Orthodoxy And The Religion Of The Future

[Teres]

I grew up in an Orthodox Christian household, in predominantly Orthodox Christian country. I can share some superficial, yet interesting observations about the religion in it's socio-political role in relation to the other denominations. I wont go deep into theology here.

Orthodoxy is the most dogmatic denomination of all, it is preserved to this day in it's form it was in since it's foundation. In it's structure, liturgical rites, architecture, modus operandi in a society. Yet, it has never been authoritarian, like Catholicism. Orthodoxy does not have a vicar of Christ who could, if he had decided as in the past, exercise inquisition or excommunicate an individual or a ruler of a state with any serious consequences in order to weaken his social and political image, given that communities back then have been deeply religious. De facto there's not a single religious head who matters to all members of the church, since the religious body is decentralized and divided into autocephalous institutions. There's the Greek church, the Bulgarian one, the Russian church and so forth, to not name them all. The ecumenical patriarch is literally nobody. He's not even a religious head of Greece to my knowledge.

Contrary to the dogmatic odor and image of the church, I have noticed the following tendency - the people who consider themselves Orthodox Christians, at least those I know and they are not just few - pretty much most of the people I know - usually approach the matters of the faith..I'm gonna be frank here - hypocritically. One may not really believe but just wish there is a God, but his or her socio-political views about the church's stance to be very firm. Pragmatism, somehow, ends up co-existing with dogmatism. Holding hands at dinner and saying thanks for it, for example, is something I've never seen people doing. Here comes the accumulation of cultural layers in the Orthodox countries and the role the church has played in some cases for their preservation. Sort of a sacred chest with treasures of tradition you may not find much use for, but you know you have to preserve it, sometimes zealously if the climate requires it. No need for examples here.

To an Orthodox Christian, those scenes of people singing prayers with futuristic beats as a background, and a guy at the front with a microphone, all clapping and dancing, these are rather comical from Orthodox point of view. Interestingly, people in such gatherings may really believe what they're singing, yet the whole thing does not come across as..right. Keep in mind, that's nothing. Even the emergence of the Catholic church is rather a historical incident, according to the Orthodox one.

I think many people in the western world do not realize how different things really are. If a person wants to get in touch with Orthodoxy, and s/he has never entered an Orthodox temple, first s/he should pay a visit to see and feel how things are. Reading a book how someone had discovered the religion, I believe, wont be as impactful as some may assume.
I certainly can share a lot more stuff, but I decide not to flood the thread with my fist comment in it.

All best to all of you

 

[Blossom]

Thank you @Teres.

 

[sweetpeat]

I grew up in an Orthodox Christian household, in predominantly Orthodox Christian country. I can share some superficial, yet interesting observations about the religion in it's socio-political role in relation to the other denominations. I wont go deep into theology here.

Orthodoxy is the most dogmatic denomination of all, it is preserved to this day in it's form it was in since it's foundation. In it's structure, liturgical rites, architecture, modus operandi in a society. Yet, it has never been authoritarian, like Catholicism. Orthodoxy does not have a vicar of Christ who could, if he had decided as in the past, exercise inquisition or excommunicate an individual or a ruler of a state with any serious consequences in order to weaken his social and political image, given that communities back then have been deeply religious. De facto there's not a single religious head who matters to all members of the church, since the religious body is decentralized and divided into autocephalous institutions. There's the Greek church, the Bulgarian one, the Russian church and so forth, to not name them all. The ecumenical patriarch is literally nobody. He's not even a religious head of Greece to my knowledge.

Contrary to the dogmatic odor and image of the church, I have noticed the following tendency - the people who consider themselves Orthodox Christians, at least those I know and they are not just few - pretty much most of the people I know - usually approach the matters of the faith..I'm gonna be frank here - hypocritically. One may not really believe but just wish there is a God, but his or her socio-political views about the church's stance to be very firm. Pragmatism, somehow, ends up co-existing with dogmatism. Holding hands at dinner and saying thanks for it, for example, is something I've never seen people doing. Here comes the accumulation of cultural layers in the Orthodox countries and the role the church has played in some cases for their preservation. Sort of a sacred chest with treasures of tradition you may not find much use for, but you know you have to preserve it, sometimes zealously if the climate requires it. No need for examples here.

To an Orthodox Christian, those scenes of people singing prayers with futuristic beats as a background, and a guy at the front with a microphone, all clapping and dancing, these are rather comical from Orthodox point of view. Interestingly, people in such gatherings may really believe what they're singing, yet the whole thing does not come across as..right. Keep in mind, that's nothing. Even the emergence of the Catholic church is rather a historical incident, according to the Orthodox one.

