Being 'spiritual'.

Oryx

Jakkass wrote: »

Question: What on earth is spirituality if it doesn't involve a connection that is somehow extraordinary or different to secular existence?

For me, I don't see why on earth I'd be interested otherwise.



Ones own spirit IMO, is there to connect with the higher spirit. Christian scriptures suggest this to me.

From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of various types of faith, some are based purely on knowledge of the self, not on any external deity. Delving within ones own soul is the only road they require. But going within oneself can be extraordinary and different to secular existence. The peace and self knowledge, the feeling of unlimited love, can be profound.

And you have that within religious practice that is based on an external god. Pare all of christianity back and it comes down to this: 'Go in peace, my peace I give you'. and 'Love one another as I have loved you'. Do simply this, and to my mind, you are a spiritual person. Whether you pray or meditate, see God or reach nirvana.

philologos

Oryx wrote: »

From my (admittedly limited) knowledge of various types of faith, some are based purely on knowledge of the self, not on any external deity. Delving within ones own soul is the only road they require. But going within oneself can be extraordinary and different to secular existence. The peace and self knowledge, the feeling of unlimited love, can be profound.

Human compassion is always limited. We are finite beings, it's impossible for us to have anything unlimited without seeking for something beyond ourselves.

Oryx wrote: »

And you have that within religious practice that is based on an external god. Pare all of christianity back and it comes down to this: 'Go in peace, my peace I give you'. and 'Love one another as I have loved you'. Do simply this, and to my mind, you are a spiritual person. Whether you pray or meditate, see God or reach nirvana.

To an extent, I agree that there is a level of truth in all religions. If there wasn't some level of truth nobody would believe in them.

However, I do not believe that all can be absolutely true. It's logically impossible that Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Mormonism, Christianity, Sikhism, Baha'i, and so on can all be true. They make contradictory claims.

I mean, it feels nice saying that all things are true, however, for me it's just too diplomatic when one is trying to find out what is really the case.

Oryx

Jakkass wrote: »

Human compassion is always limited. We are finite beings, it's impossible for us to have anything unlimited without seeking for something beyond ourselves.



To an extent, I agree that there is a level of truth in all religions. If there wasn't some level of truth nobody would believe in them.

However, I do not believe that all can be absolutely true. It's logically impossible that Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Islam, Mormonism, Christianity, Sikhism, Baha'i, and so on can all be true. They make contradictory claims.

I mean, it feels nice saying that all things are true, however, for me it's just too diplomatic when one is trying to find out what is really the case.

I didnt think I said all things were true. All religion is people trying to find a way to live and meaning to their lives. Or a pointer towards eternal salvation. Get rid of the trappings, the ritual, the money making, and you usually find their essential truth. And in that, many are similar, but yes I agree, their doctrines are contradictory.

What Im talking about here (I hope) is not religion, it is personal spirituality. Which is where your own life and belief takes you, the person it makes you beyond what you are physically. Your own personal truth.

philologos

Oryx wrote: »

I didnt think I said all things were true. All religion is people trying to find a way to live and meaning to their lives. Or a pointer towards eternal salvation. Get rid of the trappings, the ritual, the money making, and you usually find their essential truth. And in that, many are similar, but yes I agree, their doctrines are contradictory.

I think that ritual has a purpose to a certain degree. When it becomes the main focus, it is wrong. Rituals from birth, to marriage, to burial are all the way through cultural life. It seems a bit gratuitous to throw them all out because you don't like some.

Oryx wrote: »

What Im talking about here (I hope) is not religion, it is personal spirituality. Which is where your own life and belief takes you, the person it makes you beyond what you are physically. Your own personal truth.

Interesting point. If who we are is beyond who we are physically, where is our soul, or our spirit?

I guess I've always been minded towards finding out objective or universal truth that is applicable for everyone rather than personal truths.

As for it "not being religion". This is a common trend amongst people in modernity. I'd argue very much that spiritualism amounts to a personal religion in which the individual combines what seems good together rather than what may be objectively true. I think this is a really interesting trend when I see it expressed though.

