[Gem]

Originally Posted by blossomingtree

Please kindly enlighten me as to what you mean by basic structure

Name, discourse, symbols/iconography, ritual.

Disagree on that point....... Let's talk about Yoga - yoga encourages discipline, practice, deepening of spiritual awareness. In what way does that discourage free thinking?

I didn't think yoga was a religion, and I think it's a great balance of mind/body/spirit.

Buddhism. Buddhism starts with the premise - know for yourself. That is, take this body of knowledge and apply/utilize it until you know what the Buddha knew. No need to worship, just practice. Until then, keep working. Meditation - beyond belief. Beyond thought, emotion, practice, or belief. How is that not free?

I have practiced in the ashrams and there is a risk of becoming 'one of the herd' and there are certainly some cult-like aspects to some Buddhist sects. If we speak of the dhamma as taught by Gotama the buddha, then a person's religious persuasion is basically irrelevant - it makes no difference if one is Buddhist or not.

And how is that not free-er than "free thought" where the ego most often is the arbiter of what is right and not.

Yes, the right vs. wrong paradigm can't approach the spiritual subject.

To transcend ego, limited self, small self, selfishness, idiocy, whatever we want to call it, requires ascension beyond the limited self. In that way, to suggest that a person still mired in partial ignorance or/and delusion is capable of seeing through that themself - well it's possible, but it's also a long shot sometimes (Big caveat: depends on the individual)

OK... That's a very subtle subject area.

Further, I want to be clear that I am not discounting nor would ever argue against aspirants who discover Truth for themselves - there are many. i.e. I don't disagree with you on that point either, and agree also that people should keep investigating for themselves and be honest in themselves.

On the flipside:

As to honesty, well certainly, this is also possibly related to an individual aspect of self. How many on here don't think they themselves are honest and how many on this forum seem to imply (implicitly or explicitly) that they are at a peak and there is no more to do, or/and they are in no need of a genuinely realized Master because let's face it, only "I" am the true arbiter of Truth.

With the issue of doing, I would suggest stop doing and start noticing. It's basically the difference between willfulness and willingness.

Well as attractive as that is, that ain't the gold standard in genuinely realized traditions - whether they be religion based or not. (for similar reasons as above)

It is without reference to tradition or religion.

Indeed, agreed that joining a religion is not the one true direction. But if someone is throwing gold my way, I wouldn't discount that value either. I guess we might be talking about different cultures (yet you argue above that all religions can be "lumped together") as I see no disunity between freedom of thought and spiritual traditions. I also avoid and steer clear of any that don't support principles of freedom of thought, meditation, Gnosis, and kindness.

Well religions have the same primary structure and are sustained by the same primary mechanisms, but the symbols, icons, discourses, defining rituals and beliefs vary considerably.

There is also the same that you could apply for all these arguments that religions are to be avoided, teachers are to be avoided, and even more strongly, that all religions want is to control people.

Personally I would suggest avoiding religion as 'the one and only true way' and ideas such 'believe in this of go to hell', or 'a guru is necessary' is highly coercive, and when it comes to the finer human qualities such self-awareness, insight, compassion, kindness, truthfulness etc., religion isn't necessary.

Granted I don't doubt that many do. It depends on the person and the teacher and the organization - there are specious individuals and many who have no spiritual insights, but claim status. But this is not everyone.

So again, the one sided arguments need balancing, in my opinion, as they are unfair - unfair to whom? Unfair to anyone who is genuinely interested in plumbing the depths of a religion whether that be Buddhism, Yoga, Neo-Advaita, Sufism, Spiritual Christianity (please don't mention the US Christian fundamentalists who scare me)

Those with a genuine interest probably should 'plumb the depths'. teehee.

As to your last statement, you believe that all the people in Sufism, in monasteries around the world, in Buddhism, in Neo-Advaita, Yoga, are all coerced, Gem?

Probably not all, but I have practiced in the more liberal ashrams, and there is a cultish brainwashing side to it, but as in all things, we have to take to good with the bad, and avoid becoming entrapped. In the traditions I involved myself with, a person's discernment was considered important, there was no attempt to convert anyone, and no expectation that people should believe the teachings. But, in these places, no religious practices or alternative meditations are permitted. There is still a risk of getting 'hooked' in places like that, and when going into ashrams like this, there is still the good and the bad of it, and it's very important to keep one's free thought - and then keep quiet about it.

Ending with again - I don't disagree that not all people need religion by any means, or a teacher but it's so circumstantial and dependent on causes and conditions and the individuals' own propensity/spiritual insights/personality etc. that I wouldn't go all out for one path or the other. And I wouldn't discount that there are deeply realized teachers who have insights which could benefit. As to who/where that gold is, I guess I can only put that down to karmic causes and conditions. Nor would I disrespect people who have found their own Truth and happiness in even more belief based religions, so long as those contribute to inner peace, joy and care for people other than myself.

BT

Indeed. Well said.