Types of spirituality..

[Kaon]

Inspired by my other thread. While I left the definition of spirituality vague and open to personal interpretation, I am curious about the different types of spirituality out there.

In my mind there are two base ones. One I call hyper emotional empathy that has to do with concepts such as love and caring for others. While the other has more to do with submission to a higher power. Both themes you can find within Christianity and other popular faiths.

From my personal experience as a theist I leaned more to the former. Personal reasons led me to develop a great distaste for submission and I even actively choose to purge as much of it as I could in my spiritual life. Interestingly despite grasping spirituality intuitively as a kid, I never even engaged in submission back then. There were a few instances of my Christian life where curiosity got the best of me and I allowed myself to embrace the submission side of Christianity. I will report the spiritual experience was quite different than my usual emotional empathetic one. One big difference is that emotional empathy is easier to control. You meditate to feel it, and if you no longer want to feel it the spirituality is easy to opt out of. While with submission I found that I had uncontrolable after effects for hours.

Submission also produces a "drunk" like feeling. Which the phrase "drunkenness' in the spirit" probably refers too. While I have limited experience with this spirituality, it is one where I think it might be possible to obtain trippy experiences with and possibly see visions. Things that I was not very adapt at with my Christianity due to avoiding submissive spirituality.

One might wonder what I mean by emotional empathy and spirituality. I think one example is that one can feel spiritual when with a big crowd of people, like a rock concert. You are able to achieve this with your mind if you can see God within everything. Just as a being with a crowd of people can overload your emotional empathetic senses, seeing God everywhere can do the same. Which, when it comes to empathy themes of love and caring for others are quite relevant. Although to be fair, maybe submission requires empathy, although might be the more cognitive kind and isn't quite the central theme as well.

I am curious about the types of spiritualty others see, and perhaps practice themselves? Understandable this can be a difficult topic to explain (especially with me and my language disorder), but we can try our best. Given the difficulty of the subject many of us have probably come up with custom language to best describe our experiences.

We are (nearly) incapable of spirituality, because we die. Some of us work to align ourselves with spiritual things, but it is challenging to do this considering we are matter (not spirit).

The best we can do is morality. If you are a vessel with an actual spirit inside of the vessel (one that isn't counterfeit), then you will have to oppose yourself to convince yourself "a code meant for entities that do NOT die (spirituality)" is superior to a code meant for entities that do die (morality). In other words (as said in many philosophies): forget everything you know [as a human] if you want to be a spirit/spiritual.

There are many entities with many "spiritual ideologies" that wait for our folly to hit a critical point - so much so that we find it indistinguishable the differences between one spiritual ideologue and another (or, ideologues are set as violently opposing to satisfy our need for duality).

Love and empathy are consequences and symptoms of spirituality, but alone they do nothing since even the most vile entities can still love someone, and feel empathy for things that matter to them. Moreover, global school of human thought has love as an isochemistry of certain molecules already existent (or in production). Empathy can be considered an over-sensitivity (problem), and generally dangerous for (personal) Darwinian survival.

When we no longer die (or, our lifespans significantly increase), maybe we can practice spirituality as a society. For now, any mortal practicing spirituality is practicing (through faith) for a day that the mortal will no longer be mortal. Otherwise, there is no moral incentive to be spiritual.

 

[Robban]

Inspired by my other thread. While I left the definition of spirituality vague and open to personal interpretation, I am curious about the different types of spirituality out there.

In my mind there are two base ones. One I call hyper emotional empathy that has to do with concepts such as love and caring for others. While the other has more to do with submission to a higher power. Both themes you can find within Christianity and other popular faiths.

From my personal experience as a theist I leaned more to the former. Personal reasons led me to develop a great distaste for submission and I even actively choose to purge as much of it as I could in my spiritual life. Interestingly despite grasping spirituality intuitively as a kid, I never even engaged in submission back then. There were a few instances of my Christian life where curiosity got the best of me and I allowed myself to embrace the submission side of Christianity. I will report the spiritual experience was quite different than my usual emotional empathetic one. One big difference is that emotional empathy is easier to control. You meditate to feel it, and if you no longer want to feel it the spirituality is easy to opt out of. While with submission I found that I had uncontrolable after effects for hours.

Submission also produces a "drunk" like feeling. Which the phrase "drunkenness' in the spirit" probably refers too. While I have limited experience with this spirituality, it is one where I think it might be possible to obtain trippy experiences with and possibly see visions. Things that I was not very adapt at with my Christianity due to avoiding submissive spirituality.

