Kevin's Watch

On another forum I've been discussing the various interpretations and attitudes towards the word "spiritual." This post by one of the members I thought was a standout

flashbanding of Soulpancake wrote:I find it kind of amusing that people use the phrase, " your place in the UNIVERSE" when for the majority of the major religions existence time they had an extremely limited view of what that was... Most of the time believing the sun revolved around the earth - which WAS the centre of the universe...(and death to anyone who suggested otherwise!)


This is not a minor point since the mistaken ideas of our own importance and where God may fit should be utterly altered by the discovery of astronomical and quantum truths..
But....In general the religionists do not like readjusting any such set views...

I certainly feel that a spiritual quest involves becoming comfortable in your own universe, which means first and foremost, in your own skin,
then, beyond your skin into the communal oneness of humanity, at least the very limited number of humans you can make direct contact with.
Then the species oneness that some might call NIrvana.

The idea of an external authority to which humans owe some kind of deference , or a debt as our creator, or fear as a judge of eternal fate
......is a juvenile and primitive instinct that we should have shed completely by now... But unfortunately those instinctive fear-based pattern-seeking instincts, keep on bringing this false solution to false problems to the fore...

Sigh.

Thoughts?

flashbanding of Soulpancake wrote:The idea of an external authority to which humans owe some kind of deference , or a debt as our creator, or fear as a judge of eternal fate
......is a juvenile and primitive instinct that we should have shed completely by now... But unfortunately those instinctive fear-based pattern-seeking instincts, keep on bringing this false solution to false problems to the fore...

As you probably would figure, I seek to live in light of a creator to whom we are inevitably in debt, is Good, and has a right to judge our eternal fate.
Scares me silly on a regular basis.

I look around me and, some days, I see myself and my fellow humans as all being a bunch of takers.
So how do we go on?
I see the surrounding world we've been placed in, abundant with trees and blue sky, and the love and nurture and encouragement we've received which hopefully is somehow 'enough' (some of which we've perceived ourselves to have received - i.e. felt) in spite of the smallness of the human hearts that gave it...

I think the problem is that ALL humans get confused about who is the judge; we get mixed up as to who is God and who is not:

• * We drive ourselves crazy obsessing over some minor fault, assuming God is unreasonably upset with us over that... when God knows we've got something way deeper and more deadly lurking just under the surface.
  (I... do this one.)
  * A churchgoer attempts to provide comfort by reassuring another churchgoer (who she barely knows) of that person's eternal salvation.
  (this one really peeves me. because someone "seems nice and goes to my same church," they must be saved? really? how do we have the gall?)
  * When we're seeking God, and we are confronted with an idea of God that is troubling to us, we say, "Well, God can't possibly be a god like that."
  * We assume that God would or would not be "alright with someone" based on outward appearances.
  * We assume based on the present that someone 'will never be utterly forgiven by God.'
  ...as though that person is somehow 'more difficult' for God to reach than I am.
  * We obsessively compare ourselves to others, honing in on their faults and weaknesses, critiquing how they look to others - but somehow amazingly having a blind spot for their strengths!
  (we've surely all done this.)

I agree with that post's author that humans do have "mistaken ideas of our own importance," but I suspect I mean something different about it than he does.
at least, sometimes.

So, is that anything like what you're looking for, or did I take it too far afield?
(I was definitely wanting to interject some of my own rants! ...and of course, I was limiting it to my perception of the Christian religion.)

I think flashbanding is doing great, up until the end. There are some whose faith seems to be based on fear, feelings of inadequacy, and other weaknesses. But then there's folks like Furls Fire. There was never a moment of weakness in her life, and her faith was built on love and glory. At best, flashbanding does not know such people, and has formed his opinion of all faith ignorant of very important aspects of it. At worst, he knows such people, and pretends they don't exist so that he can remain superior.

As for the question of spirituality, I posted this long ago, in the Atheism and Spirituality thread:

Cail wrote:OK then what is the "spirit" in spiritual? Obviously not the Holy Spirit. Ghosts? In order to be "spiritual" there has to be some sort of spirit. I know exactly what y'all are talking about, I just think you're using the wrong word.

The spirit is the human spirit. That which strives. That which searches for beauty, wisdom, meaning. Here's some more quotes.

Jung:

The meaning and purpose of a problem seem to lie not in its solution but in our working at it incessantly.

Chris, from Northern Exposure:

I've been out here now for some days, groping my way along, trying to realize my vision here. I started concentrating so hard on my vision that I lost sight. I've come to find out that it's not the vision. It's not the vision at all. It's the groping. It's the groping, it's the yearning, it's the moving forward. I was so fixated on that flying cow that, when Ed told me Monty Python already painted that picture, thought I was through. I had to let go of that cow so that I could see all the other possibilities....... I think Kierkegard said it oh so well: “The self is only that which it’s in the process of becoming.” Art? Same thing. James Joyce had something to say about it too: “Welcome oh life! I go to encounter for the millionth time the reality of experience, and to forge in the smithy of my soul the uncreated conscious of my race.” We’re here today to fling something that bubbled up from the collective unconsciousness of our community......... The thing I learned folks, this is absolutely key: It’s not the thing you fling, it’s the fling itself.

Trek quote #1 - Data and his daughter (he made a daughter in one episode):

Lal: I watch them, and I can do the things they do. But I will never feel the emotions. I’ll never know love.