Oryx

Jakkass wrote: »

I think that ritual has a purpose to a certain degree. When it becomes the main focus, it is wrong. Rituals from birth, to marriage, to burial are all the way through cultural life. It seems a bit gratuitous to throw them all out because you don't like some.

Im not throwing anything out. I accept someones religion as valid to them even if it doesnt work for me. What I was saying is that when you get past the doctrine to the core of that religion, you get to a similar goal within each one, quite often.

As for it "not being religion". This is a common trend amongst people in modernity. I'd argue very much that spiritualism amounts to a personal religion in which the individual combines what seems good together rather than what may be objectively true. I think this is a really interesting trend when I see it expressed though.

Spiritualism is a religion. Spirituality is an attitude.

I actually dont see anything wrong with a la carte religion, but I think its a separate discussion.

philologos

Oryx wrote: »

Im not throwing anything out. I accept someones religion as valid to them even if it doesnt work for me. What I was saying is that when you get past the doctrine to the core of that religion, you get to a similar goal within each one, quite often.

If the doctrine of a certain faith can help one lead a fulfilled and a legitimate lifestyle, I personally don't know why one would need to "get past it".

You're right on many religions having a similar goal though. When faiths are received by human beings that tends to be the main commonality. I do believe that some faiths are more unique than others.

Oryx wrote: »

Spiritualism is a religion. Spirituality is an attitude.

I personally believe that spirituality follows religion, whether that religion is contrived for ones self, or whether that religion has been found through some form of revelation. Saying "I'm spiritual" sounds better than saying "I follow X" in a lot of peoples ears for some reason.

Oryx wrote: »

I actually dont see anything wrong with a la carte religion, but I think its a separate discussion.

I just think that if religion is a means for finding objective truths about who we are it seems futile to pick and mix.

The odds of religion A being true multiplied by the odds of religion B being true (fusing A and B together), and so on produces a greater odds of religion AB not being true.

espinolman

If a person minus his body is a spirit , then how could they not be spiritual !

Nevyn

I think religion is an expression of a persons spirituality.

Herbal Deity

I think I'd say religion is a formalized means of inducing spiritual feelings.

philologos

espinolman wrote: »

If a person minus his body is a spirit , then how could they not be spiritual !

Interesting. A lot of philosophers would debate the notion of whether or not a spirit is separate from a body, if a spirit can survive without a body, or if a spirit exists at all.

It's a fairly big if, but a rather interesting one.

richards6

Hollyg'lightly wrote: »

Well it seems this is the buzzword of the modern day. Is it that people are so terrified to say ya, i'm religious, so they smooth it over with this being spiritual business, or is it that some people are too lazy to get up off their arse and go to Mass and instead say i'm spiritual when in actual fact they couldn't be bothered giving a thought to any spiritual matters altogether. Is saying you are spiritual really something higher than religion?
:DWhats going on?

Just wanted to say, most interesting on-topic thread I have read around here in a while. Thanks. I have to weigh in with Thaedydal, on religion as a expression of ones spirituality. Its a bit of chicken/egg situation for many, but for me spirituality is a need within us, and our religions/rituals are external means of connecting with our internal worlds. Saying that, my opinion/belief is that there isn’t a separation between the divine and the secular, i.e. we are in the world and the world is in us. Trying to separate it out into supernatural and natural just doesn’t work for me. Again this is just my belief system, and not a judgement.

Herbal Deity

richards6 wrote: »

Saying that, my opinion/belief is that there isn’t a separation between the divine and the secular, i.e. we are in the world and the world is in us. Trying to separate it out into supernatural and natural just doesn’t work for me. Again this is just my belief system, and not a judgement.

"Natural" would imply that something can be observed and measured repeatedly, scientifically speaking.

I don't think divinity makes any sense if it's not supernatural (not that it makes much sense to me in the first place ).

I do acknowledge and respect the right of people to embrace the divine and to have their own beliefs, but I don't really understand how people fail to recognise the difference between the natural and the supernatural...

Then again, I suppose there being no distinction between the natural and supernatural could be one of those ultimately paradoxial, but deep thought patterns that induces spiritual feelings in some.

hmm...

espinolman

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Then again, I suppose there being no distinction between the natural and supernatural could be one of those ultimately paradoxial, but deep thought patterns that induces spiritual feelings in some.

hmm...

