주류 종교의 혼란과 그 기원

### 주류 종교의 혼란에 대한 이해: 기원과 오해
* 🤔 주류 종교는 인류의 인지 발달 수준이 훨씬 낮고 오늘날과 같은 과학적 이해가 부족했던 시대에서 비롯된 역사적 맥락 때문에 **종종 혼란스럽고 착각에 빠지는 것처럼 보입니다.**
* 📜 대다수의 사람들이 과학적 사고가 부족하고 신에 대한 추상적인 개념을 직관적으로 이해할 수 없었기 때문에 **기독교나 이슬람교와 같은 종교의 가르침은 은유와 이야기를 통해 전달**되었습니다.
* 🕰 이러한 종교가 형성되었을 때 많은 추종자들은 세계의 원형과 같은 기본적인 사실에 대해 알지 못했기 때문에 **영적 진리를 이해하기 위해 접근하기 쉬운 언어**가 필요했습니다.
* 📖 종교적 가르침의 전승은 마치 전화 게임처럼 수세기에 걸쳐 다양한 해석과 전달자의 한계로 인해 **원래의 통찰이 왜곡**되는 등 혼탁해졌습니다.
* 😇 예수나 무함마드와 같은 인물이 심오한 통찰력을 가졌을지라도, 그들의 가르침에 대한 기록은 **그들이 죽은 지 오래 후에 이러한 진리를 완전히 이해하거나 구현하지 못했을 수도 있는 개인**에 의해 기록되었습니다.
* ⚖ 역사적으로 종교는 정치 권력에 의해 통제 수단으로 이용되어 왔으며, 이는 **영적 가르침을 둘러싼 혼란과 부정확성**에 더욱 기여해 왔습니다.
* 🔍 이러한 종교의 본질을 진정으로 이해하려면 **다양한 종교 간의 공통점**을 밝히고 구시대적인 도덕주의적 견해에서 정당한 지혜를 분별하는 데 도움이 되는 **직접적인 신비로운 경험**에 참여해야 합니다.
* 🌐 궁극적으로 종교 간의 의견 불일치는 종종 문화적 차이와 추종자들의 제한된 이해에서 비롯된 것으로, **다양한 관점을 인정하고 존중하는 영성에 대한 통합적 접근**의 필요성을 강조합니다.

주류 종교는 역사적 맥락, 은유적 언어, 직접적인 신비적 경험의 부족으로 인해 종종 혼란을 겪습니다.

why is mainstream religion so confusing, deluded, and inaccurate? Why can't they explain God in a straightforward manner the way that you're explaining it here, Leo? Why all the silly metaphors? Why do they say that God is separate from me? Why are we told to worship God? Why are we told that God will punish us for being bad, and so forth? Religion is a very tricky thing, and you have to appreciate its origin, where it came from. It's very problematic to evaluate religions like Christianity or Islam from a modern perspective. You have to really look at it from the perspective of 2000 years ago when these religions were mostly created. Mankind was at a very unsophisticated level of cognitive development back then. There wasn't even such a thing as the notion of science the way we know of it today. Science, as we know of it today, is really a modern invention, several hundred years old. So, this notion of very carefully, analytically, empirically breaking stuff down, I mean, it exists in certain Buddhist

traditions and certain yogic traditions, but generally speaking, this is a modern notion. So, to expect religions from thousands of years ago to be very precise and scientific and clinical, and also to be very integrative, and also to share modern values, and to not be homophobic, or to not be patriarchal, or to not be moralizing, this is absurd. The era in which these religions sprang forth, most people were at spiral damage stage purple or red at that time. We're talking about very unsophisticated levels of development, and so religion was a vehicle for promulgating the idea of God. But how do you do that with people who are not scientifically minded, people who are not integral, people who are highly racist and ethnocentric, people who are very closed-minded, people who have no sense of the world back then? People didn't even, most people didn't even know that the world was round. Now, of course, the educated people knew, but regular people for whom religion was meant, they didn't know. They didn't even know.

