Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Theism and Atheism => Topic started by: Sriram on November 13, 2016, 06:17:53 AM
-
Hi everyone,
In spirituality, are we really looking for a Higher Power (God)?
Actually, the search for a higher power is the initial motivation, because the human mind is outward looking. Subsequently we end up searching for our own Inner Self. The God within.
Spirituality is really about the search for our own True Self. That which we really are.
Once we find and nurture the Higher Self, it grows and stabilizes. We thereby shed the lower nature that we have inherited from our animal links of the past. This Higher Self is the 'kingdom of heaven' that people have talked about in ancient days. We then finally cease being animals and become something higher. We can call that the divine or human or anything we want.
Just some thoughts.
Cheers.
Sriram
-
Hi everyone,
In spirituality, are we really looking for a Higher Power (God)?
Actually, the search for a higher power is the initial motivation, because the human mind is outward looking. Subsequently we end up searching for our own Inner Self. The God within.
Spirituality is really about the search for our own True Self. That which we really are.
Morning Sririam,
I have a Quaker-ish attitude to God being within everyone and being able to find him/her/it in our unconscious.
[\quote]Once we find and nurture the Higher Self, it grows and stabilizes. We thereby shed the lower nature that we have inherited from our animal links of the past. This Higher Self is the 'kingdom of heaven' that people have talked about in ancient days. We then finally cease being animals and become something higher. We can call that the divine or human or anything we want. [/quote]
Interesting. I can foresee you getting some sticks about the part I have emboldened :D.. We are animals after all, with different abilities and higher intelligence.
My ideas of seeking and communicating with God in me are more humble I think, and have a different purpose.
Good post, thought provoking, thanks.
-
Morning Sririam,
I have a Quaker-ish attitude to God being within everyone and being able to find him/her/it in our unconscious.
[\quote]Once we find and nurture the Higher Self, it grows and stabilizes. We thereby shed the lower nature that we have inherited from our animal links of the past. This Higher Self is the 'kingdom of heaven' that people have talked about in ancient days. We then finally cease being animals and become something higher. We can call that the divine or human or anything we want.
Interesting. I can foresee you getting some sticks about the part I have emboldened :D.. We are animals after all, with different abilities and higher intelligence.
My ideas of seeking and communicating with God in me are more humble I think, and have a different purpose.
Good post, thought provoking, thanks.
We are animals only as a scientific classification. We do share many traits in our bodies but not in our minds and intellect.
We have evolved and have developed many traits that are different from animals and we are increasingly becoming so. In a million years I doubt if we would be recognizable as animals.
According to the Hindu Samkhya philosophy (the oldest Indian philosophy) we are beings of Higher consciousness (Purusha) that are trapped in Nature (Prakriti). We evolve and develop by obeying the laws of nature but are always moving towards freeing ourselves from this trap. Once we reach a certain degree of alienation from our animal nature, we become free.
The more we think of ourselves as animals the more trapped we are.
It is the ultimate recognition of ourselves as free souls and not as this body (that we have inherited from animals), ....that is an important feature of spiritual growth. God, temples, rituals and other such things are only means and paths towards this development.
-
I accept that we are higher than most animals in many respects, if only by virtue of our ability to reason, and certainly don't think of myself as being in the same category as my pets.
The Hindu ethos which, from the little I know I like, is very interesting indeed and I sort of understand what you are talking about.
For me, connecting with the Divine within me would not involve me attempting to rise above anyone or any other creature, it would simply be to know God better, gain insights, strengthen myself and maybe find out what God wants me to do. I may indeed 'rise above' and become a higher being, who knows, but that wouldn't be the principal purpose and I wouldn't think of it.
It's good to learn.
-
I accept that we are higher than most animals in many respects, if only by virtue of our ability to reason, and certainly don't think of myself as being in the same category as my pets.
The Hindu ethos which, from the little I know I like, is very interesting indeed and I sort of understand what you are talking about.
For me, connecting with the Divine within me would not involve me attempting to rise above anyone or any other creature, it would simply be to know God better, gain insights, strengthen myself and maybe find out what God wants me to do. I may indeed 'rise above' and become a higher being, who knows, but that wouldn't be the principal purpose and I wouldn't think of it.
It's good to learn.
Realizing the Higher Self does not involve feeling superior or considering oneself as higher or anything of that sort. That would be ego driven.
