is often (incorrectly) explicitly associated with religion and religiosity, which are orthogonal to a “religious” dedication to the practice, a practice that requires no adherence to religious ideas. I’m only splitting hairs here because the idea that there’s a religious connection remains pretty prevalent, and is a major misconception.
- darthrupert 3y ago
  Well articulated, thank you.