One might wonder what I mean by emotional empathy and spirituality. I think one example is that one can feel spiritual when with a big crowd of people, like a rock concert. You are able to achieve this with your mind if you can see God within everything. Just as a being with a crowd of people can overload your emotional empathetic senses, seeing God everywhere can do the same. Which, when it comes to empathy themes of love and caring for others are quite relevant. Although to be fair, maybe submission requires empathy, although might be the more cognitive kind and isn't quite the central theme as well.

I am curious about the types of spiritualty others see, and perhaps practice themselves? Understandable this can be a difficult topic to explain (especially with me and my language disorder), but we can try our best. Given the difficulty of the subject many of us have probably come up with custom language to best describe our experiences.

The Talmud tells that no person can sin unless a spirit of folly, stupidity or insanity enters into them.

So that would mean that something enters,

Is it into our thinking, so much so we can be obsessed with it.

Maybe.

 

[Robban]

The Talmud tells that no person can sin unless a spirit of folly, stupidity or insanity enters into them.

So that would mean that something enters,

Is it into our thinking, so much so we can be obsessed with it.

Maybe.

Worst case would be if it were to take control.

But then what do I know.

Not much.

One thing though, people have asked me about myself

often straight out of the blue, am I religious, do I believe in God etc,

but never if I am spiritual.

Which is good I think.

 

[dlamberth]

We are (nearly) incapable of spirituality, because we die. Some of us work to align ourselves with spiritual things, but it is challenging to do this considering we are matter (not spirit)..

Another type of spirituality that turns your comment completely upside down goes like this: “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” Those are the words of the Christian Mystic Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Other Christian Mystics, Meister Eckhart for instance, say the same. But it's also an image (can I say experience?) that runs through other spiritual traditions as well.

 

[Robban]

Another type of spirituality that turns your comment completely upside down goes like this: “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” Those are the words of the Christian Mystic Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Other Christian Mystics, Meister Eckhart for instance, say the same. But it's also an image (can I say experience?) that runs through other spiritual traditions as well.

The Christian focus is on spirit alöne,

The Jewish focus is on the soul.

 

[cloudyday2]

The Christian focus is on spirit alöne,

The Jewish focus is on the soul.

I was skimming this article defining the Jewish idea of a soul and saw a quote that might help defining spirituality and "the God shaped hole". So spirituality is connected to our G-dly soul. Non-spirituality is connected to our animal soul.

The Chassidic masters speak of two distinct souls that vitalize the human being: an "Animal Soul" and a "G‑dly Soul." The Animal Soul is driven by the quest for self-preservation and self-enhancement; in this, it resembles the soul and self of all other creations. But we also possess a G‑dly Soul"--a soul driven by the desire to reconnect with its Source. Our lives are the story of the contest and interplay between these two souls, as we struggle to balance and reconcile our physical needs and desires with our spiritual aspirations, our self-focused drives with our altruistic yearnings. These two souls, however, do not reside "side-by-side" within the body; rather, the G‑dly Soul is enclothed within the Animal Soul—just as the Animal Soul is enclothed within the body. This means that the Animal Soul, too, is vitalized by the "part of G‑d above" at its core. Ostensibly, the two souls are in conflict with each other, but in essence they are compatible

What Is a Soul (Neshamah)?

 

[Kaon]

Another type of spirituality that turns your comment completely upside down goes like this: “We are not human beings having a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” Those are the words of the Christian Mystic Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. Other Christian Mystics, Meister Eckhart for instance, say the same. But it's also an image (can I say experience?) that runs through other spiritual traditions as well.

I don't believe so, especially in this context:

The best we can do is morality. If you are a vessel with an actual spirit inside of the vessel (one that isn't counterfeit), then you will have to oppose yourself to convince yourself "a code meant for entities that do NOT die (spirituality)" is superior to a code meant for entities that do die (morality). In other words (as said in many philosophies): forget everything you know [as a human] if you want to be a spirit/spiritual.
​

We are matter trying to be spirit - carnality practicing for spirituality. We can mimic spiritual things, but our nature is physical - meaning we cannot do those spiritual things 100% of the time as per our "nature". You can always "buy" enough counterfeit "spirit" to help you create your will through natural means (magic), but you are still matter - so you will be depleted. Some of us are spiritual beings, perhaps, waiting to get back to what we are. However, carnality is not spirituality. If you want to be spiritual, you will have to oppose yourself in order to even mimic spiritual things.

In order for "us" to be spiritual, our Father has to be spiritual. Not everyone was "born" from the Most High, so by definition [of spiritual things] not nearly everyone is a spirit living a carnal/mortal life: most all of "us" are living a facsimile of real life - which can only come from the Father.