I think many people in the western world do not realize how different things really are. If a person wants to get in touch with Orthodoxy, and s/he has never entered an Orthodox temple, first s/he should pay a visit to see and feel how things are. Reading a book how someone had discovered the religion, I believe, wont be as impactful as some may assume.
I certainly can share a lot more stuff, but I decide not to flood the thread with my fist comment in it.

All best to all of you

Thank you for sharing. I confess to not knowing much about Orthodoxy, but you make me curious to learn more.

 

[Inaut]

@Teres Great post.
I myself was born into the faith but never really appreciated it or took the time to dig deeper as a youth. It was more of chore. ... It seems as though I was/am one of those hypocrits as you plainly identified. Just recently have I had a change in me to re-connect. Still lots of work to do.....

Please expand further as I'd like this thread to progress and evolve into discussion of concepts of Orthodoxy and Theology, not only Seraphim's writings.

 

[TheSir]

You know, I've been wondering why I felt so guided to go on my little wordy mystical rampage the past day or so, and I suspect your question is why. Sometimes the figurative angels work like that in our lives, don't you think? We don't even know why we feel drawn to something until it suddenly becomes abundantly clear.

Three caveats here:

1 - This has the potential to derail the thread much further than I already have. I've previously tried to keep this somewhat on topic, but there's no way to talk about the dangers of diving deep into the pool of spiritual practice, and all the little subtopics that might bring up, and still make this about Seraphim and my experience with Christianity, so if @Inaut prefers it, and there's enough interest, I'll copy and paste my replies from here and gladly start my own separate thread.

2 - Offering blanket spiritual advice on the internet can be bad juju. There's a karmic weight here that I don't want. Remember, I'm not someone who believes all my sins are automatically absolved, so thus I already feel a little guilty for getting on my heretical horse and attempting to drag the Christians in this thread behind me. (I'll flagellate myself later, don't worry Christians!) That said, I want to do what's right, and the truth is I do feel I have something to offer, however meager, towards someone who's embarking on their own spiritual quest.

3 - As U.G. Krishnamurti said, "Don't follow me. I am lost." ... Or as he would otherwise say, "Get lost. And stay lost." You decide.

Onto your question. Yes and no. Not every spiritual seeker will go through a Kundalini awakening, or even have any mystical / energy experience whatsoever. You can go through a deeply rich and fulfilling spiritual life while adhering to "good deeds, good thoughts, and good words" and never have a hiccup in the spiritual danger zone, die in your sleep at a ripe old age, and go gracefully to a higher realm (or Heaven, if your prefer.) And that's basically what I recommend to most everyone.

That said, it just kind of *happens* for a lot of spiritual seekers, regardless of the specifics of your faith. Especially if you start abstaining from orgasm. Especially if you are ill or have an vata / pitta energy imbalance. (Kapha types, you could basically throw Shaktiput at them and they might not feel a freaking thing.) Here's the thing: when you walk a balanced path of good deeds, good thoughts, good words, and you develop adamantine faith and start praying or meditating (or whatever practice you chose), the whole process is so much smoother and gradual. Where people run into trouble is diving head first into intensive spiritual practice, especially without a teacher or friend who knows the way out of whatever hurdles you might face.

Point in case: I can't tell you how many people run into Kundalini problems and are given the worst freaking advice. It's all over the internet. Non-Orthodox Hindu circles are particularly corrupt in this regard, but psuedo-Sikh organizations like 3HO and "kundalini yoga" circles are just as bad. Vajrayana Buddhist circles can be helpful, but they are so secretive in what they actually do and believe, that if you're already in kundalini crisis, there's nothing they will do for you. And the systems of medicine that historically knew how to deal with Kundalini imbalances (or other serious energy imbalances, such as Qi Gong Deviation) are basically dead. Ayurveda has been so bastardized even in India it basically is incapable of helping anyone with anything. Chinese Medicine: same thing, maybe even more bastardized since Mao systemized everything that was good about Classical Chinese Medicine. Tibetan Medicine (which is really just an offshoot of Ayurveda) you basically have to go to Dharamshala to get the real deal. So it's just the blind leading the blind everywhere you turn. My point: don't seek a Kundalini awakening.

