|
| Thread: The Spirituality Thread |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 · NEXT» |
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
posted March 01, 2005 10:43 PM |
|
Edited By: Conan on 1 Mar 2005
|
The Spirituality Thread
Hi,
I've been a spiritual person all my life, but never had the time to really go into great depth in it. Recently, I started reading spiritual books because it seems my taste came back for it and it got me wondering what other people consider spirituality to be.
Of course, I find the best place to talk over some of this stuff would be here with my fellow HC friends. 
So, I'll give you what I think of when I talk spiritual and maybe we could get an interesting discussion going on here.
For me, it all has to do with Energy. It is not a question of beleifs, I actually see it and feel it. I manipulate it a bit, but not as much as I'd like to. I firmly beleive that everything that exists is made up of energy, that in the void between protons and electrons, there is energy. This Energy is part of us and is what connects us to each other. I've taken meditation classes to better understand this energy and it helped, but at the time, I was not ready for it. Maybe I shall try again.
Anyways, before I go on, I'd like to hear what others have to say on this before I bore you to death with my own experiences.
EDIT: Notice I have not mentionned religion anywhere in my statement. That is because I am Atheist. I do not beleive in religion. For me, there is a clear distinction between religion and spirituality.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Consis
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Of Ruby
|
posted March 01, 2005 10:59 PM |
|
Edited By: Consis on 1 Mar 2005
|
Too Busy
I'm usually too busy learning about other peoples' religious practices to have one of my own. I'm always looking to visit Catholic, Bhuddist, Islamic, Jewish, Baptists, Mormon, Lutheran, Apiscopal, Methodists, Presbyterians, etc...
My belief in spirituality is probably a mix of soul containership with ancient viking kings overlooking the land, sea, and air with native american-like relation to it.
There's no church to become a member of for what I believe and think. Kinda weird eh? Oh well that's me.
____________
Roses Are Red And So Am I
|
|
IYY
Responsible
Supreme Hero
REDACTED
|
|
posted March 01, 2005 11:06 PM |
|
|
I don't know much about spirituality, but since this is what people do on online forums, I will still contribute.
I think that spirituality is what you get if you take religion, and subtract the pure philosophical elements as well as the purely religious ones (that is, everything that has to do with God and his teachings). Also, it's what you get if you take a person, and remove the body and mind. Along with the mind will go all religious notions, as well as silly beliefs about some specific God.
I think that the concepts of God and religion are just ways to explain spirituality, and not very good ones. I think that there is some force working in the world, but to call it God and to say that he had a son and talked to prophets is just trying to tie this force to something physical that people would understand (and I am using Christianity as an example here; I actually mean most religions out there).
I, for example, do not belong to any religion. I am not even sure that God exists. But I do think that there is such a thing as a soul, and things about energy that modern science can't explain yet. It actually makes sense, and maybe when science advances enough it will be able to explain it more.
____________
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 01, 2005 11:11 PM |
|
|
IYY,
very in-tune to my own thoughts...
I also beleive what you say about science and Energy. Actually, I beleive that science is on the verge of explaining what this Energy is and how it affects our world.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 01:25 AM |
|
|
I think you should read more on how science understands energy, and that might help you demystify the concept, and stop giving it "spiritual" connotations. (in reference to protons and electrons and energy) Energy exists between them, energy exists in every field, energy exists in emitting waves, energy even is mass.
What is spirituality? Is that mood, physical condition and psychology, or is it about supernatural ideas like soul, karma and what-else-not?
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
IYY
Responsible
Supreme Hero
REDACTED
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 01:36 AM |
|
|
Svarog, I am a university science student, aiming for a minor in physics. I can humbly state that I know some science.
I know what energy is, but it doesn't mean that we speak of the same kind of energy when we speak of spirituality. It's just a convinient term to use. It could be a completly different particle for all we know, or it could work on a another level entirely.
But even with the current definition of energy, a lot of things can exist that have not yet been investigated. Just because energy is 'everywhere' doesn't mean that it can't be transfered in ways we don't yet know about, or be responsible for things we don't yet know it is related to.
You never know.
____________
|
|
Aculias
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
Pretty Boy Angel Sacraficer
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 05:35 AM |
|
|
A Psychadelic Scientist, now thats what i call a pretty Leary surprise, especially since you cant even fly an astral plane  .
Are all Scientist like your IYY  ?
