Religion of Fear?

[Enema]

"Religion of Fear"

 

I've heard this phrase used a number of times in relation to different religions, especially Christianity.

 

It refers to keeping people dedicated to the religion by having some practice or consequence that scares them away from leaving. With Christianity, the fear component is hell: If you don't do what we say and be a good Christian, you'll go to hell and be in eternal pain.

 

I came across an even better "Fear Mechanism" last night. My wife mentioned that her mother (asian, buddhist) was pressuring her to go to temple to "feed" the ancestors (leave food at the altar), because if you don't feed them; your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents etc will starve in the afterlife.

 

So, this mechanism is different than the christian "You'll pay if you don't" by appealing to your sense of family protectiveness and saying "They'll pay if you don't".

 

So, 2 questions!

 

1) Does anyone else know of other religion's "fear mechanisms"?

2) Is there another way religions keep people hooked?

[headlesschicken]

i don't know of any other religion's fear messages, but i do know another way religions keep people ensnared: the promise of enlightenment, the promise of seeing dead loved ones again after death, the promise of eternal recompense for earthly suffering, the promise of everlasting wonderfulness in heaven, the promise of being reincarnated as a better, higher, smarter, more enlightened person, etc.

 

so....empty promises? yup. sounds about right.

[Mahatma]

The only two religions I really know about are Christianity and Buddhism.

 

If you decide to be a Christian, and then one day decide to try to leave you go to hell.

 

Buddhism is a little harder to find the confines... But if you do not follow the path, you do not reach enlightenment.

 

I personally think Christianity is the most fear-based religion.

 

But is that actually because of the religion itself? Or the people who are deciphering it? I think the latter.

 

If you look at America in general, we are probably one of the most fear-based people as well.

 

Look at our media. It is all about what we are doing wrong, what is going wrong, and what will probably go wrong.

 

All we hear about is the murder rate, cancers, burglaries, suicide bombings in a country that has nothing to even do with us and is none of our business, terrorist attempts on America, swine flu I mean damn the list goes on and on and on and on.

 

Go to Britain and turn on the news. Go to Canada. The media isn't near as much bad stuff going on.

 

Americans respond to, and are blinded by, fear.

[TaraMaiden]

I have often heard that Buddhism first of all is not a religion but a philosophy, and I have also heard it referred to as being pessimistic and depressing, because the first Noble truth is that,

"Life is suffering/Stressful/unsatisfactory."

 

You really need to go a bit deeper than that to see this is definitely not so!

 

Also, for many Asians, Buddhism is combined with superstition and tradition, so, Enema, I can understand how your wife's relatives may be pressurising her to appease her ancestors, but this is not prevalent thinking in Buddhism at all, and not representative.

However, I believe that the factor of no god, really makes application much simpler in many ways.

But in others, a lot more difficult.

I would certainly never change religion for anything, I am very happy now, as a Buddhist. Much more so than when I practised Catholicism. Now, if you want to discuss control....!

 

 

_/l\_

[Jake Barnes]

I am very happy now, as a Buddhist. Much more so than when I practised Catholicism. Now, if you want to discuss control....!

 

 

_/l\_

The Virgin Mary is going to impale you on a spit and slow roast you like a rotisserie chicken forever and ever

[TaraMaiden]

Amen!

 

Oh sorry.... old habits are hard to give up!

 

_/l\_

[marlena]

I personally think Christianity is the most fear-based religion.

 

 

This is the major contention I have with any organized religion that incorporates a punitive system into its tenets. As much as I need the comfort of believing that we are more than just transient organisms on this planet, I simply can not subscribe to a religion that pokes a wagging finger in your face and demands that you behave in a certain way OR ELSE...It's this OR ELSE that bugs me to no end as I am by nature very belligerent and rebell at authority when it is forced upon me.

 

The concept of hell and Satan, the boogey man waiting to throw you into an abysmall pit of fire is ludicrous and insulting to human intelligence. I simply can't understand people who fall for this BS.

 

Many on here often refer to Islam and its 40 virgins but I find this no different from the concept of heaven and Saint Peter standing at the Pearly Gates.

 

Even budhism, through the threat of karma, incorporates the concept of punishment. It seems like there is no way to get away from it. All religions are based in morality and the consequences of upholding that morality or defying it. No thanks, I say. I'd rather have my own code of morality and not worry about the consequences in some after life. The consequences are in the here and now.

[Mahatma]

I have often heard that Buddhism first of all is not a religion but a philosophy, and I have also heard it referred to as being pessimistic and depressing, because the first Noble truth is that,

"Life is suffering/Stressful/unsatisfactory."

 

Buddhists do not consider Buddhism to be a religion, however it takes the place of one in my opinion.

