Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
self-mutilation; question for religious people
Topic Started: May 31 2006, 07:02 AM (958 Views)
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
I saw Da Vinci Code a few days ago and was really surprised when I saw this guy Silas mutilating himself and torturing himself as a religious act.

Judaism has taught me that the body is a gift from God, and willful self-mutiliation of this holy gift is forbidden and disgraceful (except to save your life). Self-torture aside, many Jews will not get tattoos, and multiple piercings are discouraged. Suicide is viewed as one of the greatest dishoners, and some of the ultra-orthodox won't even allow a Jewish suicide victim to be buried in a Jewish cemetary.

I'm sure what Silas was doing in that movie is not a common Christian practice, but rather one practiced by the ultra conservative groups. This is what really surprises me, though - why would the ultra conservative Christians mutilate their bodies? It would seem to me that they above all people would be most concerned with the sanctity of life and the holiness of the human body - unless this is not a concept central to Christianity, as it is in Judaism?
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
Why do you apply the word "conservative" to this practice?

Why not "liberal" or make some other connection?

You are implying the most conservative people self mutilate.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Opus Dei has been described to me as a very conservative group. That's the word I've heard, so it's the one I use.

Maybe it isn't appropriate?

As I understand the terms, religious 'conservative' seems to imply a strong, literal adherence to traditions and religious teachings, while 'liberal' would seem to imply a more relaxed view, considering more the reality and practicality of modern life.


'You are implying the most conservative people self mutilate'. This is my question. Why, if they are so conservative, would they self mutilate? The only thought that I have is that in Christianity, the body is not viewed the same way as it is in Judaism, but this seems so odd to me.
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kenny
HOLY CARP!!!
I seem to recall when reading the book that the self inflicted pain delivers a sample of Christs's suffereing.

P.S. The book is fiction.
P.S.S. Does anyone know if some O.D. members really do this.

I still think it is a misuse of the term conservative.
One might consider them to be quite radical.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
pianojerome
May 31 2006, 07:02 AM
I saw Da Vinci Code a few days ago and was really surprised Judaism has taught me that the body is a gift from God, and willful self-mutiliation of this holy gift is forbidden and disgraceful (except to save your life).  Self-torture aside, many Jews will not get tattoos, and multiple piercings are discouraged.  Suicide is viewed as one of the greatest dishoners, and some of the ultra-orthodox won't even allow a Jewish suicide victim to be buried in a Jewish cemetary.

I'm sure what Silas was doing in that movie is not a common Christian practice, but rather one practiced by the ultra conservative groups.  This is what really surprises me, though - why would the ultra conservative Christians mutilate their bodies?

It is the exception rather than the norm even for, as you say, the ultra orthodox or conservative believers. In the Middle Ages there was a heretical group of fanatic millenialists who went about Europe and indulged in rituals of self flagellation- that often led to group sex. They also became something of a political movement and were duly supressed by both ecclesiastical and secular authorities.

When practiced today it is usually a hangover to some pre-conversion tribal ritual (as in some Latin American feast celebrations or in the Philipines during Easter) or as a means of humilty through minor self mortification. Kneeling during prayer is a gentle form of showing one's humilty. Nevertheless the Opus Dei practice of wearing a cilice belt for a an hour or two per day while uncomfortable, it is hardly self multilation.

Now if we want to discuss mutilation, let's discuss a certain ritual called Bris.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Axtremus
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Uhm... what about circumcision? :unsure:

(Not that people circumcize themselves, but it's a form of willful, voluntary mutilation nonetheless.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
Now if we want to discuss mutilation, ;et's talk about a certain ritual called Bris.


Quote:
 
Uhm... what about circumcision?


Good point. I didn't think of that.

It does indeed seem to be contradictory. Although it does say specifically in the Bible to do this (forgive me, I don't know the verses well enough to quote). There is a lot that the Bible tells us to do that we don't do, but this is one that for some reason has stuck through every generation.

The law is not black and white, of course - for example, a surgeon can certainly do his job to save a person's life or to cure a threatening malady.

I'll have to think about it.
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
pianojerome
May 31 2006, 07:02 AM
I saw Da Vinci Code a few days ago and was really surprised when I saw this guy Silas mutilating himself and torturing himself as a religious act.