Now, belief system wise, most Hindu and Vajrayana schools would say that some form of sexual energy transmutation is a requirement on the path, at least at the highest level. I'd take all that with a grain of salt, tbh. To my knowledge, nothing in the Pali Canon had much to say on the topic, and that's perhaps because the Theravadist path is very gradual and guided in a specific way to prevent those kind of problems. For instance, the noble eightfold path doesn't start with meditating in a cave, living off two grains of rice, until you reach samadhi. The first step is: "Have the right view, dumbo." and the Second is: "Learn the right resolve, you lazy bum." Then: "Stop lying, you hypocrite." Then: "Stop doing bad ***t, you doer of inequity." etc. etc. Eventually culminating in the practice of intense meditation using concentration, leading to blissful altered states of consciousness called the "jhanas." So you see, you don't start sitting under the Bodhi tree with the intention to fast for 40 days. You start by studying and knowing your stuff. Then you build up the nerve to walk the path you've chosen. Then you stop lying and stop doing bad crap to your family and neighbors, etc. Then you start developing the capacity to love others, starting with stray kittens and going all the way to your worst enemies, etc. This is all really important, and one of the MAIN THINGS the New Age paths eschew: they forget that you are ONLY as safe as your virtue and wisdom. Be a nasty little creepy person and start seriously meditating: win nasty, creepy prizes. Be an ignorant person: win ignorant prizes.

As to WHAT Kundalini is: It's just a part of our spiritual physiology, one way of thinking about it is as the nervous system of our soul. I've previously mentioned that plenty of Catholic and Orthodox saints have a long documented experience with kundalini awakenings, so rest assured my Christian friendos, there's nothing inherently demonic about the experience.

But I will reiterate: It's NOT something you should seek out. It's supposed to happen organically, the very way it did for those early Christian saints. Your Bhakti (devotion) guides you, and if it happens, it happens, and hopefully you've got a gigantic storehouse of merit to draw upon when times get scary.

Remember that Virtue IS the path. The stoics got that very right. Accumulate merit and be the best kind of person you can be, and if that means you need the support of faith in a loving creator God: go for it. Everyone needs something different. Just like orange juice might be too acidic for someone's stomach, and perfect for another, everyone has to find the path that suits their own temperament.

Unless you are planning on entering a monastic community of some kind, I highly suggest walking the middle path in whatever tradition you chose. If you aren't a monk, then you're a defacto householder, and should behave like one to have the richest, safest life you can: worship in balance with earning money, raising a family, and bettering society in ways that are aligned with your values. That is all part of the spiritual path, despite its seeming lack of mystical enchantments.

Leave the deep end of the spiritual pool to the monastics. And if that's a path you seek, look for the best orthodox community you can find, just like Seraphim did.

-----

A quick note on Kundalini Crisis, simply for the posterity of google searchers who come across this post, just because I'm so sick of the bad info I see everywhere online.

The first rule of Kundalini Crisis: stop whatever the hell you were doing that set it off, get off the computer, and start walking and talking and rejoin society on any level you can, and abandon the spiritual path you were on (for a while). The second rule: eat mostly red meat. Kundalini stops on very low carb (perhaps even just a purely carnivore diet.) It probably won't need to be forever, even a few days of carnivore can help reset the flow of Kundalini. Message me if you are in crisis, and if I'm still around this forum, I will try and help.

Thank you, this is very reassuring. I am worried over the significance you place on abstaining from orgasm regarding spontaneous kundalini, since I have been pursuing celibacy with varying degrees of commitment for the last 10 years -- and more seriously in the past two years. That being said, pursuing celibacy has clearly already kicked off a process of some kind, as if a foundation was being laid for... something. Something that is currently hard to define. There has been a constant evolution in my worldview, and a change of priorities. I feel increasingly detached from the physical world, as if I was operating my body from a location beyond this world. I feel increased pressure to exercise responsibility over my thoughts and actions, and to pursue balanced and symmetric posture. It's a relief to hear how potent a safeguard virtue is against all that could go wrong on this path, I am very much driven towards virtuous and righteous living more so than grand and flashy spiritual experiences (I'm not sure if my psyche could withstand those in the first place, I already feel like I am bordering uncomfortably close to insanity at times). While I'm fine with progressing slowly rather than fast, at the same time though, it seems that the worldly existence has little else to offer than deep inwardly focused practice. The notion of gnosis rings quite true. How could I receive salvation if I don't even know who I am in the most fundamental level? I'm conflicted with how large part all of this should play in my life. In some sense, I see why it should be my whole life. The notion seems scary, yet also, right.

 

[LUH 3417]

No, you are not crazy. Your faith is a beautiful thing that should be cherished and protected. <3

@opson123 are you saying faith is nonsense?