____________
Dreaming of a Better World
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 03:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I think you should read more on how science understands energy, and that might help you demystify the concept, and stop giving it "spiritual" connotations. (in reference to protons and electrons and energy) Energy exists between them, energy exists in every field, energy exists in emitting waves, energy even is mass.
Does that energy change just by observing it? Can you send it in a certain direction using your thoughts? Can you give some to others? In a conflict, are you sucking this energy from the other person??
That is the energy I'm speaking about. Science has yet to find a reason for these phenomena.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
IYY
Responsible
Supreme Hero
REDACTED
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 06:07 PM |
|
|
It's worse than just not finding an answer - science doesn't even bother to experiment with it. If you ask me, it's very unscientific of the scientific community.
____________
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 06:11 PM |
|
|
that's a good point.
But science is based on the measurement of concrete measures of physical aspects of the world. This Energy is not measurable and not possible to study with today's science.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 09:55 PM |
|
|
You can say energy, but energy sounds kind of insentient.
Perhaps a better word would be consciousness, the fact
that all of life is shot through and through with an
over all and underlying awareness. We as people stand
as the bridge between the insentient (slower consciousness)
and the higher planes. Rather then stating that there is a
Supreme Being that is separate from us, and thus creating
another religion, I would say we are all part of that, the
whole of creation. Spirituality is the awareness of living
this fact.
____________
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 10:01 PM |
|
|
wow, that's a really good point! It is true that we are part of a whole united consciousness.
Very well put, but perhaps there is no way to properly name it. Perhaps we need to explore it more before we come to understand it better. I'm speaking of me, of course...
Question: how did you find this out?
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 02, 2005 10:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
wow, that's a really good point! It is true that we are part of a whole united consciousness.
Very well put, but perhaps there is no way to properly name it. Perhaps we need to explore it more before we come to understand it better. I'm speaking of me, of course...
Question: how did you find this out?
Svarog told me..not
I have meditated and studied the subject alot, but the
best teacher is your own awareness
____________
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 03, 2005 05:37 AM |
|
|
Disclaimer: My profs have been telling me that I don't spell out my reasoning enough in my papers. So, I'm practicing Spelling It Out here. Sorry if this gets annoying.
What is spirituality? It seems to be frequently both associated and disassociated with religion. We (or at least I) need to confront religion in order to discuss spirituality. "Spiritual but not religious" is a cliche. No one seems to describe themselves as "spiritual and religious." Nor have I heard anyone call themselves "religious but not spiritual." People say they are religious and leave it at that, although they frequently refer to their spirituality later. What are the implications of this? First, spirituality can stand alone from religion, although it requires special notation to do so. On the other hand, religion seems to imply spirituality, which doesn’t need a special designation. It’s an inherent piece of religion. Since religion is larger, it includes things that are not in spirituality. So, what are the factors that religion has which spirituality lacks? And what are the factors in common which render the “spiritual" label unnecessary for someone who self-identifies as religious?
My theory: “Religion” implies something that A) is associated with a group, B) has a set structure or system, and C) is externally visible. Whether all three of these are required of Religion is a topic of debate, but they are certainly not requirements for Spirituality. However, both Religion and Spirituality concern connection to something larger, intangible, meaningful, divine, etc. So, I define Spirituality as that basic connection with something greater. Religion is the raw connection taken to an organized and/or social level. If we were to diagram this relationship, Spirituality would be a circle within the larger circle of Religion, a core so to speak. If you take away Religion, you still have a complete circle with Spirituality. But if you take away Spirituality, Religion has a big hole in it.
Therefore, "religious but not spiritual" guts religion of what may be its critical function, or perhaps its sole redeeming virtue (depending on your point of view). Without that connection to something greater, religion becomes what? -- a herd mentality, a spoon-fed scheme for seeing the world, a series of meaningless rituals. This would explain why people typically apply "religious but not spiritual" to others. Speakers don’t use it to refer to themselves. It's derogatory and hollow, and most people don't admit/accuse themselves of such things.
Another thing that Religion has which Spirituality doesn’t is a host of tangential associations. Religion has become a stigmatized word in some circles. It conjures up images of creationists, fundamentalist zealots, superstition, and other things that are considered nasty to science and enlightenment, etc. Because religion and science often clash, it’s sometimes assumed that they must clash. Spirituality doesn’t have quite the same stains. So, the person describing themselves as "spiritual but not religious" distances themselves from “non-scientific,” “non-modern” elements as well as whatever defines religion itself.