Judaism has taught me that the body is a gift from God, and willful self-mutiliation of this holy gift is forbidden and disgraceful (except to save your life). Self-torture aside, many Jews will not get tattoos, and multiple piercings are discouraged. Suicide is viewed as one of the greatest dishoners, and some of the ultra-orthodox won't even allow a Jewish suicide victim to be buried in a Jewish cemetary.

I'm sure what Silas was doing in that movie is not a common Christian practice, but rather one practiced by the ultra conservative groups. This is what really surprises me, though - why would the ultra conservative Christians mutilate their bodies? It would seem to me that they above all people would be most concerned with the sanctity of life and the holiness of the human body - unless this is not a concept central to Christianity, as it is in Judaism?

Sam,

In the book, Silas is a fictional member of Opus Dei. What he is depicted as practicing is considered mortification, not mutiliation. He is not cutting off a part of himself or anything of that sort.

Mortification is an ancient (and current) practice in the Christian tradition and comes from Scripture, including the Old Testament. It is also practiced in most other religions to one extent or another, including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and many of the earth-based religions.

The purpose is to mortify or discipline the flesh in order to take control of one's baser desires and to focus on one's spiritual needs. It takes various forms including fasting as is done by most religions. It also includes the practice of wearing hair shirts as penance. It may include prolong prayer. When Catholics do not eat meat on Fridays or give up something they like for Lent, this is a type of mortification. When Jews fast, it is a type of mortification. When we see the Shiites in Iraq whipping each other in line, this also is a form of mortification.

What the Da Vinci Code exhibits, of course, is the most intense and extreme form of mortification -- the whipping of oneself as well as the wearing of a barbed rope around one's leg. Yes, these are practiced by certain member of Opus Dei, only the celibate member which represent about 30% of Opus Dei membership -- but it is practiced in extreme moderation.

In terms of the whipping, the Opus Dei member is to do this only once a week and only for the period of one short prayer -- the Lord's Prayer, a Hail Mary or somehting of this sort. To do this, they use an instrument called the "discipline" which is a cordlike whip that resembles a macrame weaving.

They will also wear what is called the cilice, which is a spiked chain, around their upper thigh. They wear this for no more than two hours per day.

This extreme form of mortification is not only practiced by Opus Dei, but many other religious communities as well. Mother Teressa used a discipline, as do other members of her order. The Discalced Carmelites of St Teresa in Livorno Italy use it and craft and sell these instruments for others. The Franciscan Brothers and Sisters of the Immaculate Conception also use them. It is believed to be practiced in many monasteries among a variety of religious orders and societies.

What is depicted in the Da Vinci Code is incorrect inasmuch as Opus Dei severely limits the use of the discipline that Silas is shown using to an extreme. Secondly, or more importantly, in the book (I have not seen the movie) Silas is taking great pride in what he is doing. Pride in such matters is one of the seven deadly sins. But then, Silas is also portrayed as a murderer, so I guess what's one more deadly sin, huh? :wink:

If you are not bored with my discussion, yet, here is a discussion of mortification, taken from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

----------------

One of the methods which Christian ascesticism employs in training the soul to virtuous and holy living. The term originated with St. Paul, who traces an instructive analogy between Christ dying to a mortal and rising to an immortal life, and His followers who renounce their past life of sin and rise through grace to a new life of holiness. "If you live after the flesh", says the apostle, "you shall die, but if through the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live" (Romans 8:13; cf. also Colossians 3:5, and Galatians 5:24). From this original use of the term, we see that mortification, though under one aspect it is a law of death, under another and more fundamental aspect it is a law of life, and does not destroy but elevates nature. What it slays is the disease of the soul, and by slaying this it restores and invigorates the soul's true lief.

