Passive Intolerance

[Aaron]

Hello Folks,

 

My opinion, especially of late, is that all religions are by nature intolerant. There are many religions that seem to preach tolerance, but in most instances it's always a bit left handed. You hear things like, be tolerant of other people's ignorance. How is this tolerant? It's like saying, "be nice to that person, even if they are ugly." Does that really change the fact you think they're ugly? Are you going to be nice enough to ask that person out on a date? I'm not really interested in posting a long thread about this, because I think it's so evident there really doesn't need to be much more said. I would like to hear how other people feel about this, in particular whether they see this as something that's benefiting mankind or hurting it.

 

Aaron

[Sloppy Zhang]

Well I guess it'd depend on what your goals are, and what you'd consider to be "true" or not.

 

What I mean is that, okay, a religious person might not actually BE tolerant. Behind closed doors they may bad mouth Muslims, Hindus, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, etc. But out in public carry on amicably enough. So in that sense, it us useful as a social constructs. And as a social construct, which I think is how most religions come to be about (despite all good intentions), that is useful and fairly effective.

 

The only problems with this are when REALLY radical people get a hold of something, and use it to justify their hate- the Christian Crusades, the Jihad of many fundamentalist, extremist, militaristic Islamic groups. But if you look at the psychology profile on these guys, most of them are either sociopaths to begin with, or are using it as a front to work another angle (gaining political or economic power, for instance). But since these guys are similar regardless of religious or political background, it's safe to say that these people are their own group, and they just exploit a religious doctrine to serve their goals- they aren't necessarily the product of religious doctrines.

 

Now, in what I personally to consider to be the true cultivation/self development sense, I don't think the things you've outlined helped much. It just gets people into a mode of denial. It gives them a curtain with a pretty picture painted on it that they use to cover their eyes, but firmly believe they are seeing what is really outside.

 

It's sort of like apologies. There are a thousand reasons to apologize WITHOUT actually apologizing. Apologize to save face. To appeal to the target's emotions. As a political move. As a social formality, etc.

 

Perhaps more apt, forgiveness. It's very easy for people to say "I forgive you", but with a not so subtle undertone of "after all, you are lesser than me, of course you would to this, I'm still better than you and I am getting better by forgiving you, ha ha ha ha ha, my God will reward me and punish you in the end, so it's not like you apologizing and me forgiving you is in any way going to get you off the hook. So I might as well look good in the process."

 

That's not very conducive to what I would consider honest personal, emotional, or otherwise spiritual growth.

 

But it doesn't go over so well when you start thinking of how a society runs and sticks together. It's not easy to sell real betterment to people, because real betterment involves a look under the hood, at all the nasty stuff that is really you.

 

It's much easier to tell people to have a certain exterior and they will be set, than to really get them to dig deep, and even harder to actually verify that such a change has happened.

[Aaron]

Hello Sloppy,

 

I would have to debate whether or not passive tolerance works, in fact I think it helps the fanatics to accomplish their goals, because many of the passively tolerant see the fanatics as standing up for what they believe is right. Whether it's Christians protesting at a soldier's funeral or terrorists doing what they do (Muslim or Irish). I think the only thing that keeps most people tolerant is that they relate to their religion culturally, rather than as a religion. An example being an American will most likely identify themselves as a Christian, a Yemeni Muslim, and so on. Those people within that culture that identify themselves with another religion may be tolerated, but only so far as the law allows.

 

For me religions, whether they are Eastern or Western teach intolerance because they teach that they are right and others are wrong. They proscribe what is moral and immoral, and for the most part the culture follows this morality. Now if religions are vastly different there is a strong underlying distrust that occurs. A good example is the fact that the small gnostic Christian populations that existed within Eastern countries were only able to survive by isolating themselves.

 

Lets not even get started on the radicals who come along with different ideas. Things can start out very nice, polite debates and such, but if the person who is dissenting doesn't choose to shut up or convert, then those niceties fade quickly.

 

Anyways, thanks for your input.

 

Aaron

Edited May 12, 2011 by Twinner

[Encephalon]

I hope you don't take this personally or defensively but I feel that your unfortunate childhood exposure to the dark side of religion is training your investigation in the direction of healing your psychic wounds rather than examining religious phenomena for its own sake.

 

The questions you ask are important ones but they are the same ones, over and over. Might I respectfully suggest you read the literature that speaks to your questions? We really can't expect other members to bare the burden of our own research.

