Spirituality and Religion

[Nearly Sane]

My take on this is that spirituality can be seen either as something exclusive and meaningful only to certain people, which strikes me as not very helpful or interesting, or it is relevant to everyone, in which case it must be a 'stretchy' word because people are different and also change. Sure, there's no universally agreed definition and you're free to take any version you like, as is Sriram.

Which means as Maeght points out that it is essentially useless for communication.

[Rhiannon]

So does that apply to love? My experience is that 'love' is equally as 'stretchy' a term.

[Maeght]

My take on this is that spirituality can be seen either as something exclusive and meaningful only to certain people, which strikes me as not very helpful or interesting, or it is relevant to everyone, in which case it must be a 'stretchy' word because people are different and also change. Sure, there's no universally agreed definition and you're free to take any version you like, as is Sriram.

So a meaningless and therefore pointless word.

[Rhiannon]

So a meaningless and therefore pointless word.

But it has meaning for me, and I have friends for whom it has meaning too. I get that not everyone agrees with it, and that's fine, I've no interest to insist that everyone should agree with the notion of 'spiritual'. But it does get old when I'm told that something that I do find meaning in and share with others is 'pointless'.

[Maeght]

So does that apply to love? My experience is that 'love' is equally as 'stretchy' a term.

As with most words there is more than one meaning for the word love but I wouldn't consider it as stretchy as the word spirituality seems to be. It does often need another word to clarify it though - for example when someone told me they loved me ...... like a brother!

[Maeght]

But it has meaning for me, and I have friends for whom it has meaning too. I get that not everyone agrees with it, and that's fine, I've no interest to insist that everyone should agree with the notion of 'spiritual'. But it does get old when I'm told that something that I do find meaning in and share with others is 'pointless'.

I said the word is pointless if the meaning is not clear to others. I didn't say what you find meaning in itself is pointless.

[Bramble]

Which means as Maeght points out that it is essentially useless for communication.

Well, yes and no. As it is, the word might be considered useless for communication (without further clarification) because people disagree as to its meaning. My stretchy version isn't any worse in this respect. You might just add it to the long list of possible meanings, though perhaps you could argue it is especially egregious because it's intrinsically slippery and won't yield upon investigation something tidy with clear margins. But that's really my point.

You can say language fails when clarity goes out of the window and to this end words must have agreed definitions, and for the most part I'd agree with you. The problem comes when we imagine that this kind of language can always adequately represent our experienced lives, which are fluid and slippery and often mysterious and replete with paradox and contradiction. I can already hear someone objecting that theirs isn't but hey, we're different and I can only speak for myself.

For me, if spirituality is to mean anything I can work with then it must refer to the fullness of my experienced life. Now I don't suppose I actually need a word to do this job and often I will avoid using the word precisely because people can mean different things by it. But there's also a sense in which it is used that people do seem to understand and which can be useful. It's hard to pin down what this meaning is simply because it refers to the ungraspable nature of being alive and all that entails, and to that extent I find the word can be helpful. It seems to me that there's a place for such a word and our language doesn't appear to have another one so spirituality will have to do. I see no reason why the word must be out of bounds to me because other people use it in ways that mean little to me. Why should they have all the fun?

Does the word have to remain 'essentially useless for communication'? I don't think so. Sure it can be problematical but I'm guessing even those who loathe it sometimes find themselves resorting to it on occasion. There don't seem to be many words like this in our language because for the most part what we seek is clarity, but I don't find that makes them useless. Perhaps the greatest 'offender' here is the word God, which can be just as slippery as spirituality. These words reach out beyond what we can grasp and tie up in neat linguistic packages. Their existence is an acknowledgement that our life is to a large extent mysterious, much as we might sometimes like to pretend otherwise. It is perhaps a measure of how much we desire to control things that even those who are most attracted to these words so often want to pin them down in some rigid belief (maybe that's what Jung was getting at when he said religion is a defence against the experience of God), and of course this also suits those who dislike the words because then they have something they can get their teeth into.

[Maeght]

Well, yes and no. As it is, the word might be considered useless for communication (without further clarification) because people disagree as to its meaning. My stretchy version isn't any worse in this respect. You might just add it to the long list of possible meanings, though perhaps you could argue it is especially egregious because it's intrinsically slippery and won't yield upon investigation something tidy with clear margins. But that's really my point.