Of the diseases it sets itself to slay, sin, the one mortal disease of the soul, holds the first place. Sin committed it destroys, by impelling to true penitence and to the use of those means of forgiveness and restoration which our Lord has confided to His Church. Temptations to sin it overcomes by inducing the will to accept hardships, however grace, rather than yield to the temptations. To this extent, mortification is obligatory on all, but those who wish to be more thorough in the service of Christ, carry it further, and strive with its aid to subdue, so far as is possible in this life, that "rebellion" of the flesh against the spirit which is the internal incentive to sin. What is needed to achieve this victory is that the passions and sensual concupiscences, which when freely indulged exercise so pernicious an influence on human conduct, should be trained by judicious repression to subordinate and conform their desires to the rule of reason and in faith, as discerned by the mind. But for this training to be effectual it is not sufficient to restrain these desires of the flesh only when their demands are unlawful. They represent a twist in the nature, and must be treated as one treats a twisted wire when endeavouring to straighten it, namely, by twisting it the opposite way. Thus in the various departments of ascetic observance, earnest Catholics are constantly found denying themselves even in matters which in themselves are confessedly lawful.

Mortification, viewed thus as a means of curing bad habits and implanting good ones, has its recognized place in the methods even of those who are engaged in pursuing purely natural ends. What is peculiar to Christian mortification is, that it relies for the attainment of its spiritual objects, not merely on this natural efficacy of its methods, but still more on the aids of divine grace, for which, by its earnestness in self-discipline and the Christian motive which inspires it, it can plead so powerfully with God. And here, as further contributing to increase it spiritual efficacy, another motive for which it is practiced comes in. It is practiced likewise as an expiation for past sins and shortcomings, for it is the belief of the Catholic Church, that, although only the Atonement of Christ can offer adequate expiation for the ins of men, men ought not to make that an excuse for doing nothing themselves, but should rather take it as an incentive to add their own expiations to the extent of their power, and should regard such personal expiations as very pleasing to God. This explains why many of the mortifications practiced by devout persons are not directly curative of evil propensities, but take the form of painful exercise and privations self-inflicted because they are painful, e.g., fastings, hard beds, abstention from lawful pleasures, etc. Not that these external mortifications are of themselves available, for spiritual writers never tire of insisting that the internal mortification or pride and self-love in their various forms are essential, but that external penances are good only so far as they spring from this internal spirit, and react by promoting it


[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
By the way, there is a book on this that you may find worth reading (although it is highly scientific and thus tedious and difficult to get through. ) The name is Sacred Pain; Hurting The Body For The Sake Of The Soul. It is by Ariel Glucklich and is publiched by Oxford University Press.

From the dust cover:

"Why would anyone seek out the very experience the rest of us most wish to avoid? Why would religious worshipers flog or crucify themselves, sleep on spikes, hang suspended by their flesh, or walk for miles through scorching deserts with bare and bloodied feet?

In this insightful new book, Arid Glucklich argues that the experience of ritual pain, far from being a form of a madness or superstition, contains a hidden rationality and can bring about a profound transformation of the consciousness and identity of the spiritual seeker.

Steering a course between purely cultural and purely biological explanations, Glucklich approaches sacred pain from the perspective of the practitioner to fully examine the psychological and spiritual effects of self-hurting. He discusses the scientific understanding of pain, drawing on research in fields such as neuropsychology and neurology. He also ranges over a broad spectrum of historical and cultural contexts, showing the many ways mystics, saints, pilgrims, mourners, shamans, Taoists, Muslims, Hindus, Native Americans, and indeed members of virtually every religion have used pain to achieve a greater identification with God. He examines how pain has served as a punishment for sin, a cure for disease, a weapon against the body and its desires, or a means by
which the ego may be transcended and spiritual sickness healed.

"When pain transgresses the limits; the Muslim mystic Mizra Asadullah Ghalib is quoted as saying, "it becomes medicine."

Based on extensive research and written with both empathy and critical insight, Sacred Pain explores the uncgarted terrain of self-hurting and reveals how meaningful suffering can be sued to heal the human spirit."
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ivorythumper
Member Avatar
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
Good posts, Rick.
The dogma lives loudly within me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Un friggin real.

___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Radu
Member Avatar
Senior Carp
pianojerome
May 31 2006, 06:09 PM
As I understand the terms, religious 'conservative' seems to imply a strong, literal adherence to traditions and religious teachings, while 'liberal' would seem to imply a more relaxed view, considering more the reality and practicality of modern life.


So, reb Shmuel, aren't the "conservative" Jews more "liberal" than the "orthodox" ?

------------------------------------------
Conservative Judaism, also known as Masorti Judaism, is a modern denomination of Judaism that arose in United States in the early 1900's. Conservative Judaism is characterized by:

A commitment to following traditional Jewish laws and customs

A deliberately non-fundamentalist teaching of Jewish principles of faith.