So much for the split between religion and spirituality. My own relationship with spirituality is for another time.
____________
 Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Conan
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted March 03, 2005 05:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Disclaimer: My profs have been telling me that I don't spell out my reasoning enough in my papers. So, I'm practicing Spelling It Out here. Sorry if this gets annoying.
No problem - it does not annoy me
Quote:
What is spirituality? It seems to be frequently both associated and disassociated with religion. We (or at least I) need to confront religion in order to discuss spirituality.
Not me. I hate discussing religion because I don't beleive in it. (exept the time we discussed history of religion, that was pretty fascinating). I am, like I said earlier, a very spiritual person, yet I am not religious in any way.
Quote:
"Spiritual but not religious" is a cliche. No one seems to describe themselves as "spiritual and religious." Nor have I heard anyone call themselves "religious but not spiritual." People say they are religious and leave it at that, although they frequently refer to their spirituality later.
That's a good point. But I've met alot of people that are highly religious but when they start talking about Spirituality, it does not make any sense to me. That is the limit of religion and why I don't like it. I beleive religion, however, to be a means to become or to gain spirituality. It is only a "means to an end".
Quote:
What are the implications of this? First, spirituality can stand alone from religion, although it requires special notation to do so. On the other hand, religion seems to imply spirituality, which doesn’t need a special designation. It’s an inherent piece of religion. Since religion is larger, it includes things that are not in spirituality.
I don't know if I find one larger than the other... for instance, some forms of religion are against some of the concepts of spirituality. Take the concept of Energy (for lack of better word) that we have been discussing above. Budhism is very much in-tune with this concept, but Mormons are very much less. I don't think we can say that one is greater. Since spirituality does not have to include religion, it can be completly independent of it. However, religion is dependent of spirituality. Without spirituality, you have no religion.
Quote:
However, both Religion and Spirituality concern connection to something larger, intangible, meaningful, divine, etc.
I find that spirituality is that part of a religion that is connected to something larger... not the religion itself. Religion is used to connect people to this intagible form which is Spirituality.
Quote:
If we were to diagram this relationship, Spirituality would be a circle within the larger circle of Religion, a core so to speak. If you take away Religion, you still have a complete circle with Spirituality. But if you take away Spirituality, Religion has a big hole in it.
I see things in a different light. The circles connect to each other, but some part of them are independant. As you can be spiritual, but not religious (me). I am therefore outside the cirle of religion, but in the cirle of Spirituality. Some (like you) are in the intersection of both; religious AND spiritual. Finally, some are religious and not spiritual, as they do it for social recognition, to meet people and to learn the moral values of life (which is not a spiritual thing).
Quote:
Therefore, "religious but not spiritual" guts religion of what may be its critical function, or perhaps its sole redeeming virtue (depending on your point of view). Without that connection to something greater, religion becomes what? -- a herd mentality, a spoon-fed scheme for seeing the world, a series of meaningless rituals.
Wow, you've proved my point. I think this is the more common case of people that are religious. No one will admit it, but how many religious people actually try to be more and more spiritual while being religious? How many people follow religion because mom and dad do, but don't understand the point and really don't care? How many use religion to get others to do their biddings?
Quote:
Another thing that Religion has which Spirituality doesn’t is a host of tangential associations. Religion has become a stigmatized word in some circles. It conjures up images of creationists, fundamentalist zealots, superstition, and other things that are considered nasty to science and enlightenment, etc.
this is the part of the circle of religion that does not cross the cirle of spirituality.
You have some very thought-provoking ideas. I hope you post again.
____________
Your life as it has been is over. From this time forward, you will service.... us. - Star Trek TNG
|
|
Khaelo
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Underwater
|
|
posted March 03, 2005 07:27 PM |
|
Edited By: Khaelo on 3 Mar 2005
|
long!
Since spirituality does not have to include religion, it can be completly independent of it. However, religion is dependent of spirituality. Without spirituality, you have no religion.
Well, you have religion, but it's not a full form. Anyway, this is basically what I was saying. So, it's not surprising that I prove your point later on...same point. By "larger," I only meant that religion has more stuff, stuff which is non-essential to spirituality, but which is nevertheless "more." I did not mean to imply "greater" except in the plain old "there's more" sense.