It in fact involves feeling greater love, oneness, joy, forgiveness and a sense of unity.
-
I accept that we are higher than most animals in many respects, if only by virtue of our ability to reason, and certainly don't think of myself as being in the same category as my pets.
The Hindu ethos which, from the little I know I like, is very interesting indeed and I sort of understand what you are talking about.
For me, connecting with the Divine within me would not involve me attempting to rise above anyone or any other creature, it would simply be to know God better, gain insights, strengthen myself and maybe find out what God wants me to do. I may indeed 'rise above' and become a higher being, who knows, but that wouldn't be the principal purpose and I wouldn't think of it.
It's good to learn.
Brownie
'Higher Self' has frequently become a contentious expression as it can imply superiority, which I doubt was the intention. The process is more about dis-identifying with and being consciously free from the constraints of what goes to make up our ego states. Perhaps from a Christian perspective the word 'purity' would apply before you can 'ascend' into Heaven.
-
Lovely, thank you ekim.
-
Lovely, thank you ekim.
Gordon or NS, if you are watching, I think maybe Faith Sharing might be a better place for this thread; all is harmonious atm but I can foresee difficulties in the future.
This is not about Hindu faith. It is about a secular philosophy of self development. Merely because I mention Samkhya philosophy does not make it about 'faith'.
I think it is fine here.
-
It all sounds a load of bollox to me mate , any who!
-
This is not about Hindu faith. It is about a secular philosophy of self development. Merely because I mention Samkhya philosophy does not make it about 'faith'.
I think it is fine here.
That's fair enough Sririam, you started the thread after all. Sorry if I overstepped the mark :-[.
-----------------------
Walter, it is written (somewhere), "What is bollox to one is Rambutan to another".
-
That's fair enough Sririam, you started the thread after all. Sorry if I overstepped the mark :-[.
-----------------------
Thats ok Brownie.. Just clarifying! :)
-
Thanks Brownie , I had to look that up .
-
Good to have something you can get your teeth into.
-
We are animals only as a scientific classification. We do share many traits in our bodies but not in our minds and intellect.
We have evolved and have developed many traits that are different from animals and we are increasingly becoming so. In a million years I doubt if we would be recognizable as animals.
According to the Hindu Samkhya philosophy (the oldest Indian philosophy) we are beings of Higher consciousness (Purusha) that are trapped in Nature (Prakriti). We evolve and develop by obeying the laws of nature but are always moving towards freeing ourselves from this trap. Once we reach a certain degree of alienation from our animal nature, we become free.
The more we think of ourselves as animals the more trapped we are.
It is the ultimate recognition of ourselves as free souls and not as this body (that we have inherited from animals), ....that is an important feature of spiritual growth. God, temples, rituals and other such things are only means and paths towards this development.
Sriram, Have a read, if you haven't done so already, of Arthur C Clark's book 'Childhoods End', he's been there before you have.
ippy
-
Sriram, yes, the 'Higher Power' and 'the Kingdom of Heaven' is found within. You only have to let go and be still.... and it is right there:
"Be still and know that I am God.."
..... and is such a comfort and strength..
-
Sriram, yes, the 'Higher Power' and 'the Kingdom of Heaven' is found within. You only have to let go and be still.... and it is right there:
"Be still and know that I am God.."
..... and is such a comfort and strength..
Hi SweetPea......
Yes, finding that God or Self within is the answer to everything. It actually provides a solution to life and not just a solace.
-
The importance of solace must not be underestimated though, Sririam, especially for those who find themselves in a particularly bad place. It will do 'for now' and when situations ease, move on to solutions to life.
I would like to know what you mean by "solutions to life" though, Sririam. I have an inkling but don't put great store into my vague personal interpretations.
Good stuff!
-
I don't think we are more trapped if we think of ourselves as animals. In fact I think in some ways it sets us free from being the centre of the universe.
You see, I think it is possible other animals do reason, but differently to us ( not less than, just different)
A pack of wolves probably does have an idea of what it means to be a good wolf or a bad wolf. I wouldn't even write off ideas of spirituality within that.
I do know my life and senses are different to a wolf and we don't share the same species so don't see the world in the same way. We ( human race) have a bad habit of looking down on successful species that have different values to us.
