|
|
| Fifi Said:
Hi Dale,
I used to do lots of New Age and Daoist forms of meditation. I just can't get into that mode anymore but I'm feeling the need/desire to meditate. Do you have any recommendations? I've seen several cds on various forms of Christian meditation in SoundsTrue catalog. Some focus on the teachings of Jesus, others on different Saints. I'm assuming you would support the teachings of Jesus over the Saints.
You got me really thinking about your last post. Is it ok to not join a church and worship on my own? (Hence, the meditation)
I didn't want to post a thread that seemed to focus on me but I'm sure the "gang" would be interested in your answer. I'll look for your answer on the board.
Cheers to you ~ Fifi
As a spiritual practice outside of church, meditation is a wonderful thing for a Christian. I would suggest choosing a passage of the bible and asking God to speak to you through that passage. In fact, before your meditation, I would ask Him what to meditate on :-). I usually read over a whole passage, such as a part of the epistles that concern a particular topic, or a story about Jesus, and meditate on that, asking for greater insight into what I read, so that it "comes alive" for me.
And yes, I would for sure recommend the bible over the non-canonical words of the saints, since the bible proper is a supernatural writing, that God uses to talk to and change people. the words of Jesus are a great choice for people who do not want to delve much into theology, and are more concerned with their personal relationship with God, as well as for times that your brain is tired, and you just want to lean back against Him and be loved :-).
As far as church goes, there are natural and supernatural reasons to find a church that works for you and attend regularly. First is that God has given particular spiritual gifts to some folks to use in big church. These gifts are used to build up the congregation, and you are only guaranteed to be served by these gifts in a church. For example, teaching the bible is a supernatural gift that allows the teacher to present the material in such a way that Christians understand it more easily. And preaching is a gift that allows the preacher to more effectively convince Christians to do the right things. If you are not in church, you may miss out on these things.
Next, "from a multiplicity of councillors comes wisdom." If you are in a church, then you can talk Jesus stuff with other christians - the same benefit as we have here with yoga stuff :-). And then ther is fellowship. The Christian life is difficult enough even with brothers & sisters to encourage you, edify you, and love on you - without that help, things would not be as much fun.
And speaking of brothers and sisters, why _wouldn't_ a Christian want to hang out with his spiritual kin? I'd sooner miss a yoga class than church :-). Well, depending on who's preaching that day :-)...
And btw, I am excited that you are getting back into your spiritual practice - it is good to be connected to the Source :-).
Cheers.................Dale |
|
| |
|
| The process that you are describing is not 'christian meditation' but 'contemplative prayer.' contemplative prayer is the process by which we contemplate on a scriptural verse by asking God to reveal that verse to us (New Seeds of Contemplation, Thomas Merton). Contemplative prayer is an amazing practice, and works regardless of which religion one follows. One can open contemplative prayer to any inspirational quote or idea, or even a problem on which the individual needs help or guidence. It is one of the cornerstones of my personal practice--and i contemplate on any number of scriptures, ideas, and personal concerns or issues. I have found this practice to be priceless!
Contemplative prayer is different from meditation. Meditation is the process of calming or stilling the mind for the purpose of clarity and emotional/mental stability. Meditation is important for Christians, as it is an extremely valuable spiritual discipline. The mind that is cluttered or distracted is not as open or ready to engage the world fully, but rather engages the world from a place of behavoiral pattern, habit, cultural ideology, etc. This is often what causes confusion or miscommunication.
The writings of the desert fathers (The Desert Fathers, Thomas Merton), indicates that early christian monastics were most certainly meditators as well as contemplators--among participating in many other spiritual disciplines such as group/corporate worship, intercessory prayer, fasting, etc. The meditation process--regardless of religious origin--is the same. It is the process of taking ones attention to a single point, until the mind becomes still and calm.
many people prefer different kinds of meditation--gazing at a candle; gazing at an image of a diety, saint, or teacher; listening to particular sounds (breath, bells, water, the click of prayer beads, the whispers of other's prayers, the music of birds or the wild world, etc); or even focus on movement--such as the movement of hands when typing, the movement of body when gardening, or the movement of walking.
For most christians, i recommend either candle gazing or gazing at an image of Christ, a saint, or a teacher. many christians do walking meditations of various sorts--consider the meditation labyrinths of France (Chartes Cathedral). The Grace Cathedral in San Francisco has a maze similar to this that is an active part of their church community.
A christian can use a biblical verse or phrase for meditation, if it's used as a mantra--thta is, the individual repeats or holds the verse in the mind to focus the mind on that single point. The process of asking God for guidance on a verse, or asking God to unpack the wisdom of a verse, though, is a distinctly different process that requires a level of thought. Because there is thought involved--a thought process, as opposed to the stilling or calming of the mind process of meditation--this process is not meditation, but in fact contemplative prayer.
