I have written a short analysis of my experience under the Bodhi Tree at Mahabodhi Temple as part of my assessment on what constitutes a ’sacred space’. It can be found here. It’s a little over 500 words, so it’s quite a relaxing and non-intimidating read.
I feel that Mahabodhi Temple is the most sacred space I have been to, and few other places can match it, not because there are none, but only because I have been immersed in recent years by my studies in Buddhism that doctrinally, the Temple means so much, yet I openly acknowledge my time in Hiroshima was largely more affecting than my time in Bodhgaya. And it’s not like I did not understand the significance of my pilgrimage to India; I became interested in Buddhism early in 2005, and I went to Bodhgaya in 2007.
I look forward to reading what you wrote. Question, do you think it is our perception of a place that makes it feel more spriritual or is it the energy of a place?
I think it is 70% perceptual and 30% inherent. Places that have meaning to us sometimes are ‘closed off’ to others. For example, a forest has inherent value and beauty, and by all practicalities is a place filled with vital energy. I suspect that because I was not raised in a naturescape like a forest, beach or farm, I do not feel much spirituality when I’m going on hikes through the mountains/forests.
Nevertheless, I acknowledge it is 30% inherent because even though I may not feel as much connection as other people, I acknowledge that the spirituality is most certainly there.