You can say language fails when clarity goes out of the window and to this end words must have agreed definitions, and for the most part I'd agree with you. The problem comes when we imagine that this kind of language can always adequately represent our experienced lives, which are fluid and slippery and often mysterious and replete with paradox and contradiction. I can already hear someone objecting that theirs isn't but hey, we're different and I can only speak for myself.

For me, if spirituality is to mean anything I can work with then it must refer to the fullness of my experienced life. Now I don't suppose I actually need a word to do this job and often I will avoid using the word precisely because people can mean different things by it. But there's also a sense in which it is used that people do seem to understand and which can be useful. It's hard to pin down what this meaning is simply because it refers to the ungraspable nature of being alive and all that entails, and to that extent I find the word can be helpful. It seems to me that there's a place for such a word and our language doesn't appear to have another one so spirituality will have to do. I see no reason why the word must be out of bounds to me because other people use it in ways that mean little to me. Why should they have all the fun?

Does the word have to remain 'essentially useless for communication'? I don't think so. Sure it can be problematical but I'm guessing even those who loathe it sometimes find themselves resorting to it on occasion. There don't seem to be many words like this in our language because for the most part what we seek is clarity, but I don't find that makes them useless. Perhaps the greatest 'offender' here is the word God, which can be just as slippery as spirituality. These words reach out beyond what we can grasp and tie up in neat linguistic packages. Their existence is an acknowledgement that our life is to a large extent mysterious, much as we might sometimes like to pretend otherwise. It is perhaps a measure of how much we desire to control things that even those who are most attracted to these words so often want to pin them down in some rigid belief (maybe that's what Jung was getting at when he said religion is a defence against the experience of God), and of course this also suits those who dislike the words because then they have something they can get their teeth into.

Thanks for taking the time over that answer. I can totally see how someone who sees them self as a spiritual person can have their own understanding of what that means, but I can have no understanding of that meaning from the simple use of the word spiritual. What you talk about above seems far too big a thing to be summed up in one word anyway. Within groups of likeminded individuals the word can have meaning but outside that group it can have a totally different meaning or none at all, hence my comments (I know you understand that).

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

You people are talking about two different things.....

1. Do we need or can we have a common philosophical base for all humans?

2. What does the word 'Spirituality'' mean?


1. It is not that we 'need' a common base. It is not a personal wish of anyone. It is that we in all probability, HAVE a common base.

We have a common anatomy, a common physiology, a common evolutionary history, a common genetic history....and so on. We also have a common psychological and mental pattern.  People of different cultures and regions even have common NDE's.

Even with several cultural and historical differences we all today share a common moral and ethical system. Most people around the world have largely uniform ideas of right and wrong and it is converging more and more every day.

So there should also be a common future and a common purpose and pattern to our spirituality and our life goals. It is true that different religions seem to have different teachings but the similarities are obvious and many more. This is why it is important that we try to find commonalities in religious teachings and see if a uniform base philosophy emerges.

And from even rudimentary efforts we can see that there indeed are commonalities among the secret teachings.  We have already discussed them many times.

2. As to what the word 'spirituality' means... I think too much is being made of it.  Words evolve and are used differently in different generations. Don't get stuck on that.

Try this ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirituality

Cheers.

Sriram

[Rhiannon]

I said the word is pointless if the meaning is not clear to others. I didn't say what you find meaning in itself is pointless.

But surely you can look at people doing 'spirituality' and see that there is something that isn't pointless, even if it doesn't have meaning for you?

[Rhiannon]

As with most words there is more than one meaning for the word love but I wouldn't consider it as stretchy as the word spirituality seems to be. It does often need another word to clarify it though - for example when someone told me they loved me ...... like a brother!

Oh, bless you... in my experience something like that usually gets followed with, 'it's not you, it's me'...

[Maeght]

But surely you can look at people doing 'spirituality' and see that there is something that isn't pointless, even if it doesn't have meaning for you?

Yes, but I'm not talking about what people do, which they describe as spirituality, but purely about the usefulness of the word if it has different meanings to different people and can be streched to mean virtually anything. I am not questioning the point of your spiritual activities/beliefs.

[Maeght]

Oh, bless you... in my experience something like that usually gets followed with, 'it's not you, it's me'...

Thanks, and yes I've had that said too ....

[Maeght]

Words evolve and are used differently in different generations. Don't get stuck on that.