I think that both processes are important, and that meditation aids the process of contemplation, among other spiritual disciplines. i think, though, that meditation and contemplation should be understood as and engaged as they are, rather than 'adapted into something else' based on misunderstanding.
my husband says i'm 'splitting hairs' but i consider both practices *so* valuable, and with experience in both i find them *exceptionally different* from each other that i feel it's important to mention the differences so that people can practice accordingly.
(oh, and quakers have an interesting process as well that is distinctly different from contemplative prayer and meditation--a process that they call 'anticipation of the spirit' and is the cornerstone of group worship in nonprogrammed meetings). |
|
| |
|
| oh, and i particularly enjoy the Gospel of Luke. it deals with the Christ of Social Justice (as i see it). there is more emphasis on how to treat people, how women were considered equals to christ, and a myriad of other morsels that feed my little spirit.  |
|
| |
|
| And speaking of brothers and sisters, why _wouldn't_ a Christian want to hang out with his spiritual kin? I'd sooner miss a yoga class than church :-). Well, depending on who's preaching that day.
Well, i've had difficulty with this. Consider your statements to me in the other post stream. PResumedly, since i claim to be christian, you and i would be spiritual 'kin.' and yet, when i begin to share my spiritual practices, insights and expriences, i get told 'you're not a christian' and 'you're a heretic' and 'it's my job to correct people who are wrong.' why would i want to 'hang out with' people like this?
For the most part, it is incredibly difficult for me to find true 'spiritual kin.' i do have a number of friends like me, and my husband and i do attend the quaker meeting on sunday. These are people who do not treat me like many churches do--my experience of God via christianity or any other faith practice is just as valid as their own, regardless of whether it matches a person's personal theology.
I do attend mass at a small convent once a week (usually on tuesday or wednesday mornings no less, before teaching) where they also hear my sacrimental confession (my primary confession is not officially sacrimental because it's over the phone, but it's still legally protected). My husband does not attend and the sisters do not ask me about what i believe because we all have to go to work following. I have had times when i have worked with and for the sisters (they run a homeless men's shelter and AIDS clinic), but again they haven't thought to ask me what i believe about the resurrected christ or whether or not i think incarnation theology (that of greek orthodox) makes more or as much sense as the resurrection theology (catholic and it's protestants), whether or not i think the concept of mary as coredemtrix is madness or it could function within the mythos structure, or whether or not i think durga rules. It is a peaceful place for me where worship and works of faith come together beautifully.
In general, though, it is difficult for me to go to and participate in most 'mainstream' churches. Catholic churches in my area are largely culture--most people dont' know wht they believe or they aren't christian at all (that is, they dont' believe in what the church teaches, but they go because 'we're italian!" and their familial lives revolve around cultural traditions that exist in the church). Protestant churches have the same problems in many cases, and in other cases they are so far gone from what i see as the reality of Christ (fundamentalist churches--even though they have the foundation right there and i do consider them 'valid faith practices') that i cannot consider either of these groups "spiritual kin." and in participating in workshop with them and striving to participate in the larger community with them, i get the same response from them that you gave me in the other thread.
Why would i want to hang around with people who tell me that i'm wrong, that they're right--when they're no closer to God than I am, and in many cases, just found christianity yesterday? It is not that these people are not children of God witha valuable faith experience that is worthy of sharing. Certainly, i value people's understandings and expression (via religious practices) of christ.
But for me, i find more value in my yoga community, in my quaker meeting, and among the friends that i have gathered as my 'spiritual kin.' And yes, i love to hang out with them. But they're not traditional in any sense of the word--and many of them are not christian--and there i'm not judged or chastised if i don't follow a certain interpretation of a certain text--canonical or not, and neither are they judged for being buddhist, hindu, humanist/atheist, or whatever else.
i think that group practice/worship is important, but finding your 'place' is a difficult task.
|
|
| |
|
| elson - 2005-08-16 3:08 AM
#1
as well as for times that your brain is tired, and you just want to lean back against Him and be loved :-).
#2
And speaking of brothers and sisters, why _wouldn't_ a Christian want to hang out with his spiritual kin? I'd sooner miss a yoga class than church :-). Well, depending on who's preaching that day :-)...
Cheers.................Dale
Big yes to #1.
As for #2 - I've found (many) Christians to be self-righteously hypnotized by their beliefs that they sound so stupid repeating what their other Christian buddies told them to think and say. I get bored with them. I find you and Zoe interesting. You two write interesting things in a non-self-righteous way.
True, I haven't met every single Christian person so this is a sweeping judgement on my part. I find that people who practice yoga are better read, well traveled and just plain old interesting. I see the people in yoga class as bright and shiney and the people at Church dull and fuzzy.