Maybe if we ever meet an intelligent alien species this idea that we are much more than "just another animal, striving for its best", is going to look ridiculous.
🌹
-
I agree with you, Rose, but I don't think Sririam meant it all (op) in quite the way you and I initially took it.
Ekim gave an insight.
Whatever, it's all quite fascinating.
-
just what, exactly , are you all smoking?
-
The importance of solace must not be underestimated though, Sririam, especially for those who find themselves in a particularly bad place. It will do 'for now' and when situations ease, move on to solutions to life.
I would like to know what you mean by "solutions to life" though, Sririam. I have an inkling but don't put great store into my vague personal interpretations.
Good stuff!
Hi Brownie,
Solace is what we get every day through our prayers and rituals and faith. It is very important and without this most people will not be able to go through life at all. I agree.
However, as we advance spiritually we realize that the real truth exists within. Once we realize this and actually stabilize with this knowledge, most of our needs and wants disappear automatically. We start becoming free of animal needs and go with the flow. We will begin to see a force and a pattern in our lives that lies under the surface.
Once we recognize this pattern, we don't need any solace any more. The need for consolation disappears. Synchronicity will become common. We will know the way life is going and will just flow along.
This is what I mean by a 'solution to life'.
-
I don't think we are more trapped if we think of ourselves as animals. In fact I think in some ways it sets us free from being the centre of the universe.
You see, I think it is possible other animals do reason, but differently to us ( not less than, just different)
A pack of wolves probably does have an idea of what it means to be a good wolf or a bad wolf. I wouldn't even write off ideas of spirituality within that.
I do know my life and senses are different to a wolf and we don't share the same species so don't see the world in the same way. We ( human race) have a bad habit of looking down on successful species that have different values to us.
Maybe if we ever meet an intelligent alien species this idea that we are much more than "just another animal, striving for its best", is going to look ridiculous.
🌹
I agree that animals probably share some of our mental and intellectual capabilities. We Hindus believe that humans are only a part of the huge spectrum that includes animals. We believe that we all have been animals in some earlier birth. So...human birth is different only in degree and not in kind. We have known this for millennia.
But that degree does make the difference. Like a high school student is different from a primary school student only in degree. But that is enough to enable a high school student to pass out of school while a primary school student cannot.
It is about gradual development and growing up. If a high school student identifies himself with primary school and thinks ..'I was once in primary school so I am not different from these students'...he will never be able to pass out of school. He has to recognize the differences and abandon many of the childhood traits, to go forward. Otherwise he will be stunted.
Its the same in spiritual growth.
-
just what, exactly , are you all smoking?
As I said at 08:36:55 today, "Good Stuff!" 8)
------------
Sririam: It is about gradual development and growing up. If a high school student identifies himself with primary school and thinks ..'I was once in primary school so I am not different from these students'...he will never be able to pass out of school. He has to recognize the differences and abandon many of the childhood traits, to go forward. Otherwise he will be stunted.
Its the same in spiritual growth.
Just as, 1 Corinthians 13:11: When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. (NLT)
Siriam: However, as we advance spiritually we realize that the real truth exists within. Once we realize this and actually stabilize with this knowledge, most of our needs and wants disappear automatically.
Must take time, Sririam.
-
As I said at 08:36:55 today, "Good Stuff!" 8)
------------
Sririam: It is about gradual development and growing up. If a high school student identifies himself with primary school and thinks ..'I was once in primary school so I am not different from these students'...he will never be able to pass out of school. He has to recognize the differences and abandon many of the childhood traits, to go forward. Otherwise he will be stunted.
Its the same in spiritual growth.
Just as, 1 Corinthians 13:11: When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. (NLT)
Just as not Matthew 18:3
-
As I said at 08:36:55 today, "Good Stuff!" 8)
------------
Sririam: It is about gradual development and growing up. If a high school student identifies himself with primary school and thinks ..'I was once in primary school so I am not different from these students'...he will never be able to pass out of school. He has to recognize the differences and abandon many of the childhood traits, to go forward. Otherwise he will be stunted.
Its the same in spiritual growth.
Just as, 1 Corinthians 13:11: When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. (NLT)
Siriam: However, as we advance spiritually we realize that the real truth exists within. Once we realize this and actually stabilize with this knowledge, most of our needs and wants disappear automatically.
Must take time, Sririam.