 

[Blossom]

My Orthodox friend recommended this book. I’ve been very slowly reading through it for a couple months @Inaut.

 

[Teres]

@Inaut

When I said that the Orthodox Christians approach the faith with hypocrisy, I did not frame it accusingly although a monk would call it so; just conditionally. In south-eastern Europe, Orthodoxy's stronghold apart from Russia, the religion has played key role in preserving several ethnic groups who lived in the same state, the Ottoman empire is such an example. Formally groups have been divided by religion, not by ethnicity, although the state has been very ethnically diverse. And in order to preserve the numerous peoples under the rule of a theocratic sultanate, Orthodoxy has been handy and potent force. A political one in revolutionary sense, with a preservation role so to affirm the foundations for the development of the nation-states in the region, after the various ethnic groups gain independence. See, the Catholic world has been free, went trough centuries of gradual development and eventually conquered most of the world. The Ottoman-held portion of the Orthodox world, namely south-eastern Europe, Armenia and some regions in the middle east, along with the peoples populating them, have not experienced the renaissance and the age of enlightenment the west did. They have had different matters to deal with. This has dictated the dynamics of the relations between the clergy and the people, the first being the main driving force behind a substantive and peculiar form of national revival, the second being the tool to carry out the task. And although revolutionary and nationalist networks have been established prior the turbulent events in 19-th century, it has been difficult if not impossible to spot a line between the Orthodox clergy and regular people. It hasn't been uncommon to see a monk with a musket on his shoulder back then, at some places. So, instead of talking about separation of church and state, in Ottoman-held south-eastern Europe the clergy have been the ideological shield for securing the eventual emergence of nation-states. Fundamentally different dynamics of social and political development.

Still following? All of a sudden we have the most dogmatic Christian denomination functioning not just as religious institution, but also a political force which have not opposed in any way the secular development of the newly formed states. Also often serving as logistical bases and places freedom fighters gather. Yes, a bit strange. The strict dogmatism remains in the way the church operates inside, but it happens to not be authoritarian in relation to her members. Here, I think, is rooted the reason behind the way Orthodox Christians relate to the church. She has never been an authority to be opposed, never provided a reason to happen so, and she has never tried to strictly regulate the way people live other than serving as their ideological spine in the face of [conditionally said] oppressing, infidel foe.

 

[Gone Peating]

What’s more logical:

That there’s a benevolent, omnipotent God who lets children be raped to death, because, “Hey, it’s nothing compared to the bliss of heaven! You won’t even remember all that suffering. So no worries brah! You’ll be justified in paradise! Beaches are sick here. Surfs up! Cowabunga!”

Or

There is no benevolent omnipotent being.

Please note, I’m not saying there isn’t a god. Just that he can’t be wholly benevolent AND omnipotent.

I’d rather Christians be honest with themselves and just accept one of two cold, hard facts:

Either who you are calling God is a misguided ****head (this is the Gnostic view you’re quick to dismiss, i.e. - the demiurge ...and btw is kind of the Buddhist view, too) or God doesn’t exist in the way you think he does.

I’m too tired to refute some other points you made, but the above point is the most important anyway.

You sound like a good Christian though. The world could use more of those. So...Same team! Same team! I promise.

You are mistaking what you believe or want or think to be true for what is most logical. You cannot logically reason about whether a Being that transcends our physical universe (including human logic) exists or not. Whether a transcendent God exists or not depends entirely upon that being revealed to us.

I provided you with a valid reason for why momentary suffering in our fleeting world is not enough to reject the existence of a benevolent God that exists eternally and also wants to draw us into this existence. In order for us to experience this existence consciously and not as mere dolls WE HAVE TO CHOOSE IT. And because we have free will, we often choose to go off the royal path, and there are obvious consequences for this. Also, if you want, there are arguments much better than I can think up that various theologians have come to realize.

"I'm too tried to refute some other points you made." That's funny. You weren't too tired to fill up the other pages of this thread with your ranting, but when it actually comes time to think critically you are suddenly too tired.

 

[opson123]

@opson123 are you saying faith is nonsense?

No I'm not. Faith is a really powerful thing.

 

[Lollipop2]

In order for us to experience this existence consciously and not as mere dolls WE HAVE TO CHOOSE IT. And because we have free will, we often choose to go off the royal path, and there are obvious consequences for this.

Question...so those young children are willing choosing the horrific experiences they have? At six years old they contemplate that: ”I will choose suffering now for all my life because I know when I die, I will be rewarded in Heaven?” How can any rational mind believe this to be true? Like kidnapping, forced child slavery, forced sex slave? Help me understand this choice young children have made. I have yet to find anyone who can address this. Your arguments have not - especially the choice part.