I can see what you mean by the interlinking circles (Venn diagram?), with regard to:
Quote:
Finally, some are religious and not spiritual, as they do it for social recognition, to meet people and to learn the moral values of life (which is not a spiritual thing).
This is true. But I guess I don't see people who use religion primarily for social means describing themselves as "religious." Church-going, yes, but rarely religious. So, there seems to be a difference between religion as a whole and those who describe themselves as religious.
Then again, when someone describes themselves as religious, I've never asked, "But are you spiritual???" Experience tells me that they usually consider themselves so, as revealed by later discussion. Furthermore, even when someone's behavior suggests that they are using religion for decidedly pragmatic goals, I don't feel capable of jumping to the conclusion that they are therefore devoid of the spiritual connection. That's something only the individual can determine, which is why I rely on self-definition. Sure, they may be lying. But even in the lie, they're playing to the notion that "religious" connotes "spiritual."
Quote:
Not me. I hate discussing religion because I don't beleive in it. (exept the time we discussed history of religion, that was pretty fascinating). I am, like I said earlier, a very spiritual person, yet I am not religious in any way...I've met alot of people that are highly religious but when they start talking about Spirituality, it does not make any sense to me. That is the limit of religion and why I don't like it. I beleive religion, however, to be a means to become or to gain spirituality. It is only a "means to an end".
So what is religion to you? The sense I get here is that religion is something with which you do not identify. That's a pretty broad description. What parts of religion do you dislike?
Of the A)B)C) points I made above, the one that I associate most with "religion" is the organization. If you have a system, a set of beliefs concerning the connection to something greater, you have a religion-like thing. Now, I'm biased. I consider myself religious despite having no group and very little external practice. Some people would quite happily say that the beliefs of one person cannot constitute a religion, and I don't have much to argue on that point. It's a matter of definition.
On the questions of beliefs, I'm confused. To me, when you say that something is, that's a belief. Its basis in fact or opinion is irrelevant to its being a belief. I believe that I'm sitting here typing. I believe everyone has the right to marry. I believe in gods. The content of my beliefs go from the (almost) unarguable to the highly disputed. But they are all beliefs. When you start trying to distinguish "beliefs" from "fact," you quickly run into problems because the person who believes does not make that distinction. All people have the right to marry is a fact. But certain parties nevertheless don't see it that way. Why? We have to back up and realize that what is a fact to me is an opinion to them. Either way, it's my belief. So, when we talk about beliefs, we can't fuss over what's "true" and what's not. If you think it's true, you believe it; it's a belief. Whether other people agree with you or not doesn’t make it something other than a belief.
That brings me to your perplexing comment:
Quote:
For me, it all has to do with Energy. It is not a question of beleifs, I actually see it and feel it. I manipulate it a bit, but not as much as I'd like to. I firmly beleive that everything that exists is made up of energy...
Isn't that a question of belief? Personally, I think spirituality does have something to do with beliefs. Beliefs provide the context for experience – people process their experiences through the filter of how they think the world works. In turn, experience fuels beliefs. The two are intertwined in a self re-enforcing system. When one can’t access the internal logic of someone else’s system, it makes no sense.
I don’t doubt that you have experience with Energy. But why did you interpret it as Energy and not something else? What you’re talking about (sharing, manipulating, etc), I see as the interacting of souls, akin to interaction on the material level. That it should be some grand conciousness or entity unto itself is not a concept easily accessible to me. That’s like talking about Physicalness on a grand scale. Okay, there’s some truth to that…but where does it get you? People have material selves and spiritual selves; when you interact with someone you’re using and affecting both aspects. From my point of view, human spirit just is. There isn’t any more wonder about it than about the human body (and I should note that there is considerable wonder about both; just not one more than the other ). For me, the something greater that guides my spirituality is something non-human, something divine. Deities may have their tendrils in what you call Energy, but they're not limited to it. Does that make sense?
The point of this being: I think we’ve experienced the same basic thing. But our variant beliefs about the nature of this phenomenon have led to different interpretions.
~~~
I live in a shattered universe that has been mixed back together haphazardly. The Bible tells of God creating order from chaos; I believe the gods created chaos out of order. Therefore, I don’t believe in perfection, and I don’t believe in One Great Force, Unity, whatever. Things cannot be completely separated from each other anymore than they can be completely integrated to one another. This is the view that colors everything that I see. Whether that is religion or spirituality is up to you to decide, because they’re tied together for me.