Yes...all religions have the same spiritual philosophy at their base. That is quite clear to me.
What do you mean ...'must take time'...? Do you mean that the development will take time or understanding all this will take time?!.
-
Just as not Matthew 18:3
What Brownie quoted is about gradual development. Similar to development from childhood to adulthood.
What you are quoting is about developing a trusting, simple, spontaneous and childlike attitude. Once we shed our competitive animal nature we will automatically become trusting, loving, spontaneous and childlike. Most saints are childlike people.
They above two are not contradictory.
-
Both Sririam - maybe I am a 'slow' student when it comes to such things. (Replying to your one before last post, just seen the latest one)
Regarding Matthew 18:3, there is a vast difference between being childlike and childish.
-
Both Sririam - maybe I am a 'slow' student when it comes to such things. (Replying to your one before last post, just seen the latest one)
Regarding Matthew 18:3, there is a vast difference between being childlike and childish.
Brownie....you are taking in all this much faster than most people....let me assure you! :)
-
Yes...all religions have the same spiritual philosophy at their base. That is quite clear to me.
What do you mean ...'must take time'...? Do you mean that the development will take time or understanding all this will take time?!.
what is there to understand? It reminds me of me and my friends as teenagers who talked of such stuff on camping expeditions to the lake district, we never got anywhere with it. Then one by one we grew up.
-
what is there to understand? It reminds me of me and my friends as teenagers who talked of such stuff on camping expeditions to the lake district, we never got anywhere with it. Then one by one we grew up.
:D Have fun Walter!
-
Both Sririam - maybe I am a 'slow' student when it comes to such things. (Replying to your one before last post, just seen the latest one)
Regarding Matthew 18:3, there is a vast difference between being childlike and childish.
Is there? Or is that a rationalisation to avoid contradiction.
-
Is there? Or is that a rationalisation to avoid contradiction.
We have to understand what the basic philosophy is all about. If we do...we can fit things together without any problem.
If we go merely by the words...we will always find lots of contradictions.
The issue is simple. Its about development and growth. Its about shedding our competitive animal instincts and acquiring a more selfless, loving, wise, non competitive, cooperative, spontaneous and universal nature.
This is what all religions have been teaching for centuries. This is what spirituality is all about. This is also what being civilized is all about.
Now...how we understand different biblical/Koranic/buddhist/Hindu quotes in relation to this philosophy is up to us.
-
We have to understand what the basic philosophy is all about. If we do...we can fit things together without any problem.
If we go merely by the words...we will always find lots of contradictions.
The issue is simple. Its about development and growth. Its about shedding our competitive animal instincts and acquiring a more selfless, loving, wise, non competitive, cooperative, spontaneous and universal nature.
This is what all religions have been teaching for centuries. This is what spirituality is all about. This is also what being civilized is all about.
Now...how we understand different biblical/Koranic/buddhist/Hindu quotes in relation to this philosophy is up to us.
Aren't these merely words?
-
Aren't these merely words?
Here you go again...!!! :D
-
Here you go again...!!! :D
what, being logical? Probably.
-
nope, still sounds like a lot of bollox,
-
Aren't these merely words?
Yes but they are often accompanied by suggested practices which invite the initiate to discover the truth or otherwise of what is contained within those words.
-
Yes but they are often accompanied by suggested practices which invite the initiate to discover the truth or otherwise of what is contained within those words.
but if the words have are essentially unimportant to the kevel that tgey can be contraductory than they cannot be used as something to validate 'truth' against. The issue here is that picking what seems to correlate and ignoring what doesn't by saying what does not correlate is just words is the definition of cherry picking.
-
Is there? Or is that a rationalisation to avoid contradiction.
The next verse Matt 18:4 gives the clue, I think, it's about humility (rather than egotism).
-
but if the words have are essentially unimportant to the kevel that tgey can be contraductory than they cannot be used as something to validate 'truth' against. The issue here is that picking what seems to correlate and ignoring what doesn't by saying what does not correlate is just words is the definition of cherry picking.
I'm not sure I follow. Can you give an example from what has been said so far, then I might be in a better position to reply.
-
I'm not sure I follow. Can you give an example from what has been said so far, then I might be in a better position to reply.