That's my confession. Awful, I know. Ok, let me have it!  |
|
| |
|
| it's not aweful to speak the truth of your experience. i've had similar experiences--in churches and in yoga studios/classes. not everyone is well read or spiritually driven, and that's ok too, i guess. i feel like 'they don't know what they're missing!" and it's true, they don't know, so i guess it doesn't bother them. I would know what i was missing and i get bothered when i'm missing it!
this is why i feel really lucky to have found the friends meeting that we found. Friends (quakers) come in three kinds: evangelical, christocentric, and universalist. The evangelical quaker is probably the 'most christian' in that they focus predominently on christian texts and christian perspectives to engage the divine. They are very liberal, though, as compared to most other groups of christians, having no set dogma. christocentric quakers use the touchstone of christianity as their first source, and also look to other religions and information to inform their spiritual practices. the third group is much more 'anything goes' and many of the people who participate in these meetsing may even be athiest, but drawn to the message of peace and social justice that quakerism espouses.
our meeting is christocentric. The forum meetings are really great. we read books--any sort of book--and often in the discussions we talk about various topics--things that struck us in the readings, how it relates to a bible verse or story of jesus or just personal experience. Ideas get tossed around, drawn out, chewed up, and we get no where, which is great. There's not supposed to be answers, just more questions.
meeting for worship is a particular jewel. i'm lucky that i live in an area full of unprogrammed meetings. there is no minister or leader who leads the service. it simply begins with the clerk calls the meeting to begin. At 10 on sunday, everyone enters the meeting room, faces each other (benches are set in a square), and then enters the anticipitory space where we wait for God to guide our practice, our meeting that day. Some times, the meeting is an hour of silence. Other times, the meeting is filled with words of encouragement or calls to action or whatever else. Quakers say what they feel compelled to say in a meeting, what they feel God is leading them to say. Everyone is considered a minister, with equal access to truth.
It's an amazing and dynamic practice. It's definately worth checking out. |
|
| |
|
| Zoebird said >> The process that you are describing is not 'christian meditation' but 'contemplative prayer.'
True, true :-). I agree that there is an important distinction here, and I was blurring the two practices. Thanks for mentioning it!
ok, pardon me if I ramble, but i want to think thru this.... Single-point meditation on religiously-neutral, or more precisely, Xtn-neutral items - breath, candle - has all of thebenefits of meditation for the Xtn, and no religious downside that I can think of.
btw, I highly value single-point meditation, and wish I had the good sense to do more of it :-). We ought to open a thread on cool experienced having to do with meditation - except for OBEs :-).
I personally would not use scripture as a mantra-style meditation, out of respect for the informational nature of the bible, but that is a personal thing that I wouldn't urge anyone to follow.
Now we come to an interesting Catholic/Protestant difference - the whole "adoration of an image" vs "idol worship" debate. I think that your advice to Fifi about meditating on an image of Jesus or an inspiring Saint is great for a Catholic - it fits in nicely with using an image to increase our adoration of God. Nice insight :-).
For Reformed Protestants, even trying to visualise God is idolatry. To us, the command against idolatry isn't about other God - there are other laws about that - but about building any kind of physical or mental image of God, and rendering worship unto that. The spiritual problem is that the image is a product of our imagination, not the Truth found in the bible. So - I would advise a Xtn to skip the image_of_God meditation, and go straight to a meditation on God Himself, using His attributes or actions to define Him, instead of some conception of how He looks.
So would that be a meditation, to nonverbally dwell upon the attributes or actions of God?
Cheers..................Dale |
|
| |
|
| >> Well, i've had difficulty with this. Consider your statements to me in the other post stream. PResumedly, since i claim to be christian, you and i would be spiritual 'kin.' and yet, when i begin to share my spiritual practices, insights and expriences, i get told 'you're not a christian' and 'you're a heretic' and 'it's my job to correct people who are wrong.' why would i want to 'hang out with' people like this?
Very well said!! When you deal with confessing churches (RCC, Reformed, Greek Orthodox, Baptist), your beliefs are heretical - that's just a fact, like the folks that you mention who don't agree with what the church teaches.
And yet it is difficult for you to go & participate in worship with people who have no idea what they believe. You don't say why exactly, but I think that you are not satisfied with _playing_ church; that you want to encounter God head-on & full-contact.
And your relationships in the groups you can join are shallow and unsatisfying, because you basically have a different religion. I have some sympathy for that (long story).
But let's look at the underlying theological conflict, since that is what is causing the problems. Specifically, let's look at the idea that Krishna or Durga is God and that Jesus is God also. I want to pose two questions:
1) Many people have what you refer to as a "valuable faith experience." But not all of these experiences agree. Islamics say that only Allah is God. Jews say that only G-D is God, and Allah ain't Him. Islamics reciprocate. Christians come in & say that Allah isn't God, YHWH is, and oh yeah, there's also Jesus and the Holy Spirit, which both Islam and Judeaism rejects. And so it goes... Buddhists have a religion that is totally contradictory to the other three, but claim that their holy dudes are actually enlightened sages who are totally down with Buddhism.
So how do we account for these different faiths & the different faith experiences of their adherents? Unless we go down the absurd path of relativism, we have to conclude that some of these faiths are bogus, and the faith experiences of those worshippers has somehow been misinterpreted.
Now let's talk about experiences for awhile :-). Most people who have a religious experience are pretty certain about what happened and what it means. After all - they were there, right? But if you ask witnesses to a wreck or a crime, many of them will tell contradictory or confused stories. The bottom line is that even though I experience something, I may not be able to correctly interpret it, or even remember it accurately.