how to read. They didn't know mathematics like they didn't know anything about the world. You have to understand this. So, how do you get these very tribal people to recognize the higher truth of God? Well, you have to couch it in some kind of language that they can understand. So, you're going to use metaphors, you're going to use stories. There weren't even printing presses back then, there were no books, you couldn't even print a Bible back then. So, of course, you're going to use various kinds of metaphors and analogies that make sense for that time. And this stuff was passed down oftentimes as stories, not even written down. And of course, as you're doing this, the people who are passing it down and then writing it all down, these people are not the most enlightened people. So, even though maybe Jesus was very enlightened, you might imagine, or Muhammad was, or the Buddha, or somebody else, these people, they didn't write any books, didn't record any videos. So, Jesus' story was recorded hundreds of

years after the fact, and the people who recorded the story, well, who knows? Different people reported different gospels, various conflicting accounts, and these people who made these recordings, of course, they might have tried to get the gist of Jesus down and his teachings, but they themselves, I doubt, were significantly enlightened. And so, they are filtering it through their own mind, through their own ethnocentric and maybe spiral dynamic stage red or blue worldview, and they're putting it into metaphors and stories that ordinary folks can understand. So, of course, it's going to be confusing and diluted and filled with inaccuracies, of course. And then, of course, the way it works is because these stories get passed down through the ages. It's like a game of telephone where every person talks about God to another person, to another person, so the knowledge gets further and further removed from the direct awakening experience. And how many of these people actually were able to follow the instructions and the teachings of Jesus and actually have, for example, some massive enlightenment?

very few, I would bet. And then how do you talk about it in a way that isn't dogmatic, that isn't overly ethnocentric, that isn't overly moralistic? Because you see, whatever spiral dynamics stage your cognitive level of development is at when you have these epiphanies and realizations, you're going to filter your experiences of God and understanding of God through that lens. Because you have to bring the truth back down to earth and embody it here within a particular country, within a particular era, within a particular community, within a particular culture. And so, uh, because of that, for example, a lot of old religious teachings are very moralistic, and they talk about right and wrong and lawful and unlawful, and they make various kinds of rules against what you should and what you shouldn't do. Because back then, that was advanced for their time. Back then, back then before there were even countries, before there were legal codes, this was actually an innovation to couch morality and law and to ground it with religion. But you see, of course, also what happened.

is that all of these religions and spiritual teachings they become corrupt. The ego and the devil corrupts all these teachings. He uses it for its devilish purposes. So, of course, various kinds of countries and nation-states, rulers and kings got a hold of these religions, started using them to control the masses, started using them to justify their own rule and to justify the various kinds of wars and legal codes and various kinds of things that they wanted for their government. So, you see the ego seizes a powerful tool like religion. If you have a really high-quality spiritual teaching, the ego will seize it, co-opt it, and actually it will become the chief tool by which the devil will then spread falsehood, confusion, delusion, and egotism. And so, that's exactly what happened, which is why I have to be very careful with religions and in general. The whole problem with God is that because it's such a personal and subjective realization that you can't codify it, and you can't spread it through mass means.

you can't write a book that's going to spread it. You can't create a video about it. You can try, but people will misunderstand. And then, even if you do a really good job writing a great book or creating a great video, well, some of your followers, they will just be fanatics, and they will just believe the stuff. They won't actually do the practices because the practices are too hard for them, and they will just believe it. And then, after you're dead, they're going to create a cult, and they're going to perpetuate this ideology. And that's what generally happens with these spiritual teachings. That's why we got to be very careful. And so, you have to learn how to read these teachings properly, sort the wheat from the chaff, and you have to be careful to account for the various spiral stages that are present. For example, in the Bible, so when they tell you to stone homosexuals in the Bible or something like this, you know, you have to be able to say, Okay, with that, that's old