The Corinthians quote was taken as somehow a validation of a common approach. When asked about whether the Matthew quote was being rationalised as not a contradiction, Sriram states 'if we go merely by the words...there will always be contradictions'. It's that statement that means you cannot take any individual statements as confirmation as they are merely words.
-
The next verse Matt 18:4 gives the clue, I think, it's about humility (rather than egotism).
the point I'm making is that to take out of context verses such as Corinthians and proclaim a great commonality in religion is cherry picking. To use another example given the OT tells me how hard I can beat a slave, is there a commonality in religions that I can own a person and beat them?
-
The Corinthians quote was taken as somehow a validation of a common approach. When asked about whether the Matthew quote was being rationalised as not a contradiction, Sriram states 'if we go merely by the words...there will always be contradictions'. It's that statement that means you cannot take any individual statements as confirmation as they are merely words.
Ok...let me clarify. What I meant was that we have to read the meaning behind the words and not merely the words themselves.
For example, when the bible says that we should become like children....it obviously does not mean that we should start crawling on all fours, start bawling, mess up our clothes, throw toys around and such things. It means that we should be trusting and simple minded.
Similarly when the bible says that we should not be like children...it means that we should acquire self control, discipline, wisdom, cooperation, selflessness and so on.
Its all about understanding what the words mean in any specific context.
-
the point I'm making is that to take out of context verses such as Corinthians and proclaim a great commonality in religion is cherry picking. To use another example given the OT tells me how hard I can beat a slave, is there a commonality in religions that I can own a person and beat them?
OK, I understand what you are saying. Yes, it can be like cherry picking. The commonality often comes from comparing what the mystics associated with the various religions have to say, rather than the scriptures. Many of the mystics seem to be practice oriented (e.g. contemplation, yoga etc.) rather than scripture quoting. I think, what was called, the Perennial Philosophy attempted these comparisons.
-
Ok...let me clarify. What I meant was that we have to read the meaning behind the words and not merely the words themselves.
For example, when the bible says that we should become like children....it obviously does not mean that we should start crawling on all fours, start bawling, mess up our clothes, throw toys around and such things. It means that we should be trusting and simple minded.
Similarly when the bible says that we should not be like children...it means that we should acquire self control, discipline, wisdom, cooperation, selflessness and so on.
Its all about understanding what the words mean in any specific context.
what is simpleminded about self control and wisdom.
Obviously we have to try to understand intentions behind words but you are doing it from a presupposition that there isn't really any contradiction. BTW what's the context in the OT about how hard I can beat a slave that fits in with wisdom, cooperation and selflessness?
-
the point I'm making is that to take out of context verses such as Corinthians and proclaim a great commonality in religion is cherry picking. To use another example given the OT tells me how hard I can beat a slave, is there a commonality in religions that I can own a person and beat them?
As I have pointed out many times, religions contain a base of spiritual philosophy that is largely common across the world. However, religions are also culture specific and evolve and grow in specific environments. Therefore, besides the spiritual base, they also contain many cultural, social, political, geographical, health related issues.
While most major religions would be in agreement as regards their spiritual base, they need not be in agreement as regards other aspects because they have developed and evolved in very different environments.
It is as simple as saying that all animal species have major similarities in their DNA....while being very different in their appearance and behavior.
-
what is simpleminded about self control and wisdom.
? ? ? ?
Ok...Goodnight anyway! Maybe tomorrow.
-
OK, I understand what you are saying. Yes, it can be like cherry picking. The commonality often comes from comparing what the mystics associated with the various religions have to say, rather than the scriptures. Many of the mystics seem to be practice oriented (e.g. contemplation, yoga etc.) rather than scripture quoting. I think, what was called, the Perennial Philosophy attempted these comparisons.
And much of this is included outside of religion, so to conclude that there is a central meaning given to religion and spirituality is a further form of begging the question.
Indeed there is a form of ad populum here which covers the idea 'look, some other people agree with me on certain things, we must all be right on those things even if we disagree on others'
There deems to me an attempt to give a faux privilege to one specific genre of thinking, I.e. 'religious' by pointing out that some of it agrees. It's hardly surprising given that we don't seem to have that wide a choice of thinking, and what Sriram is leaving out of his cherry pucking is also common across many religions, and what is keeping is coming in many secular positions.
-
? ? ? ?
Ok...Goodnight anyway! Maybe tomorrow.
