Lateralus es Helica
Alright time to throw my whole two cents into the conversation.
To simplify, spirituality as I define it personally is an expression of soul or self. Lucid put forth an interesting definition of soul in one of the mythology discussions.
Fritjof Capra in his book 'The Tao of Physics' often came back to a concept which the study of atoms in addition to eastern philosophy often come back to and that's the interconnection between all things. I personally think much the same is true of 'soul', a part of the self which is actually interconnected to other objects, landscapes, beings etc. around us. If the basic building blocks of all existence share such bonds and connectivity, what's to keep parts of the soul or self from interacting with objects and other beings as well? It's hard to explain but the infinitely vast seems to imitate the infinitely small, taking the same core structure but expanding on it. (Best example I can think of is that if you break down the structure of an atom, it looks strikingly similar to galaxies. Both share common properties of being composed of empty space. Both have particles scattered throughout with a cluster of particles gathered towards the center. Don't know if that helps.)
I include all of that because entirely too many people seem to indulge in an egotistical world view in which the core values and actions that would influence behaviors are defined based off of what most pertains to self while mostly denying the rest of existence. They seem to overlook the fact that we still share co-existence with other things and beings. Indeed, most of the actions we take in life are governed by our interactions with these other objects and beings. To deny such a connection as a part of the self is to deny the soul and hence has no spirituality.
You'll notice many people will define spiritual moments as moments of supreme cognition of that very fact. 'I am a part of God's plan' or 'I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual.' That's not to say I think spirituality is exclusively the recognition of inter-connectedness, just that it's a larger part of it than many would consciously think of when thinking of spirituality. Overall, I still think it is more accurate to include spirituality being an expression of self as long as you assume that part of the self is connected to the rest of existence and not apart from it.
To simplify, spirituality as I define it personally is an expression of soul or self. Lucid put forth an interesting definition of soul in one of the mythology discussions.
lucid_mirror
The current concept of the soul is deeply simplified. The soul is actually multiple layers in the myths of folk religions. Mind, Consciousness, Shadow, Spirit etc these together make up the soul. Certain parts of the soul remained with body upon death while others remained with the body.
Fritjof Capra in his book 'The Tao of Physics' often came back to a concept which the study of atoms in addition to eastern philosophy often come back to and that's the interconnection between all things. I personally think much the same is true of 'soul', a part of the self which is actually interconnected to other objects, landscapes, beings etc. around us. If the basic building blocks of all existence share such bonds and connectivity, what's to keep parts of the soul or self from interacting with objects and other beings as well? It's hard to explain but the infinitely vast seems to imitate the infinitely small, taking the same core structure but expanding on it. (Best example I can think of is that if you break down the structure of an atom, it looks strikingly similar to galaxies. Both share common properties of being composed of empty space. Both have particles scattered throughout with a cluster of particles gathered towards the center. Don't know if that helps.)
I include all of that because entirely too many people seem to indulge in an egotistical world view in which the core values and actions that would influence behaviors are defined based off of what most pertains to self while mostly denying the rest of existence. They seem to overlook the fact that we still share co-existence with other things and beings. Indeed, most of the actions we take in life are governed by our interactions with these other objects and beings. To deny such a connection as a part of the self is to deny the soul and hence has no spirituality.
You'll notice many people will define spiritual moments as moments of supreme cognition of that very fact. 'I am a part of God's plan' or 'I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual.' That's not to say I think spirituality is exclusively the recognition of inter-connectedness, just that it's a larger part of it than many would consciously think of when thinking of spirituality. Overall, I still think it is more accurate to include spirituality being an expression of self as long as you assume that part of the self is connected to the rest of existence and not apart from it.
Basilia Ann E
Quote:
You'll notice many people will define spiritual moments as moments of supreme cognition of that very fact. 'I am a part of God's plan' or 'I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual.' That's not to say I think spirituality is exclusively the recognition of inter-connectedness, just that it's a larger part of it than many would consciously think of when thinking of spirituality. Overall, I still think it is more accurate to include spirituality being an expression of self as long as you assume that part of the self is connected to the rest of existence and not apart from it.
You just demonstrated the definition of religion. It's also clear that all religions are not the same. Religions are an expression of spirituality, including lack of spirituality (atheism).
To, "'I am a part of God's plan" and "I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual."
You can add;
Sports as a religion (ritualized watching of sports and adoration of sports idols)
Science as a religion, where the word "Science" is substituted for the word "God"
Anything done "religiously"
... well, here i can say that your definition of Spirituality was only relious. and in fact, incorrect.
Spirituality is NOT a consequence of religion. religion is a consequence of Spirituality.