old style thinking from 2000 years ago. We don't do that today, right? You don't want to take that more seriously. But then other parts of the Bible are still legitimate and have legitimate wisdom in there. Next question: why do all the religions disagree so much fundamentally? It's actually amazing how much the religions all agree with each other, considering that they were started in different continents, at different times, by different people, under different situations. There's a shocking amount of agreement between Buddhism, Hinduism, Christianity, Islam, Judaism, and others. That is, if you know how to look and study the texts properly. And then you might wonder, well, how do you know you're studying the text properly? Well, you need direct experience, direct mystical experience. By having these mystical experiences, by having a personal understanding of God, it becomes extremely easy to sort the wheat from the chaff in these various religious texts. And it's also then extremely easy to see the commonalities. A lot of the disagreements can be

explained simply because, like I said, different cultures, different times call for different types of explanations. Religions will stress one thing over another thing because their culture needed that. Religions will also use different language. They will carve up God into different parts because the human mind categorizes things in different ways, and there's various kinds of categorization schemes, not one ultimate one. And because there's so few people that actually have the full awakening experience of God, that usually, oftentimes, they have more minor awakenings, various other kinds of visions and mystical insights and experiences, but not like the full monty. And so, because of that, most people never reach full non-duality, and so then they end up having partial understanding, not a full integral understanding. And also, of course, these religions, they are not integral. They don't seek to understand each other. They always seek to kind of monopolize the truth for themselves. They tend to favor themselves and their own culture while denying other religions and other cultures. So, the attitude of trying to

integrate religions. This is a rather modern notion, which has really only existed for the last 50 or 100 years at most. You

Why Mainstream Religion Is So Deluded

Actualized Clips

주류 종교는 은유를 사용하고 신을 개인과 분리된 존재로 묘사하기 때문에 종종 혼란스럽고 미혹적인 것으로 여겨집니다.

수천 년 전에 만들어진 이러한 종교의 기원은 정교한 인지 발달이 미비하고 과학적 이해가 부족했던 시대에 뿌리를 두고 있습니다.

이러한 고대 신념 체계는 세상에 대한 지식이 제한적인 폐쇄적이고 자민족 중심적인 인구를 위해 고안되었기 때문에 현대의 기준으로 평가하는 것은 문제가 있습니다.

당시에는 책이나 인쇄기가 없었기 때문에 영적인 가르침은 은유와 이야기를 통해 부족 사람들에게 전달되었습니다.

예수나 무함마드와 같은 인물에 대한 기록은 그들이 죽은 지 오래 후에 기록되었으며, 종종 크게 깨달음을 얻지 못한 사람들에 의해 기록되었습니다.

이로 인해 원래의 가르침이 희석되고 혼란스러워졌으며, 지식이 전화 게임처럼 여러 세대에 걸쳐 전승되면서 직접적인 깨달음의 경험에서 멀어지게 되었습니다.

하나님을 이해하는 것의 복잡성

신을 이해하는 것은 인지 발달과 그들이 살고 있는 문화적 맥락의 영향을 받습니다.

오래된 종교적 가르침은 당대에는 혁신적이었지만 종종 부패하여 통치자들이 대중을 통제하는 데 사용되기도 했습니다.

영적 깨달음의 주관적인 특성으로 인해 성문화되어 보편적으로 확산되기는 어렵습니다.

영적 가르침을 전파하는 데 따르는 어려움

영적인 가르침은 종종 오해를 받아 스승의 사후에 컬트가 생겨날 수 있습니다.

이러한 가르침을 비판적으로 읽고 역사적 맥락을 고려하는 것이 중요합니다.

근본적인 의견 차이에도 불구하고 많은 종교는 놀라울 정도로 많은 공통점을 공유하고 있으며, 직접적인 신비로운 경험은 본문을 이해하고 해석하는 데 도움이 될 수 있습니다.

종교는 문화적 요구와 인간 분류가 다르기 때문에 가르침과 언어가 다양합니다.

대부분의 사람들은 부분적인 깨달음이나 신비로운 통찰만을 경험하기 때문에 비이원성에 대한 이해가 제한적입니다.

종교를 통합하고 공통의 이해를 추구한다는 현대적 개념은 지난 50~100년 동안에야 등장했습니다.