pretentiousness

is it pretentious to call myself daoist, or to talk about these things out loud here? i would like to think that these are not useful questions.

im daoist not because I claim to know anything about the way. i simply identify. is it enough to be sincerely searching, reflecting? mainly, i just love the tradition so so much; it felt right from the beginning, like even if i never found the path i would feel at home looking. in any case, names are only names, i call myself one thing, and i dont claim authority over what im called: you define the names you call me, and as long as the meaning and intent is true, we will agree.

on this blog, i would flatter myself to think anyone would find an instructive vibe--
it's candid exploration for myself, thoughts that are interesting to me, and perhaps might be interesting to someone else one day. the same goes for all topics on this blog

perhaps as a kid im given more leeway to talk about these things without seeming pretentious being:
people believe in the sincerety with which we recognize our own lack of understanding.
why would i take myself seriously?

for example, is it pretentious for me to have spiritual episodes in times of emotional turmoil?--times when i put everything down and just take a walk and reflect, perhaps with texts? perhaps the only problem is with bringing these things up in conversation self-indulgently: in the future I will just call them "deep reflection," i will use the word spiritual less often.

this whole post comes from class, where someone mentioned "do-it-yourself religion" where people mix and match. i would hope "pretentiousness" implies lack of sincerity or not caring candidly. such as mixing different rites without wondering about cosmology. i on the other hand take the cosmology without the rite! everyday life can be rite too; why should i adopt foreign rite just for the sake of foreign rite?--enjoying it is something else. if your going to find inspiration in multiple traditions, you need not take parts of each to create something irreconcilable with the originals: you can accept all in their entirety (cosmologically) and reconcile to find universal, and not just individualistic, faith.

perhaps the DIY religion described in the media is a baby-boomer generation thing. they were often raised with traditional religion and rite, and so the natural human yearning for trascendentalism was already solidified in those terms. these are the angry atheists, these are the ones searching for ritual. the new generation, often raised without any religion at all, seems so free to pursue spirituality without baggage. i really cannot imagine the senses of deep spiritual un-fulfillment and discontentment that our fathers deal with. i will raise my kids without church or religious undertones (ie, the autumnal equinox will be celebrated with secular harvest festivals, not pagan rituals). thus they too can be spiritual atheists.