by cappytan 13 Replies latest jw friends
Though I now consider myself a Secular Buddhist, I just realized today that I'm okay with trying to pursue the qualities mentioned by Paul as the "fruitage of the spirit."
The only one I take issue with is "faith" in the context of religion.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
TO: “cappytan”
“What are your thoughts on the matter?”
The “fruits of the spirit” are really metaphors for basic sociological principles which help mitigate people’s fundamental defects of character. Religious “faith” is simply an exercise in one’s own reliance on, and harmony with, a power which is greater than himself. That power, which many refer to as “God,” is in my opinion simply whatever processes which happen to unfold in the natural, logical, mathematical order of the universe. “God,” as I see it, is not any sort of anthropomorphic being or “deity” but, rather, an emergent property of whatever processes that be in the natural order of things. Therefore, those positive, pro-social qualities of highly-evolved creatures such as ourselves – or “fruits of the spirit,” as such – are just the positive aspects of our human makeup which, as a collective societal phenomenon, exert an existential power – or “force for good” – over people as individuals which transcends their own capabilities for promoting self- and social efficacy.
Case in point: I myself actually am an alcoholic, and I would never have the fortitude as an individual to keep abstinent from drinking. However, a power greater than myself, in the form of fellow sufferers in kind, is in fact able to help effect my recovery, beyond whatever success I could have just by myself. It’s as the expression goes, “The total is greater than the sum of its parts.” I have faith in the fundamental tenets of the program of recovery (metaphorically embodying the essence of those general “fruits of the spirit”) as they may be expressed by the group of fellow sufferers as a whole. (I probably shouldn’t divulge the actual name of that group recovery program, if you know what I mean.)
So, the “fruits of the spirit” are really just another general metaphor, or analogy, for the antithesis of the common defects of human character, which defects are apparently based on the more basic, primal, intrinsic functioning of our mammalian brains which drive us on a subconscious level, namely fear, greed, lust, etc. – things which do in fact serve an evolutionary purpose for survival but which can also have the propensity to grossly exceed their natural purpose to the extent of becoming self-defeating.
That is what the “fruits of the spirit” are in my opinion.
My favourite fruits of the spirit are apples and nectarines. A plentiful supply on hand, you could not wish to find a nicer person than me.
It's kind of the same way people talk about all morals of the bible. Like the bible was the origin of all morality. I agree they are good to peruse. But like the logical parts of the ten commandments they would be good human qualities if, or if not the bible ever existed. Really the Egyptians did a much better job (and before the bible) of codifying decent behavior.
TO: “freemindfade”:
Those “Ideals” listed are far more simpler yet profound than the precepts of the WTS – I don’t see anything in that list about peddling pamphlets to support a publishing company.
The fruitage of the spirit were a constant source of anguish for me as a witness because I tried to put them into practice yet rearely did I see others attempt to do the same.
In the end, though, they're just general platitudes that can apply to any moral code. The bible doesn't have exclusive domain over morality, as others have posted here.
cappytan: Though I now consider myself a Secular Buddhist, I just realized today that I'm okay with trying to pursue the qualities mentioned by Paul as the "fruitage of the spirit."
The only one I take issue with is "faith" in the context of religion.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The most problematical claim by Galatians 5:22 is that good qualities listed by the author of the text are (in his view) the result of 'magic,' that is, an invisible, external force (the spirit) that can change your personality.
Possibly, some practising 'Christian' may want to quibble over the use of the word 'magic' to describe the process by which the author of Galatians 5:22 imagines personality change, however the word 'magic' is correctly used in this context.
Magic, as defined by the Oxford dictionary, is: "The power of apparently influencing events by using mysterious or supernatural forces."
A scholastic view of 'magic,' states:
Magic or sorcery is the use of rituals, symbols, actions, gestures and language that are believed to exploit supernatural forces. Modern Western magicians generally state magic's primary purpose to be personal spiritual growth.
(Source: Cicero, Chic & Sandra Tabatha () The Essential Golden Dawn: An Introduction to High Magic. pp. 87–9. Regardie, Israel (2001) The Tree of Life: An Illustrated Study of Magic, St. Paul, Minnesota: Llewellyn, p. 17. Crowley, Aleister Magic Without Tears Ch. 83.)