 

The End of Faith by Sam Harris

A Buddhist History of the West by David Loy

A History of God by Karen Armstrong

Why I Am Not a Christian by Bertrand Russell

[Aaron]

I hope you don't take this personally or defensively but I feel that your unfortunate childhood exposure to the dark side of religion is training your investigation in the direction of healing your psychic wounds rather than examining religious phenomena for its own sake.

 

The questions you ask are important ones but they are the same ones, over and over. Might I respectfully suggest you read the literature that speaks to your questions? We really can't expect other members to bare the burden of our own research.

 

The End of Faith by Sam Harris

A Buddhist History of the West by David Loy

A History of God by Karen Armstrong

Why I Am Not a Christian by Bertrand Russell

 

 

Hello Blasto,

 

Thanks for the suggested reading, but I don't hear an argument that seems to disprove what I'm asserting. In fact there aren't. Tell me that the Buddhists don't believe that they hold the "true" way, or the Christians, or the Hindus, Taoists, and the list go on. Tell me that they don't hold a passive intolerance for others.

 

In regards to my "dark childhood", I think the irony is that most of my friends are Christians from my "dark childhood". They don't seem to care that I'm gay or that I'm not Christian. I think I've hung out with them the last few weekends in fact. I remember the last conversation we had was about High Virtue and believe it or not, these intolerant Christians said that in the end the concept of high virtue, virtue without moral directive, made sense.

 

My point is that the majority of people practicing religions are unable to be tolerant, because they are unable to accept other people's beliefs as being valid. Your actions here are an excellent example of that. You believe you're right, so you set out to disprove me, by showing me the truth.

 

There is no truth, just what dwells within the minds of men. All of this so called consciousness that's evolved, is nothing more than mans need to complicate the simple. I really find you to be one of the worst offenders in this regard, hence the reason I had you on ignore for so long, and I'm returning you to ignore.

 

I'm not interested in your desire to intellectualize everything. I am not interested in learning the truth about Buddhism, nor Hinduism, or any other -ism. If you had understood the original post, rather than relate it to your own experiences, you'd understand that.

 

Peace be with you, but I really don't want to be a part of your passive insults and apparent ego driven need to diminish others.

 

Aaron

[Otis]

The only question that really matters to me is: how do I choose?

 

Everyone else can have their religion and their nationalism and their fervent beliefs, and that's just the way it is. That's as much how the world is as earthquakes and hurricanes. If I choose to see others as wrong, then I am getting caught up in the same trap that I decry, which is: "I am right, and the rest of you mother f'ers are wrong".

 

That's the issue that I think is important, not what religions teach. It's my need to be right.

 

Personally, I am anti-ism in that I see my personal choice as too sacred, to give it up to authority, method or tradition. That doesn't mean, of course, that religions don't have a great deal to teach me, and I find the most resonance with Zen, Sufism, Yoga, Tantra and Taoism. But they are not "right" any more than any of my other beliefs are. They are merely pointers beyond "right".

 

Likewise, in discussions in these threads, it is vital that I don't cling to my own "rightness" (which includes in it other's "wrongness"), or I will ignore the gifts that others are trying to share with me.

[lifeforce]

Religions = fear and control of the masses.

The way is not to be found in holy books or the preaching of religious 'leaders' and authority figures.

[Encephalon]

Hello Blasto,

 

There is no truth, just what dwells within the minds of men. All of this so called consciousness that's evolved, is nothing more than mans need to complicate the simple. I really find you to be one of the worst offenders in this regard, hence the reason I had you on ignore for so long, and I'm returning you to ignore.

 

I'm not interested in your desire to intellectualize everything. I am not interested in learning the truth about Buddhism, nor Hinduism, or any other -ism. If you had understood the original post, rather than relate it to your own experiences, you'd understand that.

 

Aaron

 

Your tantrums don't bother me, Aaron, although I have to say that any young person with such an appetite for unexamined assumptions and sweeping generalizations is not someone destined to inspire.

 

If cutting edge theories of consciousness are anethema to you, which they evidently are, please feel free to contact the Mind and Life Institute and let the leading scientists in this field know that you've got it all figured out. After all, who in their right mind would ever doubt your exquisitely honed vapidity?