Experiences don't interpret themselves. Let's imagine that I get sick. My experience is of being sick. But what if I think that God was waiting for a chance to punish me for some past sin? Then perhaps I will interpret the illness as a punishment from God. And so I think that I have experienced God punishing someone. And perhaps a doctor, seeing my sickness, believes that a germ has caused my illness? Then he will experience a man being sickened by a micro-organism.
So we can conclude that a person may be able to remember and report what he saw/heard/felt/etc during an experience, but that he may have the meaning of the experience wrong.
So, how do you know the meaning of your faith experiences?
Wow - it's a bit later than I planned -- later!
|
|
| |
|
| Very well said!! When you deal with confessing churches (RCC, Reformed, Greek Orthodox, Baptist), your beliefs are heretical - that's just a fact, like the folks that you mention who don't agree with what the church teaches.
yet, i'm actually active in the RCC--i go to mass weekly, i go to confession weekly (it's actually two confessions--one that's mine and one that's sacrimental), and i work with catholic nuns after the mass that i go to (not always, though, because sometimes i have to go and teach or have other obligations). I have not *ever* had a priest or nun tell me that i was heretic or not christian. They've councelled me to continue my studies, to think carefully, to consider various elements of church history or doctrine. They've given me direction in accessing spiritual disciplines.
my problem has not been with the church as a structure or entity, or with the clergy telling me that i was wrong, bad, not christian, or heretical. I have encountered this in Assembly of God, pentecostal chruches, various bapist strains, various bible churches and fundamentalist strains, methodists, and presbyterians. I have heard these accusations from pastors, lay people, and your average church go-er.
And yet it is difficult for you to go & participate in worship with people who have no idea what they believe. You don't say why exactly, but I think that you are not satisfied with _playing_ church; that you want to encounter God head-on & full-contact.
I think that this is a fair assessment. i have no interest in pretending and going to church for looks or because it's the right thing to do. I want to have an experience of God in a group setting, where all of us are moving into that sacred space. This is why i go to mass with the sisters once a week. They are there 'for real' and not because of any cultural notion. There is also a small, conservative church that i occassionally go to near one of my work places. they have an afternoon mass that is also small (it's a daily mass) and usually during lent and advent, i go to mass every day with this community (well, six days since one of them i'm with the sisters). There are many lay people in this church, as well as clergy and sisters, who have not ever told me that i'm not a christian, that i'm a heretic, and that they need to correct me when i'm wrong. in my experience, this only comes from protestant religious people.
And your relationships in the groups you can join are shallow and unsatisfying, because you basically have a different religion. I have some sympathy for that (long story).
actually, in the groups that i have joined, i do not have shallow relationships. those individuals in the quaker meeting are good friends--with whom i spend time during the week, whom i support in various ways depending upon my time (a lot of them have various social justice projects and often need helpers, and i'm always willing to help out when i have the time), and with whom i participate in a discussion forum and in group worship.
as for the two catholic communities, i also feel fine there. i have a good relationship with the sisters--and always have. they are missionaries of charity (mother theresa's nuns) and i've been volunteering with them since i was 14. i started when i lived in arkansas. there was a brief hiatus while in college, as there were no MCs there--but i participated in other charitable activities. When i moved into this area, i began to work with them again--and i even worked with them while i was in africa on student-exchange. I often attended vespers with them, and occassionally attended daily mass with them (over the summers, for example). I've always felt at home with this community. . .and even considered joining the order myself. There is an option to join as a 'lay member' but as yet i haven't felt the need to do so. I've always felt comfortable and accepted here, always asked the sisters for their perspective and shared my own, and i've never been told i wasn't christian, that i was a heretic, or that they needed to correct me.
the same is true of the small, conservative catholic community that i participate in. one of the women whom i teach is a member of this community and told me about it. she's been an amazing friend and confidante in many ways--and she's my mother's age. Not once has she told me tht i was not christian, that i was a heretic, and that i needed correcting. Instead, she's invited me to join her community, i've been invited to teach yoga and meditation to the sisters and brothers who are related to the community, as well as the retirement community that they run, and i've been fully embraced for my own talents and knowledge. This priest also hears my confession (usually prior to mass during those times when i go to mass every day). Not once have any of these people told me that i was wrong, bad, or whatever else.
I don't feel fine at larger catholic churches that are filled largely with 'cultural catholics' because i do not believe that they're actually worshipping. I do not feel comfortable in most protestant strains because of my experience with people constantly telling me that i'm a heretic or not christian. and quite frankly, there are often large, theological differences. the biggest stumblling block for me between catholic and protestants is the issue of transubstantiation and the eucharist. i feel that without this, people are missing out. Certainly, i agree that they should believe and workship as they see fit, and honestly, they don't know what they're missing--so that's ok too. I find the process and the practice to be incredibly beautiful and valuable, and i refuse to take communion in any other community. It drives my MIL nuts. She invited that pastor to dinner once to talk to me about it. I explained my thoughts on communion vs the eucharist, and why i didn't participate. He also told me that i wasn't a christian, that i was wrong, and whatever else. (they are UCC.)
