Why are Eastern people more spiritual?

[spacedout]

Most spiritual people seem to live in the Eastern world today. Is that because non-spiritual people migrated to the Western world first, thousands of years ago, and the spiritual ones stayed where they are? The American Indians were, and still are, quite spiritual but they were replaced mainly by Nordic and Scandinavian people who were, and still are, more religious and less spiritual. Are there any anthropologists in this forum who could shed some light on this subject?

[spirit4711]

How come you think Eastern people are more spiritual than Western people?

[Xanafax]

I think the answer lies in science. Science and industrialisation where born in the Western World, here in the UK and in America.

[spirit4711]

What is the answer @Xanafax? Scientists aren't spiritual? Mmmmm.....

Anyway, I don't believe it's Easternness or Westernness that makes people more or less spiritual. It's a distinction that doesn't serve any purpose for me.

[Xanafax]

The OP asked a question, I answered it to the best of my knowledge.

Scientists can be spiritual, but I got the impression the OP was referring to the typical type of spiritualism, you know, mysticism.

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by spirit4711

How come you think Eastern people are more spiritual than Western people?

That's a good question. To me, being spiritual has a lot to do with seeing yourself in others and others in yourself; in other words, having an innate sense that we are all one and the same with no judgment of others as being better or worse. Jesus lived in the East, yoga originated in the East, and all of the mystics I've heard of come from that part of the world. These people have never invaded another country. They just seem to me to be more peace loving people, less dogmatic, and nonsecular than people of the Western world who seem to be just the opposite of all the above.

[Xanafax]

You gotta remember that the east has seen some of the most dogmatic peoples, dictators, religions and regimes in history.

The Western world brought freedom, not the East.

[Eric Roosevelt]

The word spiritual comes from "spirit" which refers to the "supernatural" or "non-physical". So in what sense is religiosity not a type of spirituality? The Ambrahamic religions are centered around the idea of the supernatural. From what I've understood the eastern religions are less focused on the supernatural, and more focused on certain philosophical ideas and practices.

[Johnny5]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Most spiritual people seem to live in the Eastern world today. Is that because non-spiritual people migrated to the Western world first, thousands of years ago, and the spiritual ones stayed where they are? The American Indians were, and still are, quite spiritual but they were replaced mainly by Nordic and Scandinavian people who were, and still are, more religious and less spiritual. Are there any anthropologists in this forum who could shed some light on this subject?

The Spiritual of the Western World and the Eastern World are all the same; however, the religious systems are different from each other. Western Religious System originated from the Egyptian Religious Belief.

Egyptian Religion => Judaism => Christianity => Islam and etc.


Eastern Religious System originated from the Indian Religious Belief.

Hinduism => Buddhism => Jainism and etc.

They are all religious systems for people to believe and practice. The Western Religions rely on the almighty God for Salvation; and the people need only to study the scriptures and believe. They need only to have faith and follow. The leaders take advantage of this uniqueness of this belief system and use it to rule people. No mental develop is necessary; so the followers have no virtues. They have only knowledge, faith and submission.

Be Aware of Islam.... Check Islam Watch


The Eastern Religions DO NOT rely on the almighty God for salvation; and the people need to rely on themselves for salvation. There is no one to save you; basically, you are learning and practicing to save yourself. So the people need to study the scriptures, and practice according to the scriptures. You cannot just read about meditation, you have to practice meditation to get result. When people practice meditation everyday, they will develop compassions and virtues.

The people with compassions and virtues, they won't looking forward to destroy/bomb your community or country. They look forward to help people in spiritual need.

Can you see the different systems now?

Best Regards,

Johnny

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by Johnny5

The Spiritual of the Western World and the Eastern World are all the same; however, the religious systems are different from each other. Western Religious System originated from the Egyptian Religious Belief.

Egyptian Religion => Judaism => Christianity => Islam and etc.


Eastern Religious System originated from the Indian Religious Belief.

Hinduism => Buddhism => Jainism and etc.

