Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

news.ycombinator.com

651–660 of 966 posts

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#651
None, really. At least not in the sense of what people usually mean by "spiritual". That is, I don't pray to (or believe in) any gods or deities of any sort, or even believe in any actual thing called a "spirit". So that doesn't leave much room for spirituality.

The closest I come to any of this is something I like to do now and then which I suppose is a little bit like meditation. I'll put on some nice pleasant, non-distracting music which doesn't tend to make me think of anything in particular, close my eyes, and just try not to think about anything for a while, and immerse myself in just the sensation I'm feeling. But really, this is just away to kinda "clear my mind" and relax, I'm not sure I'd describe the experience as spiritual at all.

Beyond that, I do get something out of reading Zen Buddhist literature at times. But Zen, to me, is more of a philosophy and a way of thinking, than a religion. And I wouldn't say I'm an adherent or practitioner of Zen, it's just something I enjoy reading / thinking about sometimes.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#652
I'm an atheist but I think that religion and religious values are a positive force for society.

The most spiritual experience I have is when I'm out in nature alone and I see something beautiful like a sunset over the sea. These moments make me feel connected to nature and to the past. I can imagine my ancestors seeing similar things since hundreds of thousands of years. It's comforting to know that some things don't change much.

Spirituality is the struggle to find something that's both meaningful and eternal. Nature's time scales aren't eternal but they're pretty large and easy for my simple atheist mind to conceptualize.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jesus was God in flesh so he purposely limited himself to experience all that we experience, to suffer all that we suffer. There is nothing that He can't empathize with. This implies that God is incapable of fully knowing the experience of humans without becoming human, hence God is not omniscient; since now his omniscience is contingent on becoming contingent.

No. God already understood the human experience. He became human to prove to us, beyond all doubt, that He does understand.

"Beyond all doubt" is doubtful since, taking your assertions for granted, he only manifested himself to an infinitesimally small cross-section of humanity.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m curious. How did you originally arrive at the conclusion that god didn’t exist?

We all come by it by different ways but I'll share my story. I was mormon up until around 30ish. However, researching the history of the mormon religion ultimately led me to completely disbelieve the faith claims of the church. From there, atheism was just sort of natural. Why, for example, would I suddenly believe that any other religious sect got it's supernatural claims correct when the one I was raised with, got…

Look into teachings of Gurdjieff. Having similar background as yours, I was interested due to the fact that there is no need to believe anything from anybody else, and you should test everything you believe by yourself.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#655
post #632

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is, frankly, no such thing as a "god hating atheist". Those two notions are incompatible. Consider, for example, how little you (probably) care about fairies. Are you a fairy hating afairist? You may find an Atheist that says something like "If god does exist, it's a dick". but that's not really hating god but rather pointing out the silliness of believing in a supernatural all powerful being that is good which…

A little off topic, but it's mesmerizing to me to see hordes of intelligent people, completely renouncing to reason and talking to imaginary entities.

To me, it serves as a warning and a life long lesson. I was formally mormon and didn't get out because the thought of a all powerful man in the sky made me extra special was silly. I got out because I looked into the history of the church and found that the founder and his successors were obvious con-men. Like, so obvious that years of indoctrination ultimately gave way.

Had the founder any moral character and I frankly might still be a mormon today. (though, tbh, it was likely because of his immorality that mormonism has survived. I'd probably not be around as I'm from a large family that likely wouldn't have happened without mormonism).

The lesson I took from that is to challenge my world views, don't take assumed knowledge for granted, and to be extra super wary of anyone trying to tug on emotions to motivate me into action.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I had been taught I could simply confess whatever and it would be forgiven I still remember the day at Sunday school when we had to confess. I was a good kid. I had absolutely no idea what to confess. I consulted my Mom who told me to "make something up". And thus my first sin, that I can remember, was lying to the priest.

This is the most catholic story I can imagine.

You have an innocent mind. :)

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#657

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice, similar exp. Check Bernardo Kastrup. Good friend of Spira, computer scientist who worked at CERN, now pushing idealism which is essentially western Advaita Vedanta.

I'm going thru Bernardo Kastrup's site now. Thank you.

I think he shines best either in his books (the first, "Rationalist Spirituality" is very short and gives a good intro to his thought) or in YT interviews. The one with John Vervaeke or Curt Jaimungal are good picks. The blog is interesting but tend to also be an outlet for personal tantrums :) I've started a telegram channel to chit-chat about this topic.