So how do we account for these different faiths & the different faith experiences of their adherents? Unless we go down the absurd path of relativism, we have to conclude that some of these faiths are bogus, and the faith experiences of those worshippers has somehow been misinterpreted.
instead of relativism, lets consider integration, or at the very least, commonalities. It seems to me that religions have the following things in common:
1. spiritual disciplines by which we experience the divine or ultimate reality (prayer, meditation, scriptural study, group worship, works of faith or service, etc);
2. a cosmology or mythology that describes the divine and what experiences of the divine will be if one is appropriately practicing spiritual disciplines and succeeding in that practice;
3. a literary catelogue that describes both disciplines and cosmology, as well as philosophy and practical application of the knowledge gained through spiritual discipline;
4. cultural elements that are unique to the locations and origins of the religions as well as cultural elements that are changed or added if the religion has moved from it's origin culture.
it has been my experience that religions share a lot of things in common beyond these basic elements:
1. while each religion may prize one spiritual discipline over another, such as buddhism prefering meditation and islam prefering prayer and christianity prefering group worship or scriptural study, most religions embrace as many spiritual disciplines as possible and are willing to embrace the spiritual disciplines of other cultures or areas or religions as the religion moves into that area;
2. while each religion uses different descriptions for their cosmologies--largely based on cultural experience--the cosmologies themselves do not really differ that much in mythos structure and what those archetypes are pointing to in a larger spiritual spectrum. In this way, it is easy to see how the story or idea of krishna compares to the story or idea of christ. It is easy to see how this buddhist teaching matches that jewish teaching.
3. while the disciplines and cosmologies may be different, in most cases the philosophies that come out of them are the same--the universal ideas of treating people with compassion and kindness, of being slow to anger, of acting out of righteousness and not out of negative patterns and behavoirs, of seeking ways to end suffering for oneself and others, etc.
4. cultural elements are largely fluid if the religion itself is teaching the above elements--so elements thta are cultural that have perspectives that change over time or over space/location (such as the treatment of women) can be left behind or changed while keeping the truth and spirit of the teachings alive.
And here is the part that is largely different:
1. language;
2. description of cosmology and mythos usually greatly impacted by physical and cultural environment (in hinduism, for example, many things are lush because much of india is lush, and yet in judaism, we see a great deal about deserts and oasis because that is their environmental experience);
3. dress codes, cultural codes of conduct that are community specific (such as mosaic law vs the various japanese laws related to samuri as an example), and other cultural elements thta are part of the 'practical, day-to-day' running of communities--though out of this, cultural principles can be gleaned and then applied across cultures and religions.
The fact is, most religions are really about 95% the same, and in this, about 95% true. What Islam calls Allah (which simply means "god" in arabic), what Jews call G-d (or YHWH), or what christians call god (generally God or the Holy Trinity), are all the same entity or truth being described in different ways through different languages. Similarly, what Buddhists call no-thing, what hindus call durga or krishna or whomever, is the same idea or entity that a christian or jew or muslim calls upon. They are simply different languages and cosmologies to explain the same idea.
The remaining 5% is generally various bunks--cultural garbage that managed not to get weeded out, misunderstandings and confusions between groups (language barriers), fundamentalist or exclusivist attitudes, teachings that have gone awry (such as the violence teachings coming out of religious fundamentalist groups), etc.
In this way, then, God is revealing himself to all peoples at all times--everyone in every religion, by practicing spiritual disciplines is having an experience of God or Ultimate Reality (or wahtever other language you want to attach to it). Out of this, and their environmental and cultural experience, comes a cosmology and the interpretation of that cosmology via philosophy and practical application (often the larger part of the literary catelogue). Because humans are fallable, because not all is revealed or understood at once, because of influences from environment and culture, not everything that is taught is univerally applicable or necessarily a 'factual' or 'valid' teaching. This is where we run into the 'bunk' of religions, the 'untruths.'
It is simply not appropriate to say "Christians got it right; all other religions are not true." it simply doesn't make sense. Why would God, who created all people, only speak to one people? And if God wasn't speaking to these people, why would their philosophy, their cosmologies, and their spiritual disciplines to access these things be virtually the same as those of another religion?
The issue isn't "it's all relative" but a larger picture of 'what might god be doing and how?' and then from this, how can i learn from the experiences of another group? how can these inform what i know and understand abotu god, the universe, and everything (42)? how can these inform my disciplines which give me head-on access to God anytime i engage in them? How can these inform what i learn or recieve through these disciplines? how can they help explain what is going on? What aspects of my own religion/practices are unique to me (not universal) and therefore likely 'bunk?' what aspects are of a religion that don't make sense--and why don't they make sense on a larger, unversal scale? if they don't, are they 'bunk' or 'untruths?'