 

[Robban]

We are (nearly) incapable of spirituality, because we die. Some of us work to align ourselves with spiritual things, but it is challenging to do this considering we are matter (not spirit).

The best we can do is morality. If you are a vessel with an actual spirit inside of the vessel (one that isn't counterfeit), then you will have to oppose yourself to convince yourself "a code meant for entities that do NOT die (spirituality)" is superior to a code meant for entities that do die (morality). In other words (as said in many philosophies): forget everything you know [as a human] if you want to be a spirit/spiritual.

There are many entities with many "spiritual ideologies" that wait for our folly to hit a critical point - so much so that we find it indistinguishable the differences between one spiritual ideologue and another (or, ideologues are set as violently opposing to satisfy our need for duality).

Love and empathy are consequences and symptoms of spirituality, but alone they do nothing since even the most vile entities can still love someone, and feel empathy for things that matter to them. Moreover, global school of human thought has love as an isochemistry of certain molecules already existent (or in production). Empathy can be considered an over-sensitivity (problem), and generally dangerous for (personal) Darwinian survival.

When we no longer die (or, our lifespans significantly increase), maybe we can practice spirituality as a society. For now, any mortal practicing spirituality is practicing (through faith) for a day that the mortal will no longer be mortal. Otherwise, there is no moral incentive to be spiritual.

As expressed in the Yom Kippur prayer,

"Though Your mighty strength is in the angels above.

You desire praise from those formed of lowly matter."

Also Psalms 8.

 

[Zoness]

What'chall think about religious naturalism? I find the premise enticing. I follow a religion but I struggle to relate to comparatively intense religions like Christianity that demand a high degree of conformity and spiritual experience. Religious naturalism is closer to my daily spiritual position with the addition of orthopraxic ritual.

 

[cloudyday2]

What'chall think about religious naturalism? I find the premise enticing. I follow a religion but I struggle to relate to comparatively intense religions like Christianity that demand a high degree of conformity and spiritual experience. Religious naturalism is closer to my daily spiritual position with the addition of orthopraxic ritual.

It doesn't appeal to me, but I suspect it appeals to a lot of people. What appeals to me about many religions is the idea that we need to escape this reality. I have had depression most of my life, and probably that has made me always see the glass as half empty. To accept that there is no full glass of transcendental water and I should try to make the most of the half glass is difficult LOL

I imagine this idea has a lot of appeal to most people though. It may be the future of religion.

 

[dlamberth]

The Christian focus is on spirit alöne,

The Jewish focus is on the soul.

I'm wondering what the difference is?

 

[dlamberth]

We are matter trying to be spirit - carnality practicing for spirituality. We can mimic spiritual things, but our nature is physical - meaning we cannot do those spiritual things 100% of the time as per our "nature". You can always "buy" enough counterfeit "spirit" to help you create your will through natural means (magic), but you are still matter - so you will be depleted. Some of us are spiritual beings, perhaps, waiting to get back to what we are. However, carnality is not spirituality. If you want to be spiritual, you will have to oppose yourself in order to even mimic spiritual things.

I think if spirituality is entered through the physical we come to a different trajectory than if entered through consciousness. Directly related to that is the question of what is our true selves? And what's being aware of the sensual experiences that come our way?

 

[Kaon]

I think if spirituality is entered through the physical we come to a different trajectory than if entered through consciousness. Directly related to that is the question of what is our true selves? And what's being aware of the sensual experiences that come our way?

If spiritually enters through physical, it is an absolute miracle and, must have been by Providence. Matter cant "touch" spirit - it cant even perceive it because matter's consort is carnality (implied ignorance of self and surroundings except for urges and base sensory responses). This is why a Redeemer that paved the way for the carnal entity to reach spirituality is such an amazingly big deal.

Arguably, you can induce spiritual interactions through consciousness by experimenting with specific hallucinogenics - in many cultures that is the point of natural hallucinogens. The problem is that we are matter, so we don't have the capacity to sustain spiritual interaction - often leading to a depletion of the mind and eventually the vessel.

To determine whether we are "aware", there needs to be some reference point (backed by truth, not hypothesis) for us to appeal to. Otherwise, we will all come up with our own definitions of awareness. "Carnality" is a constant effort to stay awake because its end goal is death and transformation. That is why you have to work to find truth; it is rarely presented "as is".

 

[dlamberth]

Arguably, you can induce spiritual interactions through consciousness by experimenting with specific hallucinogenics - in many cultures that is the point of natural hallucinogens.

I'm curious as to how you explain those mystics who don't use hallucinogens?

The problem is that we are matter, so we don't have the capacity to sustain spiritual interaction - often leading to a depletion of the mind and eventually the vessel.