A positive attitude toward modern culture

An acceptance of both traditional rabbinic modes of study and modern scholarship and critical text study when considering Jewish religious texts.
Posted Image
------------------------------------------------------------
"Whenever I hear of culture... I release the safety-catch of my Browning!"
The modern media has made cretins out of so many people that they're not interested in reality any more, unless it's reality TV (Jean D'eaux)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bachophile
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Posted Image

"I don't know much about classical music. For years I thought the Goldberg Variations were something Mr. and Mrs. Goldberg did on their wedding night." Woody Allen
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
The concept of mortification has been around a long time, Sam.

At its worst, it capitalizes on the mistaken theology that we are essentially a pure, immortal soul "trapped" in a less-than-pure body, meeting the needs and desires of which are what leads to damaging the soul.

At its best, it can serve as a continual reminder that, as a believer, you are not "your own" - that you were, as the apostle Paul said, bought at a great price, and that you need to remember that fact as you live your daily life, not just during Sunday worship.

Some Christians practice a form of "mortification lite," such as placing a penny in their shoe - not anything that would cause actual pain, but something that's continually felt, and which causes you to reflect on what that slight discomfort represents - and reminds you who you're answerable to in your daily comings and goings. It's the exact same reason that I wear a cross necklace - not a tiny, weightless thing, but a slightly larger (it's still not huge), pewter Celtic cross, that I can feel bumping around on my chest from time to time during the day. It's a constant reminder of who I follow - who I offer ultimate allegiance to - and what my obligation is to him. Put more bluntly, it's hard to be doing something you know you shouldn't be, when you feel that cross around your neck reminding you of who you belong to.

Like just about anything else, it's a practice that can be helpful, but can also be terribly misused, or can lead to bad theology.

As an aside, Martin Luther belonged to a religious order that practiced mortification. He dedicated his life to becoming a purer and purer servant of God, and part of his attempts to that end included mortification. Unfortunately, the more he learned about God and himself, the more he became aware of the depth of his personal inability to meet God's standard - which led to more mortification, more prayer, more study, and more self-realization of sinfulness in the core of his being. Luther essentially ended up beating the snot out of himself until he reached the theological postion that he was mistaken - that no amount of acts of penitence, mortification, and personal acts of "good works" would lead to him ultimately being reconciled to God. To the contrary, he came to believe that, in fact, God had already done the hard work required for such a reconciliation. Through his reading and interpretation of Scriptures, he came to believe that a person's reconciliation to God could only come from God stepping in and offering such reconciliatoin completely independent of - even despite - any ultimately futile gestures on our part to meet God's standard. He came to believe that reconciliation with God was only possible through this unmerited act of God's reaching out to us, rather than the opposite scenario (what Christians mean when they talk about "grace"), and the individual's acceptance of this gift of "grace" through faith in God and the truth of this scenario.
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DivaDeb
HOLY CARP!!!
bachophile
May 31 2006, 11:08 AM
Posted Image

Bach...my kids occasionally line up and do that scene with their loose-leaf notebooks.

:P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Dewey
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
bachophile
May 31 2006, 11:08 AM
Posted Image

http://jahozafat.com/cgi-bin/wavs_bst.cgi?..._Python=mp6.wav
"By nature, i prefer brevity." - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, p. 685.

"Never waste your time trying to explain yourself to people who are committed to misunderstanding you." - Anonymous

"Oh sure, every once in a while a turd floated by, but other than that it was just fine." - Joe A., 2011

I'll answer your other comments later, but my primary priority for the rest of the evening is to get drunk." - Klaus, 12/31/14
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
I think a number of Conservative MP's in Britain were at one time accused of visiting a certain house for a damn good flogging by young ladies in leather and stilletos. Does that count, or would they need to be dressed as nuns?
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
***musical princess***
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
John D'Oh
May 31 2006, 08:24 PM
a number of Conservative MP's in Britain

I thought there was only ONE conservative MP in Britain.

:cool:

:P

x
x Caroline x
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mark
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
It's all so pointless.

And stupid.