I think that you may find Joseph Cambell's Hero With 1,000 Faces to be an engaging and itneresting text on this matter. As well as some good old jungian theory regarding archetypes and their personal and cultural importance.
Again, i've shared all of these ideas with my roman catholic friends and confessors, as well as my quaker friends and other friends--and not one of them has called me a heretic, not a christian, or that they needed to correct me. I do not believe that any one person or religion has cornered the market on truth or experience of the divine.
Also, because i think this way, this does not mean that i think everyone should think this way or that a person who believes in only one religion is necessarily wrong. there is a great benefit to looking to only one path and only following one path. But, there is also benefit in doing the comparative practice and striving to engage God without names or structures or preconcieved ideas (even though this is virtually impossible, which is why i like the idea of Durga and Kali--destroyer of ignorance and destroyer of illusion, because i want these two things destroyed in me so that i can engage the divine in all of it's parts, imminent and transcendent, with full awareness). Others prefer structures and this helps them to 'keep on track' or whatever else. I value that about them. I do not value when they tell me that they know everything (and therefore need to correct me) and i know nothing (and therefore i'm not really engaged with God or the real God).
So we can conclude that a person may be able to remember and report what he saw/heard/felt/etc during an experience, but that he may have the meaning of the experience wrong.
So, how do you know the meaning of your faith experiences?
This is why the process of scriptural study, confession, and group participation is so important. There are people who have had these experiences before. THey often wrote it down--using allegories or metaphors to explain what they experienced and how they experienced it.
in many ways, religions function in this way. Here is the discipline. This is how you do the discipline. If you are doing the discipline correctly, you will understand this idea, gain this wisdom, and/or behave in these ways. If you are not doing the discipline correctly, you will likely be frustrated. If you are doing the discipline correctly and you do not get this result, there are likely many reasons, two of which are this: 1. the truth that the discipline was trying to lead you to was false for wahtever reason (usually cultural or interpretative); 2. the truth that the discipline draws out is true, but it isn't as you understood it before going into it, and/or it isn't the same interpretation that those in your community got--but another community of the same religion might have found the same result as you from the discipline; among others options.
So, by having a wisdom tradition, by having access to a variety of literature and experience, by having an experienced teacher or councellor (via pastor or priest, via confession or larger church service, etc), and by having a community that has people with various experiences of the divine within a given structure/religion, one can 'test' their experience against this wisdom.
the most common problem that isee people having is this concept of "i prayed and prayed and God never answered! therefore, there is no god!" But, whta i've learned is that very few people even know how to pray--most aren't taught in this modern age, regardless of the church or community--and so how can they know if they were praying properly? disciplines have a methodology, the methodology bears out to a result--like a scientific experiment.
consider the scientist who sees Einstien's tests for his theories. That scientist says "was einstein right? i'll run his experiment.' the scientist then follows einstein's methodology and gets an opposing or different result. Was einstien wrong? Usually, the first thing that the scientist will do is check his methodology--did i get the method right? let me try again, this time being more careful. Usually, after getting the method right, the scientist will arrive at einstein's results--therefore, einstein 'was right.' Change the method slightly, and you get a different result--but why change the method? a scientist knows that there's must be a reason to change a method--it's to achieve a different end. That's why methods are developed.
spiritual disciplines are the methods of spiritual experimentation to determine truths. generally, they'll all point to each other--even if they do come from different languages or cultures. This is how one can look to durga and see 'ah, true!' and look to jesus and say "ah! true!" and look to allah (and he has many names in islam too) and say "ah! true!" and look to buddhist thought and say "ah! true!" because they are all describing the same thing in different ways.
|
|
| |
|
| re: meditation practices for christians
I personally would not use scripture as a mantra-style meditation, out of respect for the informational nature of the bible, but that is a personal thing that I wouldn't urge anyone to follow.
This is not my process either, personally. Though, there are many christians who do this. THe process of gregorian chant, for example, is not only musical but meant to be meditative. it is usually a scripture or based on scripture--a long stream or scripture--to focus the mind. I find it hard to single out a single verse and then repeat it, mantra style, personally, but i have done well with extended readings of scriptures and the like. Also, many catholics use this process during the rosary, though i believe that the rosary's intent is to be prayerful--with a contemplative element, an intercessory element, a worship-prayer element, and a myriad of others throughout the sequence. Personally, i use it in a contemplative sense, rather than a meditative sense, but it can be used either way.
Now we come to an interesting Catholic/Protestant difference - the whole "adoration of an image" vs "idol worship" debate. I think that your advice to Fifi about meditating on an image of Jesus or an inspiring Saint is great for a Catholic - it fits in nicely with using an image to increase our adoration of God. Nice insight :-).