 

And the first Noble Truth that "life is suffering" is not there to be pessimistic at all. In fact, it is there to be quite the opposite. The truth is there because people tend to be pessimistic themselves and think anything bad that happens to them is just unfair, however it is not the case.

 

So sure, on the outside it may seem pessimistic, but to anyone who learns to meaning to the phrase it is the opposite.

[Mahatma]

Even budhism, through the threat of karma, incorporates the concept of punishment. ]

 

Karma is not punishment.

 

Karma is more of a form of attraction of circumstances.

 

Karma is not "do bad things and bad things happen."

 

Karma has more to do with your mind and your thoughts and what you draw to your person.

[marlena]

Karma is not punishment.

 

Karma is more of a form of attraction of circumstances.

 

Karma is not "do bad things and bad things happen."

 

Karma has more to do with your mind and your thoughts and what you draw to your person.

 

I was under the impression that amassing bad karma in this life had a negative impact on your next life, that you somehow pay for your "sins" when you come back to life in a new, reincarnated form.

 

Is this not true?

[TaraMaiden]

Kamma is a process.

 

In fact, it's Kamma-vipaka.... We need to distinguish between Kamma and Kamma-vipaka.

Kamma just means action. Kamma-vipaka ( literally the " fruit" of Kamma) is the result of action as experienced by the one who acts. Kamma-vipaka can be experienced as positive or negative.

 

According to the Buddha only intentional, willful action results in Kamma- vipaka.

 

So good intentional actions have good consequences.

bad intentional actions have bad consequences.

 

The bad actions of a previous life can have results either in the last life or this one.

The bad actions of this life can have results either in this one or the next.

 

But the more good actions you carry out, the more likely you are to be able to cancel out (or work through) negative kamma...

 

But there is no 'paying for sins... Buddhists do not consider sins, because there is not God to whom we are accountable.... no confession. No guilt.

Regret, yes.

Remose, yes.

Apologise, (where possible) and move on.....

 

I hope this is helpful to you.

 

_/l\_

[marlena]

Kamma-vipaka can be experienced as positive or negative.

 

 

So, the moral dichotomy good/bad which is at the core of most religions is a central concept in Budhism as well. Christians call it "sin'. Budhists call it bad "karma". Christianity holds that the consequences of bad actions will result in eternal damnation. Budhism holds the belief that bad actions will have bad consequences in a subsequent life. Either way you pay. You reap what you sow whether in the fires of hell or in a reincarnated state of existence.

 

But the more good actions you carry out, the more likely you are to be able to cancel out (or work through) negative kamma...

 

The idea of atonement is also present in both religions. Christians repent to achieve salvation in the hereafter, Buddhists make up for their bad actions by counteracting them with good actions in the hope of a better after life as well. Is there really much of a difference?

 

You say that Buddhists are not accountable to a god. Are they not accountable to the laws of Buddha? I mean, who defines the concepts of "good" and "bad" in Buddhism? Who ascertains whether a person has amassed "good" or "bad" karma? Who or what gets to judge a person's actions and whether or not he/she has to suffer the consequences of these actions in his/her next life? Who passes judgement?

 

The way I see it all religion has a moral framework. There is no escaping it. Both Buddhism and Christianity believe that a person will suffer the consequences of his actions in a life after dying. This is the OR ELSE concept I was talking about. I do believe in consequences but it is the law of man and not the law of god that will inflict them on me.

 

However, yes, if I had to choose between the two, I would definitely go with Buddhism. Like Mahatma said, it is less based in fear. At least there is no hell and little red demons with horns and a club foot gleefully waiting to toss you into the eternal fire of damnation! Buddhism is kinder and more I think anthropocentric.

[knaveman]

Karma doesn't necessarily carry over only to your next life. You can and do reap the results of karma in your present life as well.

[TaraMaiden]

So, the moral dichotomy good/bad which is at the core of most religions is a central concept in Budhism as well.

yes, but it is relative. Due to personal perception. we evaluate what we see as bad or as good. nobody else does. It is all a personal assessment....

Christians call it "sin'. Budhists call it bad "karma". Christianity holds that the consequences of bad actions will result in eternal damnation. Budhism holds the belief that bad actions will have bad consequences in a subsequent life. Either way you pay. You reap what you sow whether in the fires of hell or in a reincarnated state of existence.

 

Yes, but you reap the consequences of 'bad' and 'good' IN THE SAME PLACE....

 

The idea of atonement is also present in both religions. Christians repent to achieve salvation in the hereafter, Buddhists make up for their bad actions by counteracting them with good actions in the hope of a better after life as well. Is there really much of a difference?

 

Yes.