 

http://www.mindandlife.org/

[gendao]

My opinion, especially of late, is that all religions are by nature intolerant. There are many religions that seem to preach tolerance, but in most instances it's always a bit left handed. You hear things like, be tolerant of other people's ignorance. How is this tolerant? It's like saying, "be nice to that person, even if they are ugly." Does that really change the fact you think they're ugly?

Interesting, you mean something like this?

I would just kindly remind you that knowing the truth, doesn't mean you have to press that truth on others. It's okay to allow people to believe they know something and there's absolutely no need to prove them wrong.

Pssttt...BYRON KATIE...

[doc benway]

Hello Folks,

 

My opinion, especially of late, is that all religions are by nature intolerant. There are many religions that seem to preach tolerance, but in most instances it's always a bit left handed. You hear things like, be tolerant of other people's ignorance. How is this tolerant? It's like saying, "be nice to that person, even if they are ugly." Does that really change the fact you think they're ugly? Are you going to be nice enough to ask that person out on a date? I'm not really interested in posting a long thread about this, because I think it's so evident there really doesn't need to be much more said. I would like to hear how other people feel about this, in particular whether they see this as something that's benefiting mankind or hurting it.

 

Aaron

I think you're right on the money with this comment. Religion=tribalism. Humans are inherently tribal - religion, race, geography, politics. Perhaps it has been a survival benefit in the past. Now it tends to be primarily a source of conflict. To teach a particular doctrine is to teach that other doctrines are incorrect. There is inherent polarization and violence in that. Good or bad? That simply depends on your personal perspective. I personally see no end to conflict and violence as long as there is division.

[Jetsun]

I think originally most religions and their customs and rituals were all designed to help harmonise the development of people with the world as they matured, so originally they were in a sense Taoist in that they aimed at the harmonious development of mankind, but they have now been corrupted and fragmented and much of their original intention and wisdom is lost.

[paulno]

I think religion like anything else can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Just as politics can. Just as philosophy can. Just as a steak knife can.

 

I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes here. But, people are quick to label something good or bad very quickly. Whether you believe that religion or spirituality was given to us by a divine source or created by us. It still passes through different hands. Some of these hands want to help people and some want to hurt people. Sad but true.

[ejr1069]

Aaron, I tend to agree with your sentiment that most if not all religions are intolerant and that the dogma of those religions separates rather than unites people. However, I do believe that as more people awaken, we will see a shift in this.

 

For example, I practice Catholicism. It's what I grew up with and it's an avenue that I have already carved out some ways to serve others with. But deep down, I'm more spiritual than Catholic now. I tend to believe that Jesus' original message was probably that of enlightenment, which means that his message takes you to the same place as buddhism, hinduism, yoga, etc. So the people that make up any religion don't necessarily need to be intolerant if they simply let go of the dogma.

[Aaron]

Interesting, you mean something like this?Pssttt...BYRON KATIE...

 

Hello Vortex,

 

Thanks for taking that quote out of context. I don't remember where I insinuated that one should consider someone else ignorant because they don't agree with what I believe to be true. In fact I think I've been consistently advocating the opposite, that even if one believes they know what's true, they should still be compassionate and loving of others. I question how truly spiritually enlightened someone is if they aren't capable of being honestly tolerant of someone else. I know that sounds a bit hypocritical, but again, I'm only questioning their spiritual progress, not denying them their right to be treated with respect and compassion.

 

I also think that with age you'll see that intentionally trying to cause distress or provoking people, is not only childish, but also leads others to view you as being such.

 

Aaron

Edited May 13, 2011 by Twinner

[manitou]

The interesting question to me is....Why does man have this need to question?

 

That seems to be the constant amongst us. It is that urge that we all share in common - it is that urge that may be the Source manifesting and perhaps even understanding Itself.

 

Thinking about it manifesting from the inside of us to the outsides of us, (as per our choice of paths), certainly man's ego needs are going to make him believe that he has the answers. Apparently this is where things get all balled up and intolerant.

 

And, rightfully so, we place tremendous importance on spiritual phenomena when it happens to us - times when we are capable of channeling or feeling the presence of spirit to its most blissful state, or assisting with the healing of another - but sometimes I think those individual spiritual experiences do more to promote intolerance than just about anything else.

 

Because when a person has such an experience, perhaps this is an indication to them that theirs is the only true "right" path to take; whereas in fact regardless of what path we're on, we ALL seem to get these wonderful divine taps on the shoulder and encouragement to continue.