For Reformed Protestants, even trying to visualise God is idolatry. To us, the command against idolatry isn't about other God - there are other laws about that - but about building any kind of physical or mental image of God, and rendering worship unto that. The spiritual problem is that the image is a product of our imagination, not the Truth found in the bible. So - I would advise a Xtn to skip the image_of_God meditation, and go straight to a meditation on God Himself, using His attributes or actions to define Him, instead of some conception of how He looks.
i think the debate is interesting, and largely based on miscommunication or misunderstanding. Art depictions of God, saints, and so on are not considered or adored as god or the person in and of themselves, but rather are artistic representations of their attributes which we then engage at a different level, mentaly/psychologically, than we do reading or holding a word or idea (such as wisdom). Wisdom may be depicted by a book, or an animal like an owl in the image, or something of this sort, so when gazing upon the image, we're actually engaging ideas, and not an image itself--or seeing the image as God.
similarly, most christian communities--protestant or not--use various iconic representations of God--doves, flames, crosses, lilies, lambs, etc. i have been to many types of christian churches and seen these artistic representations of God--with the understanding that they are not god within themselves, but are instead representations of God. I think that christian artwork that depicts a face of Jesus, a teacher, or a saint or whatever else, is in a similar vein. i have been to many protestant churches who also use drawings of a person of christ with his apostles, etc in their literature, in paintings aruond the facilities, and in children's books. There is a sense that representations of christ are appropriate, if they are teaching tools and not understood as being the person of christ himself.
Since art depicts attributes--and is a representation, not a reality of christ--i see no reason why a reform protestant can't use an artistic representation of christ as a meditative tool. To look on an image of jesus with the rainbow of light coming from his heart is generally understood to be a representation of the heart of Jesus, the immensity of his love. To meditate on this is the same as to meditate on a representation i saw at a local church--a heart in the center of a cross. I have seen people use this as a representation of their faith in Jesus--wearing it around their necks, on their clothing, and depicted throughout their homes. For me, there's very little difference.
Though, i truly understand the issue of worshipping an image. The concept of meditating using an image and worshipping an image are two different things. Similarly, people often misunderstand the catholic perspective of their art pieces, which are located throughout their churches. They are there to represent, to remind, to inspire about the larger attributes of God, not to be exact representations or to be God, as he is and fully present.
To meditation on the attributes of something i think would be difficult. HOw does one hold in one's mind the idea of wisdom? a representation is much easier--perhaps holding the image of a flame in one's mind. or perhaps looking at such a representation outside of the person--in a picture. I think that holding an idea is difficult, but if one can do it, i dn't see how it would not be meditation. |
|
| |
|
| you both have made good arguments as far the Religous goes. I am new here and I found your thread. I am a christian who pracitces yoga or starting to.
I just wanted to say thanks for having such a deep thread
Ash |
|
| |
|
| Hi Ash,
Welcome to the forum! What kind of yoga do you practice in Dugway, Utah? Where is Dugway? I've only been to S. Utah (Brice, St. George, Cedar City) and it's incredibly beautiful. I've thought about relocating there. Who knows, I still might! Just out of curiousity are you LDS? Sorry for the stereotype "oh, you're from Utah so you must be Mormon". My neighbors are very strict Mormons; they also truly practice what they preach and they are the kindest people. I'm lucky to live next to them. Anyway, if you are LDS I'd be interested in your experience with the LDS church and your yoga practice - do you get any flak from the elders? Do you practice yoga on the downlow? My Mormon neighbors have a 5 y.o. daughter and she & I do yoga whenever she comes over. She loves it but her mom is afraid she's going to break in half!
Sorry for the long-winded paragraph that might not even apply to you. Anyway, I agree with you that it is interesting to read well written and thoughtful (full of thinking) commentaries on Christianity.
Hello to Dale - haven't heard from you in a while.... |
|
| |
|
| Hi Fifi,
No I am not LDS, its funny though you should ask me what denonation I am. By the Dugway is a known as Dugway Proving Grounds, its an Army base 45 miles west of Tooele, and 85 Miles Southwest from Salt Lake City. Well anyway I am Chaplin's Assistant in the Army, and am very familiar with most arguments about Religious issues. I am actually non-Denomination(dont know if i spelled that right oopss) I took up Yoga this last year on more seriously than in the past years. I used to strecth breathe that sorta thing, but now have am taking it up more seriously. I took a class for about a month in Colorado, it was a combo class of Yoga and Pilliates. I got myself a book as well a dvd, and am watching Inhale with Steve Ross on the Oxygen Channel. Also about LDS, I have found that they vary in what done and said just like anyother Faith group that Judeo-Christian. I normally do my home practice in the moring, and I start my day with good Bible Study and Prayer, then ask the Lord to be with me while practice my yoga, I try to do all things as unto the Lord, not that I am perfect or anything like that. If anything God has taught me through my practice to be less judgemental and practice love more. Anyway Yoga practice is good for Kids, I work with Kids mostly Preschool and its good for them to move. Well have to go for now.
Ash |
|
| |
|
|
I used to do lots of New Age and Daoist forms of meditation. I just can't get into that mode anymore but I'm feeling the need/desire to meditate. Do you have any recommendations?