AS Americans say, we get a second 'pop'. Christians believe it's either one or the other, with no second opportunity to put things right.

 

You say that Buddhists are not accountable to a god. Are they not accountable to the laws of Buddha?

No. Buddha does not have 'Laws'. The Eightfold path and the Five precepts are descriptions of wise ways to behave. Whether we follow these ways or not, is up to us.

 

I mean, who defines the concepts of "good" and "bad" in Buddhism?

We do.

Who ascertains whether a person has amassed "good" or "bad" karma?

Time will tell...

 

Who or what gets to judge a person's actions and whether or not he/she has to suffer the consequences of these actions in his/her next life? Who passes judgement?

Nobody but us. There is no judgement, other than the one we exercise over our own thinking, speech and action. We accumulate experience over time, think/say/do more and more "good", less and less "bad"... in the end, we work through the negative Kamma, attain realisation and enlightenment....

 

The way I see it all religion has a moral framework. There is no escaping it. Both Buddhism and Christianity believe that a person will suffer the consequences of his actions in a life after dying.

no, we also reap the consequences while living....

 

This is the OR ELSE concept I was talking about. I do believe in consequences but it is the law of man and not the law of god that will inflict them on me.

Tell me about this Law of Man....

 

However, yes, if I had to choose between the two, I would definitely go with Buddhism. Like Mahatma said, it is less based in fear. At least there is no hell and little red demons with horns and a club foot gleefully waiting to toss you into the eternal fire of damnation! Buddhism is kinder and more I think anthropocentric.

The Four Noble truths, The Noble eightfold path and the Five precepts are truly all we need as moral guidance. I have been Buddhist for a good time now, and in all my years as a Catholic, nothing ever sustained me, taught me, helped me, guided me or made me as blissfully happy as these basic teachings. Because you see, once i decided to take full, complete and total final responsibility for everything that I think, I say and I do, I find that I need to keep on my toes more.

It's harder to look in the mirror and say: it is all down to you, everything is up to you now, instead of 'I give it all up to Jesus'. It's a lot easier to live with Jesus than it is to face up to things and live with yourself....

 

Just my view and opinion.

 

_/l\_

[marlena]

It's harder to look in the mirror and say: it is all down to you, everything is up to you now, instead of 'I give it all up to Jesus'. It's a lot easier to live with Jesus than it is to face up to things and live with yourself....

 

 

This is the law of man I was referring to. I have my own moral code, not one that was dictated to me by some man who came down a mountain with stone slabs or whatever, and I am accountable to myself and myself only.

[TaraMaiden]

Yes, you are accountable to yourself and yourself alone.

It's a huge responsibility though, isn't it?

 

 

_/l\_

[marlena]

Yes, you are accountable to yourself and yourself alone.

It's a huge responsibility though, isn't it?

 

 

Yes, it is but that does not frighten me in the least. I know how to be strict with myself but I also know how to be kind, too.

[TaraMaiden]

I see so many Christians being unnecessarily harsh with themselves.... so uptight, so severe, so critical.

 

I wish there was some way of getting through to them to relax!!

[Eve]

 

I didnt know that. I have never been to a Buddist Temple. Learn something new everyday and all that.

 

Do they have services or is it a case that each individual can come and visit the idols whenever they so choose? Its ok if you do not know the answers, I can Google the question. Never thought about what goes off in a Buddist Temple before.

 

Take care,

Eve xx

[disgracian]

Even budhism, through the threat of karma, incorporates the concept of punishment. It seems like there is no way to get away from it.

Aside from your misunderstanding of karma, what exactly is your problem with punishment? I can understand having a beef with unjust, arbitrary or excessive punishment, but it seems like you're not making that distinction and are railing against the idea of actions having consequences.

No thanks, I say. I'd rather have my own code of morality and not worry about the consequences in some after life. The consequences are in the here and now.

What does having your own code of morality have to do with the afterlife, or anything else that you've said?

 

Cheers,

D.

[Bluebird In My Heart]

Raised Catholic.

 

Enough said.

 

 

 

 

 

.

[FleshNBones]

"Religion of Fear"

 

I've heard this phrase used a number of times in relation to different religions, especially Christianity.

 

It refers to keeping people dedicated to the religion by having some practice or consequence that scares them away from leaving. With Christianity, the fear component is hell: If you don't do what we say and be a good Christian, you'll go to hell and be in eternal pain.

You weren't converted by the sword, or punished with death for abandoning the faith. I just don't see Jesus cutting down deviants with lightening bolts. If your parents, and family in general are pressuring you, then they probably aren't doing it out of fear.