Anyway I guess the only relevant thing I want to share is that there are at least 2 paths to build for ourselves a consistent, integral worldview (one where meaning can be found, as meaning can only be found where there is structure): Propositional to Participative, or Participative to Propositional. That is, satisfy the brain, and open up the space to the transcendental, or go all the way into direct experience and then let the brain catch up. BK is path #1, Spira is path #2, and they have been very helpful to me.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#658
post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

What does atheism have to do with consumerism ? One can believe that there's no god and not want to define their lives by consumption. An idealized version of my life would be defined by creating and learning new things, I don't need to believe in a supernatural being for that

No, you just need the belief that something more is beyond what you normally see and sense. Not a supernatural being. That is all that is required to be spiritual.

Although in reality we are only spiritual. Call it a very good haptic VR system if you will.

Our society is mainly atheists consumers. You wont find God on CNN or Amazon Prime

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#659

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even bother "trying to live a good life" if "a good life" is just a human construct and there is no judgement on that in the afterlife? By your assumptions, every atheist should just, like, die or at best, live a meaningless life.

Most anthiests seem to be nihilists, so they're already (claiming to be) doing that. I just always find it strange the way that "100% athiests" seem to ignore the logical conundrum of "I don't need a God or theology to live a good life" when our constructed definition of "good" comes from religion.

As a 100% atheist, I disagree strongly with every single one of your statements.

To elaborate,

> Most anthiests seem to be nihilists

Not true

> they're already (claiming to be) doing that

No, they're not

> the logical conundrum of "I don't need a God or theology to live a good life"

There's no conundrum or contradiction here, plenty of us live good lives

> our constructed definition of "good" comes from religion

Sounds like a made-up fact. I don't need an omnipotent third party to validate that taking another person's life, or stealing from them, etc. is not right. Empathy and the idea of "do unto others" are quite easily understandable and relatable outside of the context of religion.

Re: Ask HN: What is your spiritual practice?

#660

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CES Letter is an excellent jumping-off point.

If you've already decided that you want to leave the church and need something tangible to point to as your reason for leaving, CES letter is well suited for that. But if you are honestly and earnestly evaluating church history and are using CES letter as a primary source... I would make sure to give some of the more popular rebuttals (such as [0]) a read as well as they rightly call out some serious problems with th…

I don't think that the motive, or authenticity of the author of the CES letter should matter too much, if you do due diligence and actually research the topics, which I have. However, to your point I'll add a few more decent sources.

My personal favorite is the "Letter to My wife"[0] - similar to the CES letter but a little softer and more historically based and less fueled by emotion.

There's also a good document[1] featuring many times where the church has lied on the record with at least 152 cases.

There's also the podcast: MormonStories[2].

One of the best episodes being where they interview Tom Phillips a Stake President who has been friends and associated with general authorities. [3]

    > [Excerpt from synopsis]:  Many LDS Church members are unaware that a secret LDS temple ordinance called the “Second Anointing” is regularly being administered by LDS Church apostles to elite friends, family, and leaders (mostly stake presidents, temple presidents, mission presidents, and LDS general authorities, along with their wives).  In this ordinance (according to reports) an apostle washes the feet of the couple in the temple, anoints them on the head with oil such that their “calling and election is made sure” (guaranteeing them a place in the Celestial Kingdom), and then invites the couple to retreat to a room in the temple, wherein the wife washes her husband’s feet, and then lays her hands on his head to give him a special priesthood blessing.

    > In June of 2012 I interviewed Tom Phillips, former LDS church stake president in London, England U.K.  In this interview he discusses the following:

      - His early experiences as a bishop and stake president in the LDS church, along with his friendship with LDS apostle Jeffrey R. Holland.
      - His experience receiving a secret/sacred LDS church ordinance called the “Second Anointing,” wherein he > - was anointed by the hands of Elder M. Russel Ballard, and assured exaltation in there hereafter.
      - His subsequent loss of faith over historical and scientific issues with the church.
      - His direct correspondence with then friend, LDS apostle Jeffrey R. Holland, over these troubling issues.
      - The pain, suffering, and ultimate divorce that he and his family experienced as a result of his faith crisis.
      - Additional details about Tom’s story can be found here [http://mormonthink.com/tomphillips.htm].
For anyone who's ready to do the final act of leaving the church and completely remove your membership there's a free and easy online service that helps with that.[4]

  - [0] https://www.letterformywife.com/the-letter
  - [1] http://www.mormonthink.com/lying.htm
  - [2] https://www.mormonstories.org
  - [3] https://www.mormonstories.org/podcast/tom-phillips-and-the-second-anointing/
  - [4] https://quitmormon.com
Additional resources:

  - https://reddit.com/r/exmormon
  - https://protectldschildren.org/read-the-stories-2/ - Stories of bishops abusing their power and asking sexuality based questions in interviews alone with children as young as 11. Many times this has in fact led to 'grooming' behavior in Bishops with pedophilia tendencies.
--edit: formatting.
Post reply on HN