The spirit creates the natural , it creates energy , space and time .

You are a spirit and if you were not creating the physical universe , you would not be able to percieve it .

Anything you can see , you are creating .

Herbal Deity

Solipsist?

espinolman

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Solipsist?

No , the mind does not exist , a spirit can create something real .

The physical universe is real , it is not an illusion , you can create something real .

Get a mental picture of an elephant , ok , what is creating the picture ?

Its not your "mind' thats creating it , it is you .

Herbal Deity

Surely there's no semantic difference between the mind and "you", in this context...

espinolman

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Surely there's no semantic difference between the mind and "you", in this context...

You could create a mechanism like a computer and say it is thinking , but that does'nt make it aware , it would be a created stimulus responce mechanism .

You are a spirit and a spirit is not created , but a spirit can create , so a spirit could create a machine which he calls a mind and then confuse himself with the machine he created and think he is this machine he created .

Darlughda

There are people whom I have met in life (some atheist, some religious, and some who define themselves as 'spiritual'.)
Some of these have been full of their own nonsense and ego, some sincere but misguided, others just plain motivated by an inner urge to be fully present with another human being, doing the very best they can for that person at that time.

Only very few of those people would I personally describe as truly spiritual, in my own definition. Atheist, religious or whatever, there is no mistaking the sureness that they are genuinely spiritual people. Their company and presence is truly uplifting.

I love the quote 'Spirituality is the burgeoning of divinity in the individual'. I really don't know if I could ever worship and obey a deity again in my lifetime, but I feel greatly assured when in the presence of truly spiritual people.

hiorta

As every individual is so very different in so many ways from each other, it is no surprise how we might view some of them.
How do you suppose you were assessed?

philologos

Darlugha: Again, sounds very nice, but I'm not sure how true it is in reality. I'm confused as to how atheists can believe in spirits or even be considered as spiritual when they reject all things beyond what they can verify scientifically in their own opinion. We cannot verify a spirit as being anything material.

Confusing stuff. I'd love to hear your thoughts on it though.

Darlughda

Jackass, this is just my take on things: I believe every human being is a spirit, and we live in a dense material world, co-existing with us are dimensions of etherial realities.

But I do not believe in god, anymore,nor a pantheon of them,anymore, and certainly not the Judaeo-Christian paternalistic archetype), nor any other variation of 'superior' deities to be placated and worshipped.

Yet, I do believe in an evolution of spirits. So, a person can be an atheist, yet by their actions and deeds they can manifest an inherent spirituality.

Hiorta, I wouldn't like to speculate on how I would be assessed!:pac:
Though, it does seem to be that truly spiritual people have an astounding compassion and wisdom, so maybe they have the clarity to see beyond muddled attempts.

dlofnep

Jakkass wrote: »

I personally would consider it more "wacky" to regard yourself as spiritual without any external basis for their beliefs.

No more Wacky than taking a 2000 year old book as Gospel. Being spiritual seems to be alot more modest - they do not claim to know or understand, but base their spirituality on their own life experiences.

Christianity is no more credible than spirituality. Infact, it's the opposite.

philologos

dlofnep wrote: »

No more Wacky than taking a 2000 year old book as Gospel. Being spiritual seems to be alot more modest - they do not claim to know or understand, but base their spirituality on their own life experiences.

Christianity is no more credible than spirituality. Infact, it's the opposite.

I'd need to hear reasoning for your second point.

On your first point, I'm referring to the subjectivity vs objectivity issue. If one is coming up with ideas without basis, it can only possibly be subjective.

Herbal Deity

Depends on whether you consider a personal spiritual experience to be objective or subjective.

I would think many Christians would attribute their faith largely to feeling a personal connection to God or some other kind of personal, religious/spiritual experience. Is this not subjective?

philologos

Theres a difference between:
1) A God or gods interacting with the world in it, and revealing Himself consistently.
2) A person basing assumptions on themselves alone without considering the collective experience of mankind.

For me, faith isn't just something that makes me happy. It is the pursuit of truth about what this world is about.