They may be use differently in different generations but we are surely talking about how it is used now and if different groups or people have a different understanding on what it means the word, on its own, is of little use regarding communications between those groups.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, but I'm not talking about what people do, which they describe as spirituality, but purely about the usefulness of the word if it has different meanings to different people and can be streched to mean virtually anything. I am not questioning the point of your spiritual activities/beliefs.

No, I get that. I think what I am saying is that if you see people doing something that they find meaning in then the word that applies to it has a point, even if it is irrelevant to you personally and is something of an umbrella term for varying ideas.

I feel the same about the word 'golf'.

[Maeght]

No, I get that. I think what I am saying is that if you see people doing something that they find meaning in then the word that applies to it has a point, even if it is irrelevant to you personally and is something of an umbrella term for varying ideas.

I feel the same about the word 'golf'.

Not in terms of communication if it can mean different things to different people or groups. Everyone understands what golf is if the word is used. You may not see any point in the game but the word has a point. Spirituality isn't the same.

[SusanDoris]

But surely you can look at people doing 'spirituality' and see that there is something that isn't pointless, even if it doesn't have meaning for you?

How do you 'do' spirituality an how do you know if someone is 'doing ' it?

[Rhiannon]

Not in terms of communication if it can mean different things to different people or groups. Everyone understands what golf is if the word is used. You may not see any point in the game but the word has a point. Spirituality isn't the same.

Golf is a good walk spoiled, it is televised sky.

[Rhiannon]

How do you 'do' spirituality an how do you know if someone is 'doing ' it?

I was using the term 'doing' loosely. You'll have noticed I put some writing that comes from my spirituality on this forum. That's me doing my spiritual thing.

[Maeght]

Golf is a good walk spoiled, it is televised sky.

Maybe, but you know what it is from the word, unlike spirituality.

Like many sports on TV it is alot about the 'situation' - who is winning, who you want to win etc rather than watching the play as you don't really get the best idea of how difficult the shots are.

[Rhiannon]

Maybe, but you know what it is from the word, unlike spirituality.

Like many sports on TV it is alot about the 'situation' - who is winning, who you want to win etc rather than watching the play as you don't really get the best idea of how difficult the shots are.

My views on golf are shaped by the golfers I've known and my limited experience of attending a golf club once a year for several years for a corporate thing. It is fair to say that my views are therefore not favourable. I guess you could say the same thing of religion and the religious, and indeed spirituality and the spiritual - there's good, there's bad, depends which kind you encounter as you go through life.

[Maeght]

My views on golf are shaped by the golfers I've known and my limited experience of attending a golf club once a year for several years for a corporate thing. It is fair to say that my views are therefore not favourable. I guess you could say the same thing of religion and the religious, and indeed spirituality and the spiritual - there's good, there's bad, depends which kind you encounter as you go through life.

Indeed. Golf clubs can be funny places - and I never enjoyed playing golf when I tried as I wasn't any good (not flexible enough) but I did watch a lot of the Masters recently as I wanted Rose or Garcia to win and usually watch the Ryder Cup but not much other golf.

[Rhiannon]

Indeed. Golf clubs can be funny places - and I never enjoyed playing golf when I tried as I wasn't any good (not flexible enough) but I did watch a lot of the Masters recently as I wanted Rose or Garcia to win and usually watch the Ryder Cup but not much other golf.

I've never tried golf, mainly on the basis of golf taking place at golf clubs. I try to watch the Ryder Cup as I like match play, but watching any of the Majors is forbidden by my kids, and I kind of get their point.

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,

To come back to the subject of the thread....

Spirituality (I think I have explained sufficiently about what I mean by spirituality)....is not the same as religion and there can be secular spirituality independent of any religion. Religion is a means to spirituality ..but it need not be the only way.....and no religion can claim to be the only way to spiritual growth.

If we try to look into the secret teachings of all religions we would find many common characteristics that point the way to a common philosophy of Life for all humans (and perhaps other life forms too).

We should avoid exoteric religious differences from affecting our emotions in such a way that they prevent us formulating a common philosophy. Similarly we should also avoid extreme scientific materialism from preventing us formulating such a philosophy.

IMO a common philosophy (the real Theory of Everything!) is unavoidable and will surely happen in coming generations....even if some of us are kicking and screaming all the way! 

Cheers.

Sriram

[Robbie]

I know your thread has moved on from the title sriam but someone asked me what i meant by 'spirituality' a few weeks ago and when i came back I couldn't find the thread or remember who asked it.
Another word is 'otherwordly' and I subscribe to that. Don't expect anyone else to believe in it but it is true for me.