Sustain spiritual interactions, that's an interesting concept. The Indigenous people experience trees, plants, animals and all of nature not as nouns, but as verbs. Isn't that a type of sustain spiritual interaction?

 

[com7fy8]

In my mind there are two base ones. One I call hyper emotional empathy that has to do with concepts such as love and caring for others. While the other has more to do with submission to a higher power. Both themes you can find within Christianity and other popular faiths.

Yes, I find that God wants me to be able to feel for others. A practical part of empathy is how I can use my own wrong things to help me understand what is going on in the problems of other people >

"He can have compassion on those who are ignorant and going astray, since he himself is also subject to weakness." (Hebrews 5:2)

This scripture has helped me to not look down on even very obviously wrong people, but have compassion with hope for them, and even use how I can be wrong to help me feel for them and understand what is going on inside them. And I find how God changes me out of my wrong stuff so I become better in loving any and all people, and able to be sensitive and intimate with others who can relate kindly and humbly.

And be submissive to God in His peace >

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15)

God is all-loving and about family caring and sharing; so this peace has me seeing people in a kind way with hope for even wrong people. So, empathetic and emotional and submissive spirituality are connected, for me, in how God's peace rules me. And this peace is God's and God is almighty; so this peace almighty can easily keep me safe from any and all sorts of mental and emotional chaos > and so even very wrong people can not have power over me to get me bitter, fearful, worried, lusting, unforgiving, and angry and arguing.

So, this is the definition of sober, then . . . being so wrong and cruel things can't get the better of me, plus I stay ready for love even though someone else isn't. And God's word does say >

"Be sober" (in 1 Peter 5:8).

So, this is my experience . . . after maybe more than forty years of investment.

And I have had various people helping me, along the way . . . mainly by their example, possibly, especially for how to be in relating with other people. So, I have not gotten anywhere in isolation, though I seem to be an introvert. So I need to keep feeding my relating, then, with certain other people.

 

[dlamberth]

Two Types of Mystical Experience as presented by W.T. Stace.
"One may be called extrovertive mystical experience, the other introvertive mystical experience. Both are apprehensions of the One, but they reach it in different ways. The extrovertive way looks outward and through the physical senses into the external world and finds the One there. The introvertive way turns inward, introspectively, and finds the One at the bottoom of the self, at the bottom of human personality. The latter far outweighs the former in importance both in the history of mysticism and in the history of human thought generally. The introvertive way is the major strand in the history of mysticism, the extrovertive way a minor strand.

The extrovertive mystic with his physical senses continues to perceive the same world of trees and hills and tables and chairs as the rest of us. But he sees these objects transfigured in such manner that the Unity shines through them. Because it includes ordinary sense perceptions, it only partially realizes the description...(that is, an experience of complete unity)...It is suggested that the extrovertive type of experience is a kind of halfway house to the introvertive. For the introvertive experience is wholly nonsensuous and nonintellectual. But the extrovertive experience is sensory-intellectual in so far as it still perceives physical objects but is nonsensuous and nonintellectual in so far as it perceives them as "all one."

Introvertive mysticism..."Now it happens to be the case that this total suppression of the whole empirical content of consciousness is precisely what the introvertive mystic claims to achieve. And he claims that what happens is not that all consciousness disappears but that only the ordinary sensory-intellectual consciousnessness disappears and is replaced by an entirely new kind of consciousness, the mystical consciousness."

"Of the introvertive mystical consciousness the Mandukya (Upanishad) says that it is "beyond the senses, beyond the understanding, beyond all expression...It is the pure unitary consciousness, wherein awareness of the world and of multiplicity is completely obliterated. It is ineffable peace. It is the Supreme Good. It is One without a second. It is the Self.""..."Not only in Christianity and Hinduism but everywhere else we find that the essence of this experience is that it is an undifferentiated unity, though each culture and each religion interprets this undifferentiated unity in terms of its own creeds and dogmas."

 

[Kaon]

I'm curious as to how you explain those mystics who don't use hallucinogens?

Mystics have their own school of thought for perceiving God(s) - I can't comment on whether it is right or not. What I will say is that there are plenty of entities that masquerade as gods, and are willing to entertain us in order to get something in return: our ignorance of them and their devices is not an excuse or protection.

These same entities can manipulate our matter to give us an experience we think is real - because we are simply matter. (The chemical changes our brains due to hallucinogens or drugs mimic these "spiritual" experiences; you don't have to be under the influence of an hallucinogenic to be hallucinating.)

Sustain spiritual interactions

, that's an interesting concept. The Indigenous people experience trees, plants, animals and all of nature not as nouns, but as verbs. Isn't that a type of sustain spiritual interaction?

