About spirituality and religion. Posted by John on January 12, 19100 at 14:03:37:
In Reply to: Re: What DOES "spiritual" mean, anyway??? posted by suz on January 07, 19100 at 08:38:21:
Hi, everybody. I'd like to carry our conversation about "spirituality"
a little farther today.
First of all, as several of you have inferred, spirituality does NOT
have to be tied to religion. Religions may be said to pertain to
spirituality, but spirituality does not always pertain to religion. I
would say that spirituality is even more fundamental, more basic even
than religion.
In this sense, spirituality is, as Jeff said, "life." That is certainly
a more general definition of the term than I came up with the other day
(I'd asked for some of you to have a shot at that). Or, perhaps we
could say "reality." Yet, I think something else has to be added to
this, Jeff. I think we have to say that spirituality is life being
known, or being perceived with awareness. I'd like to posit that
spirituality is life apprehended in mindfulness. That is NOT a
doctrine, to be believed. It's just my idea of it, from my own
experience.
For, if we say that there is spirituality, apparently we must say that
there is also non-spirituality. And in this view of it, non-
spirituality is what prevails in the world as we know it. For we know
that there is life, in all of its many aspects. We perceive that there
is life. But in non-spirituality—at least this coach looks at it this
way—we know that there is life, yet we do not really know life
mindfully. That's how it seems to me. That is "the ordinary human
condition," knowing life, behaving in life, but not *really being aware
of anything! Along these lines, I would posit that the real meaning of
the term "spirit," as we find this in so many different spiritual
writings around the world, is . . . mindfulness, or simply, awareness.
Now, Douglas has also brought up the interesting point that there is
obviously something more that is being talked about in classical
trainings of this kind, there is an "Absolute," a "Higher Power," as he
puts it. We also hear a lot about this puzzling and generally
uncomprehended (so far as I know) idea by the name . . . "God." What
are we to make of this? For just about every place we hear about
awakening, we also hear about this "Absolute," or, this "God." And
there are other terms, as well, all referring to some kind of, yes,
"Higher Power," seems to be as good a way of putting it as any. And,
yes, it is true. The term "Spirit" appears, just as much, in the
classical writings to refer to this "Absolute" or "Higher Power in the
Universe."
Can a person be "spiritual" and not "believe in God?" I think the
answer to that is: yes. Can a person who believes in God be
"spiritual?" Again, I think the answer is: yes. From the point of
view of these classes, a person can become spiritual whether or not they
"believe in God." In fact, I would say that a person can be spiritual
without believing in *anything. "Spiritual," in this perspective, then,
means "reality as it is, perceived in awareness." Spirituality is
experiential. That's the contention of this approach. It doesn't
depend upon beliefs. It depends upon waking up and experiencing.
It also can be noted that "spiritual" in this sense cannot be taken of
as a "badge," or permanent status. If spirituality is looked at in this
way, a man or woman cannot be described generally as "a spiritual
person." One can say only that if they remember to wake up, if they
perceive reality with awareness, only then can they be said to be
"spiritual."
That's where the Zen teaching that Douglas has shared comes into the
picture, the idea of "a larger container." I think that's an excellent
demonstration of spirituality. Whatever happens, make a larger
container, and include it in, in awareness. Something "good" happens?
Include it in, mindfully. Something "bad" happens? Include it in,
mindfully. That's spirituality, to me. Keep making a larger and larger
container with your awareness, and whatever happens, include it in. In
this sense, mindfulness is the intentional affirmation of life . . . as
it is. Keep affirming life. Exclude nothing. Keep including new
things in, by experiencing them in mindfulness, until you have affirmed
the "Whole of it All" that way. This, to me, is spirituality. This is
how to live a "spiritual life."
But what of this "Higher Power." Remember, please, I am NOT telling any
of you that you have to believe in one. In fact, in my view, it doesn't
really "do any good" to believe in one. As long as it's just a belief,
it is not really going to be known, or apprehended in mindfulness. Oh,
one can be mindful that one *has that belief, alright! But that is not
the same thing as apprehending the reality of it . . . whatever that may
be. (?)