Try:
"Centering Prayer and Inner Awakening" by Cynthia Bourgeault.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1561012629/qid=1125159382/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-3516180-8047923?v=glance&s=books
|
|
| |
|
| Thanks, nthomrob, I'll check it out ~ |
|
| |
|
| Zoebird,
I just wanted to thank you for your insightful posts. It really makes me want to sit down with you over a cup of coffee and talk about all these things. I am a Christian and was raised Catholic but with the divorce of my parents and me living with my mother, I then attended Lutheran churches and eventually Baptist, non denominational, etc.
I have recently found yoga and meditation after a really bad addiction experience and it has made all the difference. But as with anything that you come to love, you want to learn more about it. And through talking with others and reading some I find that there are many similarities between faiths. And this amazes me because of all I have been taught over the years. On the one hand, this really excites me, the idea of reincarnation, the practice of the eight limbs of yoga (to name a few) facinate me. On the other hand, I am really scared. One of the reasons I believe in Christ is of course my upbringing, but I also love to call him my God because he was here, on earth, and I feel like he personally knows what I go through and can understand my struggles. My faith has always been important to me and the idea of losing it, or somehow hurting Christ because of my questions, scares me. And yet, I find myself compelled to go "out of the box" to find what God really is and how He is perceived through the eyes of different cultures, faiths, etc
I have always had a problem with "my way is the only way and the rest of you are going to hell" mentality. How can this be? I wonder if somehow the Bible has been misinterpreted and I wonder what Jesus really meant when he said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, No one comes to the Father but by me". Maybe he really meant that in order to get to God, you must do the things that I did, strive to be more like me.
Anyway, I just wanted to say thank you for sharing. It is nice to know I am not alone.
Robin |
|
| |
|
| Hi Zoebird,
I am so disappointed; my post got swallowed into cyberspace. However I will try to write it again. I wanted to thank you Zoebird for your insightful words. I have been a Christian all my life beginning with baptism into the Catholic church and when my parents were divorced, we attended a Lutheran church, then Baptist, non-denominational, etc. I have recently found yoga and meditation after a terrible addiction and have found it to make all the difference to me. As with anything you come to love, you want to learn more about it. And this has led me to some study of the yogic lifestyle, hinduism, buddhism, etc. And most of all, how this can relate to my Christian faith.
While the study of the 8 limbs of yoga, reincarnation and the similarities of the stories of Krishna and Christ facinate me, they also scare me. On the one hand, I love to see how God is viewed through the eyes of different cultures and faiths and how those views can help me in my own experience with God. On the other, I have a very real fear of losing my faith or hurting Christ in some way by my questions. The reason I came to believe in Christ is of course because of my upbringing, but the reason I choose to call him my God is because He was here, on earth, and dealt with many of the same issues we have to deal with, so I feel He understands me. My faith is important to me and I would never want to do anything to damage it. However, I am compelled to take God "out of the box" or the confines of the Bible and my upbringing to experience Him in the fullest way possible.
The mentality of "my way is right and all the rest of you are going to Hell" never has seemed right to me. I know Jesus said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one comes to the Father but by me" But what did he really mean by this statement? Could it be that we are to be like Christ, do the things he did, care like he did, follow what he said?
Anyway, I am off to church And have just finished my yoga lol. But I wanted to thank you for your words and comparisons of the different faiths. It really made sense to me and makes me want to sit down with you and a cup of coffee to talk about it!
Namaste,
Robin |
|
| |
|
Expert Yogi
Posts: 2479
  
Location: A Blue State | Firefly - 2005-08-28 10:04 AM
On the other, I have a very real fear of losing my faith or hurting Christ in some way by my questions.
One thing that you should have confidence in is the fact that Christ himself could never
be hurt by your questions. He would love you for your acceptance of him -- and even
without your acceptance of him. Read Corinthians I:13 --
1 If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
2 If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
3 If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.
4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
5 It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
8 Love never falls. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.
9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part,
10 but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
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 childish ways behind me.
12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
In the KJV, verse 12 says "For now we see through a glass, darkly:" The above is from
the NIV, which I like in this case for its use of "love" rather in place of "charity".
Anyway, Christ is love, and he will love you despite your questions.
Om nama Sivaya,
BG
|
|
| |
|
| Firefly WROTE
"I have always had a problem with "my way is the only way and the rest of you are going to hell" mentality. How can this be? I wonder if somehow the Bible has been misinterpreted and I wonder what Jesus really meant when he said, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, No one comes to the Father but by me". Maybe he really meant that in order to get to God, you must do the things that I did, strive to be more like me. "
>>>
Yogananda ( WWW.SELFREALIZATION.ORG)
explained this verse in details in his book SECOND COMING OF CHRIST. Christ was one with God and his consciousness was universal as God is Universal. Christ claimed I am one with Him. He also said, before Abraham was, I am.
So, it is true that Chrsit is the way but not in physical body but in spritual oneness with God. When, he was one with Him, he couldmake that claim.
Once, we start seeing Chrsit as one with God, we can see why what he said could be said for ohter religion. Krishna in Gita made the same proclaimation as he was one with God.
|
|
| |
Christian Meditation