They are all religious systems for people to believe and practice. The Western Religions rely on the almighty God for Salvation; and the people need only to study the scriptures and believe. They need only to have faith and follow. The leaders take advantage of this uniqueness of this belief system and use it to rule people. No mental develop is necessary; so the followers have no virtues. They have only knowledge, faith and submission.


The Eastern Religions DO NOT rely on the almighty God for salvation; and the people need to rely on themselves for salvation. There is no one to save you; basically, you are learning and practicing to save yourself. So the people need to study the scriptures, and practice according to the scriptures. You cannot just read about meditation, you have to practice meditation to get result. When people practice meditation everyday, they will develop compassions and virtues.

This is very good Johnny but my question is why is that so? Why didn't the Western world develop a similar belief system as the Eastern religions? Why did the West become so dogmatic, as in your description in the third paragraph? I'm thinking that your answer reinforces my hypothesis of Nordic and Scandinavian migration.

[MiBeloved]

check out the books by Jared Diamond. His idea is that it is based on the geographic location where those particular people developed.

[Xanafax]

You know sometimes I think I talk to myself on this forum.

Has anybody even considered my opinion or did you just discard it out of hand because it didn't agree with your established idea about reality?

[JSB]

Originally Posted by spacedout

...
These people have never invaded another country.
...

What on Earth ever gave you this idea?

[nin64]

The funny thing is, the east strive to be as scientific as the west, come over here if you don't believe me, and now the west want to throw away science and strive to be spiritual?? What's wrong with this world?
I read Silva Method and stopped reading it when I reach page 50... something is not right.

I personally think it's because the East is so different from the West when they first met, and we are naturally attracted to the exotic.

"You gotta remember that the east has seen some of the most dogmatic peoples, dictators, religions and regimes in history.

The Western world brought freedom, not the East. "

Totally agree with this.
Maybe it's because the East have suffered too much and can't see anyway out, and used spirituality to escape and reminding themselves that they are way better than the kings... or maybe because the East eat a lot of rice.

As for the freedom part, it's obvious isn't it? America is a rebel country, right? They want freedom and don't want to be oppressed by their ruler.
I learned it from playing Civ4: Colonization

[spacedout]

These are some great and varied answers that got me thinking. I know, I'm not supposed to do that, but the "monkery mind" took over. Anyway, here goes: Science and industrialization were basically born in the West (Xanafax) but both the East and the West have dogmatic people. Okay, so far so good. Spirituality vs non-spirituality have to do with geographics where people were developed (MiBeloved). A good observation which supports the idea that N.W. Europe set out, settled, and conquered the West. America has freedom (Nin64 & Vader), which is probably the heart of the answer. There is more supression in the East (Vader).

So, some aggressive people (Vikings, Englishmen, Germans, etc.) ventured out and settled in the Western world and established a democracy that allowed them to be free and do what they wanted. Their religion was Christianity; not Hindu, Buddhism, or anything really spiritual. Since they had freedom to do and think as they pleased, they invented all kinds of stuff and became very industrious. They work hard, play hard and think a lot. How's that?

[Xanafax]

Christianity did nothing to free the western world, just shackled it in a desert dogma.

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Christianity did nothing to free the western world, just shackled it in a desert dogma.

Yes, exactly - this is why the West is so dogmatic and aggresive.

[Xanafax]

Was. Was.

Not any more. Secularism is on the rise and making headway.

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Was. Was.

Not any more. Secularism is on the rise and making headway.

We can only hope.

[SarahJaynee]

Maybe it's to do with our Prophets. The East had Jesus but he had a short Life and a very violent death. Mohummed and Suddharta lived a much longer Life and thus had more stories, revelations, followers etc.
I also can't help but feel it is to do with the weather also. Those in the chilly West had to construct adequate shelter, store food, farm like mad just to survive. Many of the Eastern countries are warm, year round supply of fruits and veg, seas and lakes teaming with fish (and not too cold to go and catch them year round), not much shelter required an dthe warm weather just creates a more relaxed pace of Life.
The religions of the East are much more about individuals striving to be better in their daily and community lives (Buddhism, Muslim, Hinduism) whereas Christianity sets us all as sinners from the get go who need to strive for redemption.
Interesting topic - well done OP.

