Are you a new ager?

[Identity]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Like in the video that OP referenced, New Age is religious eclecticism, steeped in individualism (which in virtually all cases means postmodernism, but that's a bit besides the point).

Whether or not in your bag of eclectic beliefs you have things like "Buddha exemplifies a principle of authentic experience", is rather orthogonal to whether or not it's New Age. "But it's not beliefs". Ok, but you're professing something. What you're professing, and despite of how epistemically stripped down you sometimes profess it to be — over our repeated interactions, it seems like New Age describes that.

In general, when people start to speak about what their religion is, it's possible to describe that, and when I see people on this forum do that, I generally see New Age.

Right, if I understand you correctly, this perspective is similar to the point I’m trying to make.

Just like @Leo Gura says ‘no legs, no pants, no problem’. Yet, if I see the ‘form’ Leo walking around. There will be legs, and most likely, there will be pants. Right? Unless you’re THAT wild.

@UnbornTao and yes, the possibility to eliminate beliefs sounds great. Yet, when you’re in a conversation with someone, words are still being said, right? 
However awake, detached, loose, the ideas are held, surely there is still some general philosophy that acts as your operating system?

These examples are symptoms of the underlying idea;

No matter how deeply one gets grounded into nothingness, there will still be some form that appears, right?

That’s actually what I’ve been really enjoying about the tantric perspective. Yes, be deeply rooted in the formless. But don’t reject the form, fully infuse your consciousness into that form. Feel it. Live it. Live the human experience.

[Leo Gura]

Being Awake or spiritual does not mean you gotta act like a Hippie.

But if you wanna act like Hippie, that's available.

Edited August 29 by Leo Gura

[Identity]

Haha this discussion puts a smile on my face. Love you guys ❤️✌🏼

[Moutushi]

26 minutes ago, Identity said:

Haha this discussion puts a smile on my face. Love you guys ❤️✌🏼

I'm not a New Ager, this discussion's got me feeling like I'm about to join an ecstatic dance party in loose patterned pants, while introducing myself as Bodhi Lightyear, as I sip Kombucha in a cup labeled with a picture of earth lol

Edited August 29 by Moutushi

[Identity]

@Moutushi hahaha, that sounds like a fantastic time 🕺🏻

[Keryo Koffa]

12 hours ago, Identity said:

Are you a new ager?

Sure, why not? Let's add that to the list of self-descriptors along with Alien, God, Buddhist, Christian, Psychonaut and Leo.

[UnbornTao]

On 8/29/2024 at 3:20 AM, Carl-Richard said:

Like in the video that OP referenced, New Age is religious eclecticism, steeped in individualism (which in virtually all cases means postmodernism, but that's a bit besides the point).

Whether or not in your bag of eclectic beliefs you have things like "Buddha exemplifies a principle of authentic experience", is rather orthogonal to whether or not it's New Age. "But it's not beliefs". Ok, but you're professing something. What you're professing, and despite of how epistemically stripped down you sometimes profess it to be — over our repeated interactions, it seems like New Age describes that.

In general, when people start to speak about what their religion is, it's possible to describe that, and when I see people on this forum do that, I generally see New Age.

It is about the principle rather than any individual. New age is another worldview but all in all, fair enough. 

A good thing about principles is that they exist and work independent from your mind.

Edited August 30 by UnbornTao

[Jodistrict]

I am Old Age.  I prefer ancient texts.   The modern world is a degeneration of the past.  There is less wisdom now than there was in the middle ages. 

[Lyubov]

be careful with what you all label a distraction, it may be their greatest teacher, and something with a lesson in it you do not have access to in your reality. 

[Carl-Richard]

20 hours ago, Identity said:

Right, if I understand you correctly, this perspective is similar to the point I’m trying to make.

Just like @Leo Gura says ‘no legs, no pants, no problem’. Yet, if I see the ‘form’ Leo walking around. There will be legs, and most likely, there will be pants. Right? Unless you’re THAT wild.

@UnbornTao and yes, the possibility to eliminate beliefs sounds great. Yet, when you’re in a conversation with someone, words are still being said, right? 
However awake, detached, loose, the ideas are held, surely there is still some general philosophy that acts as your operating system?

These examples are symptoms of the underlying idea;

No matter how deeply one gets grounded into nothingness, there will still be some form that appears, right?

That’s actually what I’ve been really enjoying about the tantric perspective. Yes, be deeply rooted in the formless. But don’t reject the form, fully infuse your consciousness into that form. Feel it. Live it. Live the human experience.

Exactly. Even if you're all aboard the formless train, when you profess that to other people and practice it in your own life, that looks like something (it has a form), because you're indeed a formed human being. And whether you prefer to practice it alone in your closet with a YouTube video running in the background or in a monastery with deeply trained and knowledgeable masters, that's form too.

You can indeed reach the formless despite the presence of multiple egoic forms in the same room, or despite deriving practices and principles strictly from one kind of doctrine like a good religious boy. In fact, sometimes that is even the better alternative (in my opinion). And in fact, it's really unavoidable: the only question is if you indeed prefer your own eclectic mix or the original package (or the mix that you got passed down from some other eclectic talking head on YouTube, like the good religious boy you are).