You said Matthew was telling people to be simpleminded, and Corinthians was calling for self control and wisdom. These don't seem to fit together to me.
-
As I have pointed out many times, religions contain a base of spiritual philosophy that is largely common across the world. However, religions are also culture specific and evolve and grow in specific environments. Therefore, besides the spiritual base, they also contain many cultural, social, political, geographical, health related issues.
While most major religions would be in agreement as regards their spiritual base, they need not be in agreement as regards other aspects because they have developed and evolved in very different environments.
It is as simple as saying that all animal species have major similarities in their DNA....while being very different in their appearance and behavior.
Most major philosophies have certain parts in common too. That you have cherry picked religion and the common parts you like is just your own cultural bias. It shows no argument that your choices are either actually common or prevalent, never mind uniquely common and prevalent to religious though as opposed to any other.
-
And much of this is included outside of religion, so to conclude that there is a central meaning given to religion and spirituality is a further form of begging the question.
Indeed there is a form of ad populum here which covers the idea 'look, some other people agree with me on certain things, we must all be right on those things even if we disagree on others'
There deems to me an attempt to give a faux privilege to one specific genre of thinking, I.e. 'religious' by pointing out that some of it agrees. It's hardly surprising given that we don't seem to have that wide a choice of thinking, and what Sriram is leaving out of his cherry pucking is also common across many religions, and what is keeping is coming in many secular positions.
I shall have to leave Sriram to answer your latter point. It seems to me that many religions aspire towards uniting with or living in harmony with a power beyond the understanding of a human. It might be called God, Elohim, Brahman, Tao Te or the state of unity might be called Heaven, Nirvana etc. The claimed experiences of those who aspired to this are that it is empowering, enlivening, blissful etc. and they propose a variety of ways or methods that others may use to attain the same. If it is to be validated you have to 'walk the walk' rather than 'talk the talk' or 'think the thought'.
-
I shall have to leave Sriram to answer your latter point. It seems to me that many religions aspire towards uniting with or living in harmony with a power beyond the understanding of a human. It might be called God, Elohim, Brahman, Tao Te or the state of unity might be called Heaven, Nirvana etc. The claimed experiences of those who aspired to this are that it is empowering, enlivening, blissful etc. and they propose a variety of ways or methods that others may use to attain the same. If it is to be validated you have to 'walk the walk' rather than 'talk the talk' or 'think the thought'.
I am sure, they have just as many who do not follow any such thing will also 'walk the walk' without the need to do anything beyond the understanding of a human. Further we are back at the issue of validating any if this as true in any sense. If something is 'beyond the understanding of a Hunan' then any attempt to explain that is both meaningless and unable to being validated in any way.
-
I am sure, they have just as many who do not follow any such thing will also 'walk the walk' without the need to do anything beyond the understanding of a human. Further we are back at the issue of validating any if this as true in any sense. If something is 'beyond the understanding of a Hunan' then any attempt to explain that is both meaningless and unable to being validated in any way.
In a way, yes, it's more about experience rather than cerebral understanding and to gain the experience, the invitation is to follow a method or way suggested. The 'ways' are usually related to inner stillness rather than incessant mental agitation, transformation rather than information.
-
Is there? Or is that a rationalisation to avoid contradiction.
Not to me, I understand it quite clearly but can see why others don't and I think it is a good question.
In context, being 'childlike' means being innocent*, without bias; being 'childish', for an adult, means being silly.
*not too naive, I hasten to add.
In a way, yes, it's more about experience rather than cerebral understanding and to gain the experience, the invitation is to follow a method or way suggested. The 'ways' are usually related to inner stillness rather than incessant mental agitation, transformation rather than information.
That's my opinion too, ekim.
Sririam - thank you :D. Not sure you are right but nice to 'hear' you say it.
-
Most major philosophies have certain parts in common too. That you have cherry picked religion and the common parts you like is just your own cultural bias. It shows no argument that your choices are either actually common or prevalent, never mind uniquely common and prevalent to religious though as opposed to any other.
Ok...I have said what I have to say. Make of it what you will. No point in repeating the same things.
Thanks NS & others. :)
-
I really like the universality of what Sririam has outlined and it pleases me that it is common to many religious beliefs and in some ways to those without religion. Imo, there is not nearly enough interfaith dialogue in this society.
Many Christians will disagree with me (don't care).