Nature "dies", or transforms (however you want to see it) too often to be a spiritual interaction; nature is still matter: matter cannot touch spirit, it can only mimic a shadow of it.

You can always see nature as simply food/resources for manipulation (magic) and consumption; the technological world does this extremely well.

Indigenous people have enough sense, however, to realize that everything is either dead or alive: they chose to practice for the perpetuity of life (spirit) by acknowledging the life in dead things (just like the Most High acknowledges the Life in dead carnal humans by allowing for Redemption).

 

[cloudyday2]

@Kaon , you seem to have an elaborate model of reality, and I was curious if it comes from some religious group or if you developed it yourself. A lot of your ideas are interesting and new to me, so that's why I ask.

 

[dlamberth]

Mystics have their own school of thought for perceiving God(s) - I can't comment on whether it is right or not.

When exploring the question posed in the OP, I'm not looking at right or wrong. I just think the question posed by MehGuy is of interest. And the Mystics offer some pretty interesting ways to go about spirituality.

Indigenous people have enough sense, however, to realize that everything is either dead or alive: they chose to practice for the perpetuity of life (spirit) by acknowledging the life in dead things (just like the Most High acknowledges the Life in dead carnal humans by allowing for Redemption).

Please, I'm only using what you wrote only to jump off on to a different spirituality. Indigenous people, when sensing nature as a verb, that's through the inner eye of "non-duality". That's a perspective of reality that is much different than the duality perspective pictured in your reply.

Non-duality can be a perspective where spirit is experienced in the physical and is one with it. So for instance, the Indigenous people are able to sense the spirit of a forest, or the bear spirit or mountain spirit. The death of a tree does not mean the death of the forest spirit. The same with a bear spirit when the bear dies. The spirit of the ancestors of the America Indians very much lives with them.

When bringing in images of God through non-duality, I think of the Life Force of God flowing within and through all that exist. And knowing and even experiencing that we are in it and not apart of it is a type of spirituality.

 

[Kaon]

When exploring the question posed in the OP, I'm not looking at right or wrong. I just think the question posed by MehGuy is of interest. And the Mystics offer some pretty interesting ways to go about spirituality.


Please, I'm only using what you wrote only to jump off on to a different spirituality. Indigenous people, when sensing nature as a verb, that's through the inner eye of "non-duality". That's a perspective of reality that is much different than the duality perspective pictured in your reply.

My perspective isn't duality either: I am saying matter can only mimic spiritual things, and perceive its function on a rudimentary level, because matter is a shadow of spirit. You can use magic to manipulate matter, and you can use other means to interact with interdimensional entities/gods (these are still not spirits). But, my point is that matter cannot touch spirit - specifically because spirit is not from this universe. The Most High is the generator of spiritual entities, and they do not come from matter (i.e. the universe). The "light" in the abode of the Most High is beyond gamma/cosmic radiation.

Spirit is a completely separate substance of matter that is non-native to this entire universe (and all of its dimensions). This is why carnality cannot touch spirit. I do not mean your soul when I say spirit, and I do not mean the astral projection of your physical manifestation in any dimension or form. If you are "from" this universe and/or all of its dimensions, you are categorically not spirit.

Things that are dead have released their soul - meaning the very substance of their identity has been released to somewhere. Some humans will release their souls to judgment and clothe themselves with spirit (light) as per Providence. The light of spirit is beyond gamma/cosmic radiation detection, because spirit is not from this universe. However, if the requisite for "life" on this plane of existence/universe is to have energy, then everything has "life".

Non-duality can be a perspective where spirit is experienced in the physical and is one with it. So for instance, the Indigenous people are able to sense the spirit of a forest, or the bear spirit or mountain spirit. The death of a tree does not mean the death of the forest spirit. The same with a bear spirit when the bear dies. The spirit of the ancestors of the America Indians very much lives with them.

You are describing what I would call "soul sensing" - it is a sense beyond touch/taste/smell/hearing/sight. What people call ESP is using one of the other five senses most people don't realize they have. One of these senses is the ability to detect souls (like ghosts, or humans who are in pain). Natives likely had ample opportunity to exploit their ESP because the food was cleaner, they willingly communed with the land on which they lived and they respected the overall nature surrounding them. When you do these things you naturally enhance your ability to be able to sense other souls, and do other exploits. Even the book of Enoch talks about souls that have been released into four different (interdimensional) columns based on their deeds (1 of light, 3 of darkness). The souls are still "alive"; Abel makes an account against his brother "day and night".

Life is subjective; what we have are facsimiles of real life. But, real life wouldn't be duality; it would be unity.