Clearly, if the power, by which the personality change process of Galatians 5:22 is supposed to occur, does not exist then the 'personality change' will not/cannot happen, which is often the experience of individual Christians and Christians as a group.
It is unclear as to whether Jesus thought of the process of 'personality change' in the same way as did the author of Galatians 5:22. In the so-called Sermon on the Mount, the instruction Jesus is conceived as teaching, certainly involves a personality change, but the process of change is imagined as being the result of personal decisions affecting behaviour. His audience is told what to do and what not to do.
-----------------------------------
Buddhism on the other hand takes a different approach. In the view of the Sakyamuni Buddhist, 'suffering' is the key problem in the world. So suffering must be elimnated. As a Buddhist web-site says.
"Alone among the world's religions, Buddhism locates suffering at the heart of the world. Indeed according to Buddhism, existence is suffering (dukkha). The main question that Guatama (c.566 BC - c.480 BC), the traditional founder of Buddhism, sought to answer was: "Why do pain and suffering exist?"
Buddhism teaches compassion toward all sentient beings. By contrast, Christianity and its secular offshoot, Western science, cling to a very un-Darwinian form of human exceptionalism. According to the Biblical Book of Genesis, God put animals on earth purely to serve Man, who exists to serve God."
The four Noble Truths of Buddhism, (supposedly) explains how we may eliminate suffering:
THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS:
- All is suffering (dukkha).
- Suffering is caused by desire/attachment.
- If one can eliminate desire/attachment, one can eliminate suffering.
- The Noble Eight-fold Path can eliminate desire. Extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification should be avoided.
And the Eight-fold path is described thus:
THE NOBLE EIGHT-FOLD PATH:
- Right Views.
- The true understanding of the four noble truths.
- Right Intent.
- Right aspiration is the true desire to free oneself from attachment, ignorance, and hatefulness.
- [These first two are referred to as prajña, or wisdom.]
- Right Speech.
- Right speech involves abstaining from lying, gossiping, or hurtful talk.
- Right Conduct.
- Right action involves abstaining from hurtful behaviours, such as killing, stealing, and careless sex.
- Right livelihood.
- Right livelihood means making your living in such a way as to avoid dishonesty and hurting others, including animals.
- [The above three are referred to as shila, or morality.]
- Right Effort.
- Right effort is a matter of exerting oneself in regulating the content of one's mind: bad qualities should be abandoned and prevented from arising again; good qualities should be enacted and nurtured.
- Right Mindfulness.
- Right mindfulness is the focusing of one's attention on one's body, feelings, thoughts, and consciousness in such a way as to overcome craving, hatred, and ignorance.
- Right Concentration.
- Right concentration is meditating in such a way as to progressively realize a true understanding of imperfection, impermanence, and non-separateness.
Obviously, this is the result of an individual's own effort, and is not the result of some magical process, though some forms of Buddhism attribute the attainment of enlightenment to 'magical' occurrences.
(Source: http://www.bltc.com/buddhism-suffering.html )
I guess, in the end, if we wish to live in a well-behaved society, then there has to be some form of "behaviour training."
Singapore (to pick an example) is usually seen as a well-behaved society, where it is safe for a woman to walk the streets late at night (something that would not be advisable in Sydney). This is seen to be the result of 'social engineering,' (usually in the form of saturation advertising campaigns coupled with heavy penalties) something that was openly derided in the west some 30 years ago. I saw something similar recently in Nanjing (China) where my friend ( a Communist party member) pointed out huge street posters that sought to influence family life, and with a smile commented, that street posters were no longer political, but moral. Generally, I've found both Singapore and Chinese cities to be safe places at night, whereas my own city of Sydney is not. But all examples indicate a need to keep reminding people of certain behavioural standards
________________
PS: One final thought.
cappytan: The only one I take issue with is "faith" in the context of religion.
Faith is defined (in its basic sense) as: Complete trust or confidence in someone or something:
So faith is very close in meaning to the word 'belief.'
In Chinese societies, traditionally, 'doubt' (questioning) is more important than 'faith.' Do you think that may explain the contemporary success of China. (grin)
I'm okay with trying to pursue the qualities mentioned by Paul as the "fruitage of the spirit."
Reminds me of James 3: 18
"Now the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace."