___.___
(_]===*
o 0
When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
John D'Oh
Member Avatar
MAMIL
***musical princess***
May 31 2006, 03:33 PM
John D'Oh
May 31 2006, 08:24 PM
a number of Conservative MP's in Britain

I thought there was only ONE conservative MP in Britain.

:cool:

:P

x

In the old days, before you were born, British conservatives used to roam the earth, feeding from the poor, grinding their faces into the dirt, and drinking expensive after-shave. Believe it or not, my MP was one Gyles Brandreth, which gives you an idea of the high levels of intellect required to join the august ranks of these now extinct creatures. They were ruled by a madwoman, who dressed all in blue, and would shriek in a manner most horrid if anyone even so much looked at the 'Labour' box on a voting slip. Eventually, she succumbed to Mad Cow disease, and was taken out of office gibbering and drooling, to finally be seen as the agent of evil and despair that she truly was. A Grey Shade, the one they named Major, followed, until it became apparent that his true name was Major-Ballsup, and he was replaced by He Who Shall Not Be Named, may He Reign For Eternity, or at least until the next Rhyll by-election.
What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pianojerome
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Quote:
 
Mortification is an ancient (and current) practice in the Christian tradition and comes from Scripture, including the Old Testament. It is also practiced in most other religions to one extent or another, including Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and many of the earth-based religions.

The purpose is to mortify or discipline the flesh in order to take control of one's baser desires and to focus on one's spiritual needs. It takes various forms including fasting as is done by most religions. It also includes the practice of wearing hair shirts as penance. It may include prolong prayer. When Catholics do not eat meat on Fridays or give up something they like for Lent, this is a type of mortification. When Jews fast, it is a type of mortification. When we see the Shiites in Iraq whipping each other in line, this also is a form of mortification.

What the Da Vinci Code exhibits, of course, is the most intense and extreme form of mortification -- the whipping of oneself as well as the wearing of a barbed rope around one's leg.


Interesting posts, Rick.

I'm not sure how Jewish fasting or Catholic lent is considered 'mortification'. The point of Jews fasting for one day on Yom Kippur, or of Catholics giving up chocolate (or something else) for Lent (as far as I know; I'm not expert on Catholicism) is not to mortify the body or to cause pain, nor does such behavior even cause any damage or pain to the body. Jews fast for one day on Yom Kippur, and really, if you don't concentrate on the hunger all day (which is not the point of fasting), it really doesn't hurt. As you said, the point is to focus on spiritual needs, but the reason for fasting is not to hurt ourselves but simply to not eat so as to focus more on prayer. When Catholics give up, for example, chocolate for Lent, that's not harming the body in any way at all - it is simply choosing to live without some particular commodity for a given period of time - perhaps it is a sacrifice, but certainly not mortification.

Fasting for an entire week, including both days and nights, might be mortification. Giving up water for Lent might be a form of mortification, as water is essential, and without it for such a long period of time, real bodily harm can be caused. Maybe if one were to fast for a day, but focus the entire day on hunger and thirst, and focus the entire day on the fact that one is not eating so as to cause oneself pain and misery - maybe that would be mortification.

But simply not eating for 24 hours so as to focus more on something else (without focusing at all on the fact that one is not eating)? Many college students do that every now and then anyway, simply because they don't have time or forget to eat meals one day. Not eating chocolate for a few weeks? Is being a vegetarian considered mortification, because the person is denying himself the pleasure of eating meat?
Sam
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
AlbertaCrude
Bull-Carp
Sam, since Pope John XXIII the RCC Lenten fasting and other rituals of self mortification/discipline leading up to Easter have become highly individualistic. There are recommended practices but it pretty much up to an individual's own piety how they choose to observe- note I did not use the word celebrate- Lent

The Eastern Orthodox Lenten tradition of Velikii Post or Great Fast, however is far more prescribed and similar to the RCC Lenten fast pre Vatican II. A devout Orthodox will not under any circumstances other than medical, eat the flesh of an animal other than a fish throughout Lent. Nor will they over eat but deliberately make a point of leaving the dinner table still feeling a bit hungry. Normally treats such as coffee, candy and alcohol are also eschewed during Lent. He or she will attend Vespers each Saturday evening prior to the Divine Liturgy on Sunday and will consume nothing other than water in the time between Vespers and teh Divine Liturgy the following day. Each morning and evening during the week the family will pray in small area of their home or apartment that is adorned with icons and candles. Usually there is a table in that area upon which sits a specially baked loaf of bread, salt and a pitcher or glass of water. Finally you have a priest take your confession before receiving teh Sacrament of Communion at the Divine Liturgy on Easter Sunday which symbolizes the official end of the Great Fast and the beginning of the celebration of the Resurrection.