 

[Terma]

You can always start over assuming you're Data, or on the spiritual level of an animal, and that we don't know our past. That way you don't fear the process of discovery of what you really are. It takes a fall, I've given up quickly resigned to "new age" philosophy from tv shows more than anything esoteric and in 3 words it's fulfilling your potential, however close to godhood that takes you or not. Remember: Spider-man. The point of being agnostic isn't tearing down meaning, it's not proceeding through experience in fear of loss of imaginary reward and worse. I don't want to admonish individuals practicing religions anymore, just keep in mind you pass this stuff to your kids, if I'm any indication friendly warning it's going to backfire on some of you and my fun is imagining those futures. I also imagine the future where someone I know reads this and this post destroys my family, in case you think that was joke. Otherwise from these posts I'm happy enough knowing I'm more or less not alone. Cheers

 

[TheSir]

Whether a transcendent God exists or not depends entirely upon that being revealed to us.

I may be misinterpreting, but isn't this a silly thing to say? Why (and how) would the existence of God depend on whether or not we are given a glimpse of him? Were I to ask you "if God exists but no one is there to witness him, does God still exits?", would your answer be no?

 

[Inaut]

For those interested

 

[orangeUglad]

Mainly for those interested in Christianity and it’s battle with the Occult/New Age religion that we are being indoctrinated into (opinion of mine as a disclaimer).
Not looking to have a religious/spiritual debate on what’s true/false but I recently read this book by an Orthodox Father named Seraphim Rose (he was a convert in the later part of his life). This dude went through a lot of eastern religions and occult practices in his life early life until finding his way to orthodox Christianity. He was even a student of Alan Watt in the early 60s. This book really resonated with me as it ties in with my own experiences and thoughts in my younger days when I also was interested in the occult and eastern mysticism.

For those that have read Constance Cumbey’s The Hidden Dangers of The Rainbow, this book was regarded as an inspiration for her.

I know there will be some on this forum that will be triggered simply by the words religion or Christianity so for you, please ignore this post. For anybody else interested , check it out. Really worth a read.

Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by Seraphim Rose

Thanks to this post planting a seed in my head and then stumbling upon videos talking about the dangers of New Age I've found my way out of this web I've been (unknowingly) trapped in for several years. I can hardly describe what I am feeling right now...it truly feels like chains have been taken off my hands and feet. I didn't even know I was trapped. There's so much more potential in my life I didn't even know could exist. Praise my Lord I am so grateful to be a daughter of the King.

 

[orangeUglad]

Mainly for those interested in Christianity and it’s battle with the Occult/New Age religion that we are being indoctrinated into (opinion of mine as a disclaimer).
Not looking to have a religious/spiritual debate on what’s true/false but I recently read this book by an Orthodox Father named Seraphim Rose (he was a convert in the later part of his life). This dude went through a lot of eastern religions and occult practices in his life early life until finding his way to orthodox Christianity. He was even a student of Alan Watt in the early 60s. This book really resonated with me as it ties in with my own experiences and thoughts in my younger days when I also was interested in the occult and eastern mysticism.

For those that have read Constance Cumbey’s The Hidden Dangers of The Rainbow, this book was regarded as an inspiration for her.

I know there will be some on this forum that will be triggered simply by the words religion or Christianity so for you, please ignore this post. For anybody else interested , check it out. Really worth a read.

Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future by Seraphim Rose

Would you say the King James bible is the version of the bible that has been tinkered with the least?

 

[orangeUglad]

 

[charlie]

Praise my Lord I am so grateful to be a daughter of the King.

Amen Amen Amen!

Would you say the King James bible is the version of the bible that has been tinkered with the least?

It's the best Bible we have. Bullinger's companion bible is as good as it gets for commentary.

Keep in mind in the front of the King James they wrote a letter to us basically saying they are human and could have made some errors, and they did. Like "fear the Lord" should read "revere the Lord" in a lot of places. But it is still the best we got.

 

[Recoen]

I like the Orthodox study Bible.

 

[Inaut]

Thanks to this post planting a seed in my head and then stumbling upon videos talking about the dangers of New Age I've found my way out of this web I've been (unknowingly) trapped in for several years. I can hardly describe what I am feeling right now...it truly feels like chains have been taken off my hands and feet. I didn't even know I was trapped. There's so much more potential in my life I didn't even know could exist. Praise my Lord I am so grateful to be a daughter of the King.

I feel much the same and I’m glad to hear this :)