Edited August 30 by Carl-Richard

[QVx]

On 29/08/2024 at 5:33 AM, Lila9 said:

Many times, they are more focused on pleasant and shallow spiritual ideas, attempting to bypass the struggles of life, distracting themselves with the community, various labels they put on themselves, or with hedonism while avoiding deeper spiritual work.

 

This sums up new age individuals and communities perfectly.

It’s one hell of a trap and once you’re in it, it’s as difficult to break free of as materialistic world view.

My biggest realisation is that many people in my lifetime will fail to transcend this stage of development, and thus the next big challenge of conscious development of humanity will be born of entrapment in relativistic bullshit and avoidance of truth within the new age realm.

 

[Basman]

In my experience, new-ageism is a sub-culture of spiritual pleasantries. It is riddled with confirmation bias and wishful interpreting of events. What Lila9 and Carl-Richard said in this thread is pretty much on point.

I had a new-age phase in my early 20s. Very cringe when I look back and I'm glad I got over it. I had a near death experience that completely changed my life and all the new-ageism evaporated from my mind like the morning dew. Spiritual fantasies and pleasantries didn't make my life better and where essentially a waste of energy, though I didn't see it like that until then.

As a result, I value practical action-based self-help a lot more now. I'm extremely shy of interpreting things in a spiritual way because its so easy to self-delusional. If self-help/spirituality isn't practical somehow then I discount it, and I'm right in doing that 9 times out of 10.

Edited August 30 by Basman

[Basman]

It is interesting, because new-ageys are essentially proto-hippies. They are they ones who get the idea to dress in tie-dye and build communes. Then  eventually those communes get co-opted by drug addicts and criminals.

[Carl-Richard]

11 hours ago, Basman said:

I had a new-age phase in my early 20s. Very cringe when I look back and I'm glad I got over it. I had a near death experience that completely changed my life and all the new-ageism evaporated from my mind like the morning dew. Spiritual fantasies and pleasantries didn't make my life better and where essentially a waste of energy, though I didn't see it like that until then.

As a result, I value practical action-based self-help a lot more now. I'm extremely shy of interpreting things in a spiritual way because its so easy to self-delusional. If self-help/spirituality isn't practical somehow then I discount it, and I'm right in doing that 9 times out of 10.

You're probably still New Age though People conflate New Age with a very particular aesthetic (hippies, "peace and love", crystal healing, Burning Man). That's not really it. The aesthetic sometimes co-occurs with New Age, but New Age is much more than that.

Edited August 30 by Carl-Richard

[Human Mint]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

The aesthetic sometimes co-occurs with New Age, but New Age is much more than that.

Hi, what do you think New Age is, then?

Edited August 30 by Human Mint

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Human Mint said:

Hi, what do you think New Age is, then?

On 29.8.2024 at 4:20 AM, Carl-Richard said:

Like in the video that OP referenced, New Age is religious eclecticism, steeped in individualism (which in virtually all cases means postmodernism, but that's a bit besides the point).

Whether or not in your bag of eclectic beliefs you have things like "Buddha exemplifies a principle of authentic experience", is rather orthogonal to whether or not it's New Age. "But it's not beliefs". Ok, let's grant that: you're still professing something. What you're professing, and despite of how epistemically stripped down you sometimes profess it to be — over our repeated interactions, it seems like New Age describes that.

In general, when people start to speak about what their religion is, it's possible to describe that, and when I see people on this forum do that, I generally see New Age.

 

[Human Mint]

@Carl-Richard Yeah, I think I do have some New Age ideas ingrained, although I don't seem to profess them. It is like the current baseline nonetheless

[Basman]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

You're probably still New Age though People conflate New age with an aesthetic (hippies, "peace and love", crystal healing, Burning Man). That's not really it. The aesthetic sometimes co-occurs with New Age, but New Age is much more than that.

I'm not a new-agey. I just like Tony Robbins style self-help and understanding. I don't consider myself a spiritual person.

What do you consider new-age exactly?

[integral]

 

I confess: 🤞 I don’t brush my teeth, I don’t take showers, I don’t wear underwear or shirts, I only wear shorts when it’s mandatory, I have plenty of crazy beliefs that no one would ever support, I wanna live in a tent in the woods, work with a laptop with the nearest available free Wi-Fi while making a six figure salary and shitting in a doggy bag. 

[Lyubov]

4 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

You're probably still New Age though People conflate New Age with a very particular aesthetic (hippies, "peace and love", crystal healing, Burning Man). That's not really it. The aesthetic sometimes co-occurs with New Age, but New Age is much more than that.

Could be, thing is new age to me looks mostly like a sub culture. Usually done by ethnic white people. It’s probably pretty easy to label really any white personality who build their identity around a sort of pantheistic / eastern religion (Hinduism), shrooms, hippy pants, communal potlucks, gentrification of beach towns in Thailand, the terrible music they listen to. I saw a funny meme that said people with ☮️ tattoos are really mean and selfish while people with 💀 tattoos are usually really nice and thoughtful. The irony.