Spirituality is the connectedness of self-awareness to awareness of the Spirit, and things of a Faith-based lifestyle, or of a personal relationship to the Spiritual.
which seems to be what Helica is actually referring to. that many people FORGET that Spirituality is connectedness, and that the various religions have TEACHINGS of connectedness and Spirituality, but not so many practitioners of these religions actual pay enough attention to the Spiritual aspects of their religions.
i will further illustrate.
i am not religious, i do not belong to any rligion. i have borrowed many teachings from many religions, but i do not adhere to any religion, or agree even considerably with any religion. however, i believe in the Creator, and in Gods and Goddesses, and in Spirits. i believe in the Soul, and in the Otherworld/Spiritual Dimension/Astral Plane, and in Nirvana/Heaven.
by your definition, because i am not religious, i cannot be Spiritual, no matter my practices or beliefs. or, you are saying that my lifestyle, however ecclectic and unique, is a religion. but that goes against the definition of religion found in a dictionary. i have no congregations, no orthodoxy, no tenets or dogma.... i just have a Philosophy. one that states that i cannot settle on any belief, because to settle on a belief is to give up the persuit of Truth. and hat by it's very nature is non-religious, because religions have set beliefs.
i am only being harsh and pushy because that is what debate is good for. ^_^ when one's ideas are chalenged, the speaker must now reasses, and find ways to either support or reform their belief or sttement. it helps both parties to learn from eachother. smile
Basilia Ann E
lucid_mirror
Lateralus es Helica
Basilia Ann E
Quote:
You'll notice many people will define spiritual moments as moments of supreme cognition of that very fact. 'I am a part of God's plan' or 'I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual.' That's not to say I think spirituality is exclusively the recognition of inter-connectedness, just that it's a larger part of it than many would consciously think of when thinking of spirituality. Overall, I still think it is more accurate to include spirituality being an expression of self as long as you assume that part of the self is connected to the rest of existence and not apart from it.
You just demonstrated the definition of religion. It's also clear that all religions are not the same. Religions are an expression of spirituality, including lack of spirituality (atheism).
To, "'I am a part of God's plan" and "I feel connected to Buddha's nature in the performance of ritual."
You can add;
Sports as a religion (ritualized watching of sports and adoration of sports idols)
Science as a religion, where the word "Science" is substituted for the word "God"
Anything done "religiously"
The two specific examples were examples of the religious side of spiritual expression, especially considering we are in a religion guild after all, but that still doesn't mean that the definition includes solely religion. Indeed atheists have reported that seem feeling of connection when taking walks in nature.
You'll also have to give your own definition of religion because honestly, like Lucid, I think you're way off track with what religion actually is. I think more of what you're talking about goes into Robert Pirsig's world of quality in which one care's about what they're doing. Such moments of connection to a sports game or connection to a test performed within science can have a certain amount of Zen, that same inter-connectedness I speak of, but that does not necessarily make them religious moments. When you're displaying that level of connection, it's a unification of self and the work being done or the game, it's a spiritual moment, not a religious moment.
My view on Religion.
All Religions contain the following
1. Moral and Ethical practices.
2. Ritual or Religious practices.
3. A direction of worship whether it be a deity, themselves or others.
4. Answers to the big questions (death, origin etc)
Where the confusion comes in is that religion is often confused with theology. Your (both of you and commonly) view religion as theology, but it's not. Religion (the practice and in Greek called the Typikon - Τυπικον) is not the same as theology.
Religion covers;
1. Moral and Ethical practices.
2. Ritual or Religious practices.
While, theology covers
3. A direction of worship whether it be a deity, deities, themselves or anything else (ie cults).
4. Answers to the big questions (death, origin etc)
Atheism (diametrically opposed to theism) would stack up as follows;
Theology 1st;
1. There is no god or gods
2. belief in nothing, or belief in the self
3. The university is chaos and coincidence
The Religion of Atheism;
1. Communism or Environmentalism - where the state of the environment determines direction, ethics and morals
2. Nazisim or Eugenics - where genetics determine direction, ethics and morals
3. Anarchism & Nihilism; the practice of total chaos and destruction.
Branching from atheism are the agnostics, who aren't sure - and have left their beliefs undefined. (I'm doing a word search on agnostic into the Greek evolution of the word.) I'll post the result when I have it and references.
nazis based their racial superiority on religion, not on any actual science. to call it atheism is rediculous. the so-called "science" of humanology was based entirely on the personal prejiduce that the "researcher" had. every data-point he used as evidence was pure speculation on his part.
and in no way is Communism or Environmentalism a universally accepted thing among atheists. o_O; the majority of atheists i know are iffy about my choice to be a Socialist. they are afraid of Communism/Socialism.
and most importantly, no. the main confusion is not between Theology and religion. that happens, yes, but it is nowhere NEAR as serious and common as the confusion between religion and Spirituality, a confusion that you clearly have in abundance.
i realy think you should do alot more studying of History, Theology, Philosophy, Politics and Science, dear. confused you seem awfully uneducated, and biased. i'm under the impression that you are repeating things that you were taught by your local pastor.... who most likely doesn't even read his own Bible.