This we can say: *Perhaps, in living the life of a mindfulness
practitioner, and in using mindfulness as a tool to divest one's inner
being of the overlay of ego and personality that one has put on while
growing up, the fruits of this kind of transformative work (or play),
over the hours, days, weeks, months, and years, *may lead to the
experiential apprehension of the Absolute. That is what all the
mystical and spiritual teachings seem to be saying, anyway, as far as I
can tell.
But for now, Kiddees, I would say we don't really need to worry about
that . . . because all of us still have our egos and personalities
pretty firmly in place, characterizing our daily lives the way they do—
our reactive negative emotions, our thoughts and beliefs, our desires,
and our ways of behaving with others. And so, we are cut-off from
experiencing whether there is an Absolute, or Higher Power, anyway, for
now. (At least, so the writers of mystical, metaphysical, and spiritual
teachings seem to be saying.) Instead of being in a position in life
where we are able to know that, we are in a position where all we can
know is pre-determined by the make-up of our automatic conditioned
selves, our "ego-driven selves." We are "alienated" from such knowing
in this way. That is, we can only know parts, but we cannot see the
Whole.
Do you see what I mean? Here's a hypothetical example in terms of the
personality and essence wheel we use in this class. Let's say we have a
hypothetical person whose life is largely governed by the personality
patterns of the Dictator, the Con Artist, and the Judge. Let's say this
person has these personality types in the extreme, and that very little
of the other personality types play a part in their daily thinking,
wanting, and acting-out on the stage of life.
That personality formation, that "profile of typology" could only know
God in terms of power, success, and being right.
At once, we can see that a person with a make-up like that, would be
unable to know God in terms of other elements of life that we *can know
about than those three. For instance he or she couldn't know God in
terms of beauty, in terms of being merciful, in terms of appreciation
(worship), in terms of love, nor in terms of fellowship. Their
personality profile wouldn't have the beliefs and opinions necessary for
doing that kind of knowing! They wouldn't have it in 'em. Their make-
up would entirely be filled up with power, success, and being right. —
Or let's say this same hypothetical person had a Martyr in their make-
up, in place of that Dictator. In this case, he or she could know the
God of love, and yet they couldn't know God in terms of power.
As God is actually *ineffable, and can't be known in terms of words and
meanings in our thinking minds, anyway, the farthest we may be able to
go in "knowing God intellectually" may simply be in terms of the
essential strengths and qualitites that *are known to appear in human
beings. If there is any validity in this (For we *are said in the
Bible, for instance, to be "made in God's image."), then God may be *
reflected in the qualities of our human essence: the strength and
courage of the Can-Do Person, the brilliance and vision of the Teacher,
the balance and harmony of the Player, the beauty and sensitivity of the
Artist, the peace and gentleness of the Can-Do Person, the faith and
enthusiasm ("en-Theos") of the Student, the tenderness and passion of
the Lover, and the caring and willingness to help of the Healer.
The principle types will know only fragments of the Whole, each
according to the biases and propensities of their own unique
perspectives. So, as long as we have egos and personalities, Kiddees,
we are not going to be able to know the answer to this question, not
really.
But this is all only intellectual speculation, after all. It's just a
game. :-)
Coach
I've been down with the flu (or whatever?) all week. I'll probably post
a few more times this week in smaller segments. There's still a lot I'd
like to quote from of remarks by Michael and Douglas recently, to carry
this discussion of "spirituality" farther along for awhile, if you
students don't mind. Add your comments, by all means, if you feel like
it.
Remember: whatever happens, keep making a bigger basket for it by
experiencing it in awareness, and including it in with the rest of
reality this way. — This doesn't say to "surrender" to bad things,
just to be *aware of it all, to know the simple truth of it in vivid
high-relief.
Continue with Winter 1999/2000 Classroom Talk or
Post a new discussion in the current Classroom Talk
Archived February 13, 2000