sophiaserpentia | (no subject)

This essay about "New Age Bullying" has been making the rounds on my friend's list for a couple of days now.

I think the author of this list left out the most significant form of new age bullying i've seen: where people tell you to "not let your pain control you."

There's a point in the healing process where you can finally do this. I've experienced it myself -- one day, the pain just doesn't overwhelm you anymore and you wonder how it could ever have controlled you the way it did.

Well, it happens that way because there is so separation between body and mind. An emotional or psychological injury affects the way your nerve cells communicate with one another and the ways your nerve cells react to neuropeptides and neurotransmitters. It takes time to fix this. Recovering from trauma is very much like healing a physical cut. And some injuries of this sort are too deep and big to heal in the space of a single lifetime.

So, while some people find they suddenly have the ability to own their hurt and not be controlled by it anymore, it is wrong for them to then turn around to people who haven't healed yet and demand they snap out of it. To do so is more injurious than simply listening and offering compassion while someone is still healing.

But the article also made me realize i can't hide anymore how much contempt i have developed for almost all spirituality. Every now and then i come across something which is genuinely healing, but most commonly what i see is emotional manipulation, collections of platitudes meant to make us feel better about injustice.

What if people stopped believing there was a big daddy-figure in the sky who was going to punish all the bad guys after they die, a Santa Claus type figure watching everything that happens and keeping a list of everyone who's good and everyone who's bad? Maybe people shouldn't find comfort in this idea. Even if it's true. Because maybe then they would be more moved to seek justice in this life.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

The xians I grew up with did pretty much the same thing, as far as I can recall. "God gave you this to draw you closer to him." is a phrasing I recall.

That whole 'Opiate of the masses' thing works on so many levels - I mean, I've seen LOTS of people do damage to themselves and others that they'd never even think of doing if they weren't all hopped up on religion.

My favorite was somebody I knew who had found a guru that demanded 'Absolute, brutal honesty' - Which basically ment giving his followers free reign to be the biggest assholes possible, while developing a massive persecution complex when nobody wants to talk to them anymore.

Eew, or remember that old nugget: "the Lord never gives you more burdens than you can bear." Um. Yes He does. He SO does. Look around...there's lots and lots of people getting more than they can handle and breaking because of it.

Sounds like a Gurdjieffite.

Oh godz - I know what you mean. I know, and am a "fan" of, a very talented and reasonably well-known creator of what might be termed ambient soundscapes (though they are much more than that). But he is very much of the "brutal honesty before diplomacy" school of verbal interchange, interprets stupidity or incompetence as personal attacks, and has gradually alienated a lot of his supporters and collaborators. He's pretty much broke and has life-threatening health problems, but the sheer obstacles he both creates and imagines for himself mean he has virtually no support network left. Which sucks in the extreme, because he has so much of value to offer, that should have a viable outlet.

I've read a great deal of Gurdjieff, and I have found much that is useful to my own life in his writings. I see nothing there that would automatically cause that sort of negative attitude to arise. Like so many "masters," I suspect it's the followers and disciples that end up warping the teachings and becoming insufferable assholes. See Saul of Tarsus as a good example. :)

You know, many people who examine the question of how ideas like original sin could have become prominent in Christianity come away with the conclusion that people prefer to believe they are responsible for tragedy in some way, over admitting they have no control over it.

But that has never rung true with me -- and now i think the real reason these beliefs became prominent is that it benefits the people in authority for people to believe it. A serf with self-doubt is a serf less likely to question authority. And a minister may not even intend to harm his flock; he may promote this idea just because it seems to make people more placid and peaceful (on the outside).

I heard a story from someone I trust. I don't remember the details. A prominant black Christian preacher with a huge congregation came to a realization that hell was not real. He had a talk with Jesus and Jesus affirmed that there was no hell. He started preaching this new message and mostr of his huge congregation left to go to other churches. So it seems that many people like to believe in hell to punish those who do not follow the rules.

It sounds like you are talking about Bishop Carlton Pearson (http://www.higherd.org/). I heard about his so-called "falling away from the faith" in my former church. I have (thank goodness) become far more open-minded in recent years and now have a lot of respect for him for preaching the truth as he understands it.

I think your assumption about why many people believe in hell is right on the money.

So it seems that many people like to believe in hell to punish those who do not follow the rules.

Since they don't have the guts to break the rules -- or have a serious guilt trip after doing so -- this is their psychological crutch. Its a wonderful way to blow off one's resentment. See Dante's placing of his political enemies in hell, his political friends in purgatory or heaven in the Commedia.

Freedom is a tough row to hoe.