____________
Cleverly
disguised as a responsible adult
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 03, 2005 08:37 PM |
|
|
Religion is the formed side of spirituality. It contains
dogma, ritual and other pre-fab ideas that help the user
from having to think about life in an aware manner.
True spirituality contains no limiting features based
on a tradition, but is just living the moment with
attentiveness, consciously walking the path step by step.
____________
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 06, 2005 03:06 AM |
|
|
Balloons
If I begin discussing the formalistic definitions of religion and spirituality, and what they’ve come to mean in practice, they’d be two different terms, relating to different spheres of human life. Religion referring more to systems of organized supernatural beliefs, while spirituality describing the relation between an individual and the bogus concept of spirit.
In essence however, they exemplify two separate approaches to a same idea – belief in something that is necessarily supernatural, i.e. immaterial, and thus impossible to be ever scientifically proven. (This something, later on, will be referred to as belief.) Philosophical objective idealism should also be included in this group (is it not Plato’s world of ideas or Hegel’s Absolute a religious belief in a way?) In this sense, there’s no differential line to set apart kinds of beliefs, and define them according to some valid criteria. It’s all part of a spectrum of beliefs, displaying degrees of variation along an infinite number of axes, but never drawing a sharp defining line. In this way spiritual (religious) beliefs can range from organized to individualistic (almost all beliefs falling in between these two), conservative to liberal, moral-abiding to immoral, monotheistic to deistic (even atheistic, like Buddhism and Jainism) etc.
Hence, any of your so called “spiritual” beliefs is at the same time a “religious” one, because it includes a belief in the immaterial. It’s not the existence of set structure that defines a belief as “religion”, sense there can be no belief without a structure. It has to have a mental skeleton at least, in order it to be meaningful in any way. “Externally visible”, also another interesting point, although I’d say beliefs can manifest in the outside world, more or less, and that’s what makes them externally visible. Whether someone meditates in order to get in touch with some higher consciousness of his own personal religion, or there’s a Holy Mass going on, it’s the same objectification of those beliefs in the immaterial.
Why is there the urge in some people to present spirituality as a more rational alternative to religion? Its clear that most/all religious beliefs havent withstood the test of scientific verification. They however stay to cling in robust religious systems (such as all the major religions) and in the minds of the people as a testament to man’s ability to twist and shape reality in a fantastical manner. And while myths and temples do represent a jewel in every culture testifying for the fantastical thinking of our ancestors, we still fail to realize that this practice of fantastical thinking is just as always present in the human race, constructing a fantastical image for the reality in our heads, which is bound to live until the next big scientific discovery. Since science has its limits unfortunately, some of these fantastical beliefs will never cease to represent false constructs of reality. This means that as long as we wait for science to tear down the spider web of our own imagination in which we have entangled ourselves, there’s a dreadful possibility that humanity will forever be victim of that fictitious spider. And it is precisely here that we should be looking for the answer: How come “spiritual people” claim they differ so much from “religious people”, enough to be considered “enlightened and in consistency with on-going science”. They get rid of the puffed balloons as “religious anachronism”, but they keep holding up high all the remaining ones as “spiritual wisdom”. The truth is they are all filled with nothing but thin air.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
|
Shiva
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted March 06, 2005 05:00 AM |
|
|
Svarog, there is absolutely nothing substantial in your
arguments that needs answering. That is your experience,
you wish to believe in scientific materiality, that is
your religion. I accept that. As a scientist, however, you
must allow for the existance of more than you know at the
present and accept that maybe some people see what you
don't. Notice I didn't say "believe", I said see.
____________
|
|
Svarog
Honorable
Supreme Hero
statue-loving necrophiliac
|
|
posted March 06, 2005 06:12 AM |
|
Edited By: Svarog on 6 Mar 2005
|
I expected to get such feedback from most of the people on HC when I wrote that post.
Yes, I noticed what you said. I just dont know if u've noticed how no one sees what you see. We humans see, what scientists see; other perceptions by non-scientists are usually proven to be illusionary. Because perceptions, my friend, are in the bottomline subjective, not objective. Scientists come closest to objectiveness when it comes to perception, so dont prescribe me arrogance for something which is common sense.
As for the existance of more than we know, of course we allow it, we just dont take it for granted based on hollow beliefs, for Invisible Pink Unicorn's sake.
____________
The meek shall inherit the earth, but NOT its mineral rights.
|
| |
|
|