 

I came across an even better "Fear Mechanism" last night. My wife mentioned that her mother (asian, buddhist) was pressuring her to go to temple to "feed" the ancestors (leave food at the altar), because if you don't feed them; your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents etc will starve in the afterlife.

 

So, this mechanism is different than the christian "You'll pay if you don't" by appealing to your sense of family protectiveness and saying "They'll pay if you don't".

Fascinating. So the disceased side of her family will get hungry. It is not like they would starve to death. But still, I do not see the fear mechanism. Parents feed their children out of love, and not fear (assuming they aren't sadistic).

So, 2 questions!

 

1) Does anyone else know of other religion's "fear mechanisms"?

2) Is there another way religions keep people hooked?

Hooked suggests that it is an addiction, and an almost involuntary action. In my case, it is a conscious and informed choice.

 

I guess a better question would be, why am I loyal?

There is an element of faith. I actually believe it. I think all of the talk about "proof" is just a red herring.

There is also an element of hope. There will be a better tomorrow.

[TaraMaiden]

 

I didnt know that. I have never been to a Buddist Temple. Learn something new everyday and all that.

This is absolutely not typical of other Buddhist temples.

As I tried to point out earlier, these rituals are actually a combination of Buddhism, superstition, tradition and a form of shamanism.... If one is talking about the central practise, in Buddhism there are no such things as ancestors, and making offerings to the dead. The dead do not exist....

Buddhists might remember those who have dies, but they certainly do not have extreme rituals or ceremonies of this kind in the majoriy of schools.

 

Do they have services or is it a case that each individual can come and visit the idols whenever they so choose? Its ok if you do not know the answers, I can Google the question. Never thought about what goes off in a Buddist Temple before.

 

Take care,

Eve xx

Buddhist temples are a place where people may come to sit in quiet contemplation, and according to whichever school or tradition you follow, you either do this when you wish, or perhaps if it is permitted (or a Buddhist festival day) join the ordained monks in meditation and practice.

Monks will often gather to recite passages of the suttas, and venerate the Buddha, Dhamma and the sangha, but there are no 'services' as such.

There are also Dhamma sessions where members of the public may attend to be taught the Buddha's teachings.

His suttas are still learned by rote by his monks....

So the tradition of learning the teachings by heart is as prominent and important today as it was in the Buddha's day.... And all in Pali....

This is why the suttas seem to be tedious and repetititve.... but first, it brings the message home, then also, it is easier to memorise, when you have to repeat the same thing ovwer and over again.

 

here is an example of a topical sutta, you will see what I mean....

 

_/l\_

[marlena]

Aside from your misunderstanding of karma, what exactly is your problem with punishment? I can understand having a beef with unjust, arbitrary or excessive punishment, but it seems like you're not making that distinction and are railing against the idea of actions having consequences.

 

 

You are right. I do not like the concept of punishment especially when it is imposed by a system of religion. I accept that my actions have consequences, all actions do, action and effect, I do not deny that but rather than be punished for my actions that society/religion may think harmful,I would rather my failings/imperfections be pointed out, understood and if possible forgiven. This is the only way I could improve as a human being.

 

What does having your own code of morality have to do with the afterlife, or anything else that you've said?

 

 

My own code of morality has nothing to do with the afterlife as I don't believe in the afterlife. Hell and heaven are right here where I stand. And I will have to bear the consequences of my actions in the here and now.

[Eve]

1) Does anyone else know of other religion's "fear mechanisms"?

2) Is there another way religions keep people hooked?

 

A few definitions of fear..

 

be afraid or feel anxious or apprehensive about a possible or probable situation or event; "I fear she might get aggressive"

be afraid or scared of; be frightened of; "I fear the winters in Moscow"; "We should not fear the Communists!"

be sorry; used to introduce an unpleasant statement; "I fear I won't make it to your wedding party"

an emotion experienced in anticipation of some specific pain or danger (usually accompanied by a desire to flee or fight)

be uneasy or apprehensive about; "I fear the results of the final exams"

concern: an anxious feeling; "care had aged him"; "they hushed it up out of fear of public reaction"

reverence: regard with feelings of respect and reverence; consider hallowed or exalted or be in awe of; "Fear God as your father"; "We venerate genius"

a feeling of profound respect for someone or something; "the fear of God"; "the Chinese reverence for the dead"; "the French treat food with gentle reverence"; "his respect for the law bordered on veneration"

wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

 

I understand the fear of God as an act of reverence, not a paralysing type of fear. I would say that there is a definate difference.

 

I will have to check a few things regarding TMs post about the superstition/mysthical aspect of Buddism before responding further to the point you made about the idols etc.

 

Do you think that the irreligious have less fear? I think the irreligious have more fear.

 

Take care,

Eve xx