[Johnny5]

Originally Posted by spacedout

This is very good Johnny but my question is why is that so? Why didn't the Western world develop a similar belief system as the Eastern religions? Why did the West become so dogmatic, as in your description in the third paragraph? I'm thinking that your answer reinforces my hypothesis of Nordic and Scandinavian migration.

Let me elaborate further. It is not the Nordic and Scandinavian migration. It is the power of the Religious System (the power to dominate, use and abuse it's for advantages).

The Western Religious System was created by the Rulers, and was used by the ruler to rule over people's lives. In Ancient Egypt, the Pharaohs had the power to change the Religious systems for the purpose of ruling people.

Mose is a Hebrew who was raised and lived with the Pharaoh, and he had the chance to learn about Egyptian Religious System. I believed that Mose borrowed the Ten Commandments from the Egyptian's Book of the Death. Some of the stories in the Bible, are borrowed from other cultures in the regions. Archaeologist found Noah's arch story in Mesopotamia, and Lion's den story in the Egyptian's temple.

The Christian belief system established to fight against the Roman Rule. Next Emperor Constantine accepted Christianity; then Christianity took advantage of this privilege, and destroyed other weak belief system in the region. They established the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire).

The Empire broke up, the established Religious System adopted by new rulers, and continue to rule people with it to this day with the Pope as a representative of the almighty. He and his organization change the rules and regulations of the Western Religious System. The leadership in this religious System is focusing on expansion and ruling only (not for freedom, not for progressive science, not for mental development).


The Muslim Religious System is created by a despicable man, called himself the prophet Muhammad. He learned about Judaism and Christianity; then he spend his life wrote a declaration war (the Koran). He taught this Religious System to mobilize people to wage war against Judaism, Christianity, and the world. The most vicious and destructive Wahabism is spreading around the world like wild fire with the power of petroleum dollars. check Islam Watch

Wahabism and petroleum dollars will make the world a terrifying place to live.

This my view on Western Religious System.

Best Regards,

Johnny

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Yes, exactly - this is why the West is so dogmatic and aggresive.

And Chinese communism isn't? And their invasion of Tibet? How about Japan's invasion of China, Burma, etc, not so many years ago? Or the Pol Pot regime in Cambodia?

I have not been to the Far East, but I worked in the Middle East for three years. People there are pretty much the same as anywhere else - trying to make a living. I wouldn't say they were any more spiritual than westerners.

Being poor either doesn't necessarily make one more spiritual. There are many poor people who are mean and grasping, whether they live in the East or the West.

Also, do you think people in the East are more spiritual than people in Africa and South America?

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Johnny5

The Christian belief system established to fight against the Roman Rule.

So, which history of Christianity did you get that from? When Jesus appeared, many Jews hoped he was a political messiah who would free them from the Roman yoke. But, he told them he wasn't - he was a spiritual messiah.

When asked about paying tribute to Caesar (paying taxes), he took a Roman coin and said:

"Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s." (Luke 20:25).

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by Xanafax

Christianity did nothing to free the western world, just shackled it in a desert dogma.

Do you think it was Christianity's remit to free the western world? If so, free it from what, exactly?

[aelle]

Whatever gave you the impression that the East was more spiritual (how do you define it anyway?) than the West?
How do you even see a cohesion among the beliefs in the East, or in the West? Having lived in several countries in the Far East, South East and Middle East, I can tell you there just isn't one - ditto for the West.

Religious/spiritual followers in the East can be just as dogmatic about their beliefs as some westerners, and vice versa. The full spectrum exists all over the world.