It's all about physical self discipline and the contemplation of something beyond the material world.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
Mark
May 31 2006, 11:38 AM
It's all so pointless.

And stupid.

It appears that way, Mark, to unbelievers as well as to believers who do not understand nor appreciate ascetic spirituality. For those who see their body and soul as fully intertwined and who see their purpose as reaching a spiritual plain, being able to subjugate the immediacy of the body's urges and feelings to a higher spiritual purpose make perfect sense and is very rational.

The fact that such practices bridge virtually all religions but are generally practiced only by those who practice their religion through some level of ascetical practices would indicate it has merit. Either that, or we would have to define these people as insane. I am not so sure I would define people such as Mother Theresa, or some of the great mysitics of all religions as insane.

But to be honest with you, if I were an unbeliever, I'd be reading this and saying ..."WTF????!!!!"
[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rick Zimmer
Member Avatar
Fulla-Carp
pianojerome
May 31 2006, 12:29 PM
Interesting posts, Rick.

I'm not sure how Jewish fasting or Catholic lent is considered 'mortification'.  The point of Jews fasting for one day on Yom Kippur, or of Catholics giving up chocolate (or something else) for Lent (as far as I know; I'm not expert on Catholicism) is not to mortify the body or to cause pain, nor does such behavior even cause any damage or pain to the body.  Jews fast for one day on Yom Kippur, and really, if you don't concentrate on the hunger all day (which is not the point of fasting), it really doesn't hurt.  As you said, the point is to focus on spiritual needs, but the reason for fasting is not to hurt ourselves but simply to not eat so as to focus more on prayer.  When Catholics give up, for example, chocolate for Lent, that's not harming the body in any way at all - it is simply choosing to live without some particular commodity for a given period of time - perhaps it is a sacrifice, but certainly not mortification.

Fasting for an entire week, including both days and nights, might be mortification.  Giving up water for Lent might be a form of mortification, as water is essential, and without it for such a long period of time, real bodily harm can be caused.  Maybe if one were to fast for a day, but focus the entire day on hunger and thirst, and focus the entire day on the fact that one is not eating so as to cause oneself pain and misery - maybe that would be mortification.

But simply not eating for 24 hours so as to focus more on something else (without focusing at all on the fact that one is not eating)?  Many college students do that every now and then anyway, simply because they don't have time or forget to eat meals one day.  Not eating chocolate for a few weeks?  Is being a vegetarian considered mortification, because the person is denying himself the pleasure of eating meat?

Don't get hung up on semantics, Sam.

To me, fasting and ritual pain are both defined as mortification -- an attempt to subjugate the body for a spiritual purpose.

However, you are also correct. Forget the term mortification and just look at the actions and fasting is one thing and inflicting ritualistic pain is another.

To me, ritualistic pain is not a practice which should be recommended or even suggested to most people, believers or not-believers. It is a very focused expression of interior spirituality and is a practice that should be reserved only to those for whom it provides deep and lasting spiritual edification.

This of course, is why it is not commonly known -- it is indeed and intensely private and intimate expression of ones spiritual nature. To me, it should never be done, even if one wants to, without full and complete knowledge and advice of one's spiritual director.

The book I mentioned above is really an excellent source to study this practice from an unbiased, biological and sociological standpoint and understand why there are those who undertake it. If you are truly interested and looking for some very heavy summer reading, I'd recommend it.

[size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size]
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
LWpianistin
Member Avatar
HOLY CARP!!!
Mark
May 31 2006, 11:38 AM
It's all so pointless.

And stupid.

i'm not a strong believer (if at all), but i don't think it's stupid at all.

[ it's actually one of the few things about religion that i agree with. not flaggilation every hour or anything like that, but i like the penny-in-the-shoe idea and the heavier necklace. i might try that actually. just put a penny in my shoe and see if it changes anything...
And how are you today?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1