Data: It is a limitation we must learn to accept, Lal.

Lal: Then why do you still try to emulate humans. What purpose does it serve, except to remind you that you are incomplete?

Data: I have asked myself that, many times, as I have struggled to be more human. Until I realized it is the struggle itself that is most important. We must strive to be more than we are, Lal. It does not matter that we will never reach our ultimate goal. The effort yields its own rewards.

Trek quote #2 - Data and Dr. Crusher:

Data: What is the definition of life?

Crusher: That is a BIG question. Why do you ask?

Data: I am searching for a definition that will allow me to test an hypotheses.

Crusher: Well, the broadest scientific definition might be that life is what enables plants and animals to consume food, derive energy from it, grow, adapt themselves to their surrounding, and reproduce.

Data: And you suggest that anything that exhibits these characteristics is considered alive.

Crusher: In general, yes.

Data: What about fire?

Crusher: Fire?

Data: Yes. It consumes fuel to produce energy. It grows. It creates offspring. By your definition, is it alive?

Crusher: Fire is a chemical reaction. You could use the same argument for growing crystals. But, obviously, we don't consider them alive.

Data: And what about me? I do not grow. I do not reprodue. Yet I am considered to be alive.

Crusher: That's true. But you are unique.

Data: Hm. I wonder if that is so.

Crusher: Data, if I may ask, what exactly are you getting at?

Data: I am curious as to what transpired between the moment when I was nothing more than an assemblage of parts in Dr. Sung's laboratory and the next moment, when I became alive. What is it that endowed me with life?

Crusher: I remember Wesley asking me a similar question when he was little. And I tried desperately to give him an answer. But everything I said sounded inadequate. Then I realized that scientists and philosophers have been grappling with that question for centuries without coming to any conclusion.

Data: Are you saying the question cannot be answered?

Crusher: No. I think I'm saying that we struggle all our lives to answer it. That it's the struggle that is important. That's what helps us to define our place in the universe.

As someone who "knows" flashbanding, I'm comfortable in saying that that last paragraph is intended as a theological and institutional critique, rather than an attack on people's personal beliefs. And as a theological critique, it's one that I mostly agree with.

My perspective on religion both institutional and personal is that the most common themes are those of fear and love. Each person is torn between these things in their lives, and that microcosm is mirrored in religion. Now, some systems seem to me to be based much more upon fear than love. The concepts of sin and judgement and eternal afterlife, for instance. But in each religion with, for me, uncomfortable amounts of this kind of thinking, there exists also a wealth of love. And when a loving soul such as Furls or Deer finds the love in Christianity, those loves compliment and transcend each other.

Which is why I can see a valid spiritual journey through religions that, theologically, I have major beef with. It's about where a person's soul meets their chosen doctrine, so in that sense it truly is between them and God.

I certainly feel that a spiritual quest involves becoming comfortable in your own universe, which means first and foremost, in your own skin,
then, beyond your skin into the communal oneness of humanity, at least the very limited number of humans you can make direct contact with.
Then the species oneness that some might call NIrvana.

To me, nirvana is something that can stretch far beyond a "species" oneness, and at the same time might not necessarily imply a union with all of one's own species, since not all might have reached nirvana.

The idea of an external authority to which humans owe some kind of deference , or a debt as our creator, or fear as a judge of eternal fate
......is a juvenile and primitive instinct that we should have shed completely by now... But unfortunately those instinctive fear-based pattern-seeking instincts, keep on bringing this false solution to false problems to the fore...

This may be true as humans....but as a human, other humans are an external collective authority to whom, regardless of whether we feel we owe anything or not for what has been given to us, we are at least restricted by (though the restriction probably is secondary to what we get out of being a member of our species, by and large). Deference to the authority of "society," or whatever, is not juvenile, in fact rebellion is frequently juvenile or adolescent on the individual level.

Really, the most dramatic difference between these two authorities is that one is fragmented, more clearly extant, and has control over you while you're alive, while the others existence is more difficult to come to terms with and has the power to make your life a hell or heaven when you die.

When examined, I believe even the post sort of suggests this unconsciously: on the one hand, the idea of looking to an external authority is belittled; on the other, other humans, clearly something external, are considered the second and third step in this poster's guide to spiritual completion: surely our species, and their willingness to accept us - and/or our willingness to accept them - could be posed, then, as "judge[s] of...fate," if not eternally so.

I happen to have a belief in some sort of supernatural entity, but don't really know anything about it except that it might not like when I mention it (or maybe more specifically if I explain why I believe in it), and more generally it's possible it doesn't like it when I post on the internet. It doesn't seem to have given me any hints about how to do anything, but then again, I'm not really looking that hard, either.

In general I think it's a pretty nice quote. The use of "quantum truths" amused me however.

As for my own experiences... they have been a lot to do with self acceptance and an understanding/feeling that self acceptance and the acceptance of others are two sides of the same coin..

So much more that I would struggle to find any words for but yeah... I don't know any truths or really anything for sure... and I don't need to. There's direct experience and everything else is just a story about it.

Truth, Holarchy. The part about acceptance of self and other has been a major factor in my own spiritual journey.

I especially liked this also:

There's direct experience and everything else is just a story about it.

+1

There's direct experience and everything else is just a story about it.

+2

Pfft. Anecdotal.

--A

Avatar wrote:Pfft. Anecdotal.

--A

nice