A Basic Definition of Spirituality (of True Faith)

[Leonardo17]

BrianSoddingBoru:

 

“‘Possible’ doesn’t mean probable. It’s possible that my cats speak fluent Mandarin but I’m not going to expend any effort investigating the matter.”

 

- As I said: I don’t believe in God as a cosmic persona either. The least we can say about this matter is that there has been no evidence pointing to the existence of such a being so far. This “inner reality” I’m talking about, is still worth exploring because it does not in any way defy any part of our scientific / rational findings in this world.

 

AngrBoda:

 

“This assumes there is a true spirituality which you can practice. The reality is you're simply reapplying spiritual techniques and understandings that someone else developed -- you're not creating anything based upon first person examination, you're using existing spiritual ideas as a bootstrap, with much the same problem as you have with reason. The spiritual techniques which, to be blunt, you are borrowing, not creating, are infected with the same viewpoint issues as secular rational bodies of knowledge. As a Hindu, I can tell you that the different Hindu schools all tell the tale of Hinduism and their Hindu rivals differently, reserving the crown jewel for whatever Hindu school the writer happens to subscribe to themselves. And Buddhism is the same way. Christianity, the same. And none of it is original. And this is because while you portray spirituality as something that you can practice fresh, without borrowing from others, you really can't. Sitting alone and contemplating will not get you a worthwhile spiritual practice. You'll simply end up stewing in whatever juices you've mentally accumulated over time. Like it or not, spirituality isn't a solitary practice. Spirituality is a social practice wherein groups, movements, institutions, and societies lay out both the basic blueprint and outline and on toward the details. You like to think that you're discovering and implimenting something authentic, but you're not; you're just combining old parts in your own unique way, without ever escaping the problems with those old parts. You may suggest that some commonality points toward a genuine core existing, but that's just a theory. It's far more likely that common core is simply a reflection of the fact that human nature expresses itself similarly within social processes, and a core of common items represents their greater evolutionary fitness within social process, regardless of whether those parts themselves have any inherent fitness or genuineness.

 

A good example is Zen Buddhism. The Zen Buddhist argues that by engaging in sitting practice, you are stripping away all artifice. But the theory and technique of this stripping away depends upon large chunks of metaphysical artifice, without which, zazen becomes just daydreaming.”

 

- Are you a Hindu?

- I’m not into the religion thing that much either. I grew up reading the books and listening to the TV interviews of very secular approaches to Islam. As a teenager I was interested in Native American Religion and believed that the more “nature based” Religions like Shamanism were the beast because they had not been contaminated by our corrupt / consumerist societies.

 

   As you can see in the beginning of this post, I am way beyond the “mind-based” / intellectual approaches right now. I don’t care about doctrines because (If I understood correctly – As you have just pointed out) all of the doctrines are basically false. I basically study this and that, without any restrictions. And if it feels good inside, I study the same thing a little more. And what matters the most is this feeling of progress. If I am more balanced / more at peace with myself and if I feel like I understand more about what is going on right here right now, than I feel like I’m not wasting my time.

 

/And this is very different from intellectualism. I like intellectualism too but this is different.

 

   Your point is a point we all must have living in a modern world. There are spiritual narcissists out there who are eager to make all sorts of religious combinations, serving spiritual cocktails to their followers just to be able to control and exploit these naïve / unrespecting people who usually have some psychological trauma that they are not able to work out through traditional medical means.

 

- And (once again) that’s where true spirituality kicks in. What I am talking about here is:

 

1) Free of charge. If God is inside you and is a universal phenomenon the only person you need to pay to access it is yourself.

 

2) No one has a “better” or “greater” access to it. So all the “religions” you have been mentioning plus all the spiritual teachers that are available on the religion-spirituality part of a book store are basically products that I will choose or not to consume. And

 

3) As I said. There has been a lot of progress in social science during the last century and in this century. There are many great philosophical writings out there too. What I like in spiritual approaches is this self-empowering ideas that are based on the first two assumptions mentioned above.

 

/So if I am wrong, I’m just wrong. Many people before me have been wrong about a lot things and that’s just a part of the human condition. But if I’m not, than I might just have discovered a place of peace and silence within the constant irrationality and noise of a human society that is (I believe) completely immature and still a long way from a truly civilized society.

Bellaqua:

 

“

I think this is an important point. And the comparison to psychotherapy is on point.

 

Psychoanalysis, when it's successful, is extremely self-revealing. The fictions we tell ourselves and the defenses we set up to protect our egos are hard to break through, and psychoanalysis can do this. It's not always successful, of course, but at its best it can be a great benefit.

 

Often when people describe a spiritual experience, it seems to me that what they're talking about is simply aesthetic. That is, if you get some numinous feeling in a forest, or looking at a starry sky, it can be very beautiful. And beautiful things can give us pause, briefly taking us away from our normal habits of thought.”

 

- These are ver correct observations. That’s what I am trying to tell.

 

“But the way I define spirituality, there must be a lasting effect. And it must be an effect which reveals us to ourselves, and points us in the direction of becoming better people. This happens largely by a dissolution of the protective ego and an epiphany concerning one's real place and importance in the universe. I call this a spiritual epiphany because logically, rationally, we can be aware of our tininess in relation to the Great Scheme of Things, but even so behave as though we were special and specially deserving. It requires something other than a logical argument to really bring the meaning home and make it a part of one's working psyche.

 

There are many traditions which aim at something spiritual, but I think many of them have this as their goal.

 

I have met people who were proud of their consistent meditation habits and general spiritual personality (self-described) who were nonetheless egoistic and indifferent to their influence on the rest of the world. This seems to me like an imitation spirituality, because it doesn't end in the "good-constructive deeds" you mention.”

 

- These are deep issues. But I believe that we are already “better people”. For instance some Christians might tell you things like “I will pray for you” or “I hope you find this light within you someday”. I’ve been in this forum for 4 years now and I’ve never said anything like that to anybody. Because at some point you get to understand the limits of your human condition too. This is a bit difficult to understand. But you may re-read my post about Aristotle. The core of the idea, is that we can have a very good intellect. That intellect can serve us in many ways and all of us would like to have a strong intellect. But at some point you understand that the Earth is like a particle in this universe and we are a particle in this world. Hence (maybe) there may be other ways in trying to understand those core questions people have been asking since the dawn of mankind.