There is one significant difference, which is that extraversion is more highly regarded in the West (US especially), while introversion (and introspection) are more highly regarded in some Asian cultures. This could pass for spirituality I guess

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Jesus lived in the East, yoga originated in the East, and all of the mystics I've heard of come from that part of the world.

Jesus and the Apostles lived in the Near East (Israel/Palestine), which is right on the edge of Europe, and is considered by some to be actually part of Europe (Israel usually takes part in the Eurovision Song Contest!).

A lot of the mystics I have read have come from Europe, for example:

Padre Pio (Italy)
Maria Faustina Kowalska (Poland)
St Therese de Lisieux (France)
St John of the Cross (Spain)
St Teresa of Avila (Spain)
Anne Catherine Emmerich (Germany)
St Francis of Assisi (Italy)
Thomas a Kempis (Germany)

and many, many more.

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by Cantando

Jesus and the Apostles lived in the Near East (Israel/Palestine), which is right on the edge of Europe, and is considered by some to be actually part of Europe (Israel usually takes part in the Eurovision Song Contest!).

A lot of the mystics I have read have come from Europe, for example:

Padre Pio (Italy)
Maria Faustina Kowalska (Poland)
St Therese de Lisieux (France)
St John of the Cross (Spain)
St Teresa of Avila (Spain)
Anne Catherine Emmerich (Germany)
St Francis of Assisi (Italy)
Thomas a Kempis (Germany)

I guess it depends on how one defines the Eastern world. The division between the "East" and the "West" began as a product of European culture before the discovery of America and southern Africa. Now East/West distinction has become global. I think of the Western world as the western hemisphere and the Eastern world as the eastern hemisphere, more or less.

The Eastern World can be broken up into the Far East, Middle East and the Near East with Far East being SE Asia, South Asia, E. Russia, etc. The Middle East being SW Asia, East Africa and so on. Near East - Se Europe, Mediterranean area, Western Africa, Turkey, etc.

The divisions are truly aribrary and ambiguous depending on whether one is concerned with cultures, religions, archeology, history, politics, economics, or something else.

Therefore, all of those people mentioned above would be from the Eastern world, would they not?

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Therefore, all of those people mentioned above would be from the Eastern world, would they not?

Well, strictly speaking, any place east on the compass, wherever you are, is east!

It depends on your own usage. I imagine if you were in California and someone came up to you and said they were from the east, you may think they were from New York!

If I was on the Central Line in London, and someone said they wanted to go east, I would direct them to the platform to take them to east London.

Here in England, the usual meaning of the East means Asia, especially India, China, Japan, etc.

Israel/Palestine is a very special case as it is on the cusp between East and West. Some theologians believe this to be significant.

I think it's stretching it a bit (to put it mildly) if you consider France, Germany, Italy and Spain to be in the Eastern World.

[spacedout]

Yes Cantando, like you said, it depends on your own usage. If the eastern hemisphere (0 degrees east longitude to 180) is considered the Eastern world, then eastern France, all of Germany and Italy would be part of the Near East. On the other hand; Spain, Portugal and most of UK would be in the Western world.
I agree with you, it's very arbitrary.

[Cantando]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Yes Cantando, like you said, it depends on your own usage. If the eastern hemisphere (0 degrees east longitude to 180) is considered the Eastern world, then eastern France, all of Germany and Italy would be part of the Near East. On the other hand; Spain, Portugal and most of UK would be in the Western world.
I agree with you, it's very arbitrary.

Yes, but please note the difference between 'east' (the geographical position relative to where you are) and 'the East' (or the Eastern World) which are long recognized terms to denote, not only the location of, but also all of the habits, culture and belief systems of Asia.

France, Germany, Spain and Italy are part of Europe, the West, the Western World. That is not just my personal opinion, or a matter of arbitrary usage. It's fact.

Added:

Btw, did you know that South Korea and Japan are increasingly recognized as being part of the West?
So, the concept nowadays has not so much to do with geographical location, but more of having a common ground in culture, economics, democracy, law, beliefs, etc.