Should we even be spiritual while incarnated in the physis? And why do we incarnate?

[BigJohn]

Lets see...... when 1 of 4 or is 2 of 4 or whatever........
or is it 4 of 1
and then you add one more.
Interesting odds.

Originally Posted by janielee

I don’t need to lie

We don't tell the Truth, we tell the Truth of ourselves.


Thanks for telling me your truths, Greenslade. Nice sound bites, but yeah, no, I’ve seen and experienced enough to know what the Masters point to is a Truth that’s beyond such circular arguments, the constant appeal to rationality, and the world of grudges and offence. In other words, something much better, in my books.

YMMV but as to spiritual “competition” try not to take a difference of opinion as politics or competition - this is a forum, and a spirituality based one, so the conversations probably flow that way, and in this field, yeah there are bright lights (see above) and not one of these Masters contradicts the other or says “don’t worry everything is spiritual so whatever”.

I’d say a pretty strong road sign right there for those who are interested in the path of Light and Honor,

JL

I'm with SD, I can't be ars_ed either.

Originally Posted by davidsun

,Agreed. Given that I think/believe that everything is 'composed' by Mind (we are all the 'thoughts' of 'God') and Spirit (we are all the ex-press-ions of 'God'). I regard all being-doing (incarnate or excarnate ) as being 'spiritual'. My focus is on grokking and sharing what I think Spirit's 'game' pertaining to what 'incarnation' and Spirit's purpose (goal) in doing so is.

There comes a time when the word 'Spiritual' is meaningless, and this is one of those times. The real question is not what is or isn't Spiritual but what are the reasons we believe it to be? Spirit understands and allows the existence of all things without judgement or prejudice and recognises only the Isness because Isness is all that really exists. The egoic mind categorises into Spiritual and non-Spiritual, attaches values and makes judgements and prejudices accordingly. The intrinsic Isness is lost in favour of "This is Spiritual while this is not Spiritual. This has value and importance while this is meaningless." "I am more Spiritual than you."

Our Spirituality is not Spirituality, it is a projection of the relationship we have with ourselves.

As for what Spirit's goal, a friend of mine had the most admirable expression - "Love under Free Will." So when God gives us a ton of suffering but really doesn't, you know why. The most pertinent questions for me are "Do I Love myself enough to give myself this experience, do I love others enough to give them theirs?" Yes, every time.

[Jyotir]

Originally Posted by Altair

You are being very insufferable Yjotir, over-analysing my every sentence. I'm honestly not interested in any interrogations. What's important here is that you are missing the point..

This idea that happiness can't be found in the worldly things and in pleasure, because they are 'temporary' is rather problematic, but a view that returns in many spiritual traditions. Many of the things we enjoy are temporary, as are loved ones. I think we may forget anti-pleasure and non-attachment teachings were made and are upheld by ascetics and monks, and are not that relevant for most of us. Abandoning the worldly, eschewing pleasures, and all things of ''a temporary nature'' does not necessarily bring one happiness. Such an anti-world view can work for genuine ascetics and monks, but should IMO be met with caution by most spiritually interested people. And I am not the only one who observed this as others I've talked with have come to similar observations.

Life on earth and everything in it shouldn't be viewed as all misery and unhappiness, and spirituality as some miracle cure for every problem, because it really isn't. When someone says that the worldly won't bring happiness but only something spiritual does, then they are placing themselves firmly into that position. The irony is that spiritual traditions, besides being able to make people happy, can also have the potency to actually make people miserable by making them give up things that would otherwise make their lives better.

Hi Altair,

Maybe what’s actually “very insufferable” is when someone parrots themselves by repeating exactly the same frail arguments while not addressing a prior cogent response to each and every one of them, all by using the lame facile prevarication of “over-analyzing” and “interrogations”, and puffed-up indignant posture as schoolyard tactics of avoiding actual intellectual honesty and rigor. You seem to play fast and loose with protocol, content, and reason, yet flexible in allowing yourself certain ‘freedoms’, while taking others to task for those very same indulgences, with clever put-downs that serve to conveniently excuse your evasions. (e.g., people refuting falsehoods logically are “interrogating” others. Right)

Am I missing the point? Hardly. But are you avoiding them? There is a confusion regarding the distinction between the intellectual content of abstract concepts and tenets of spiritual practice and apparently very important self-defined moral conclusions of posture they seem to reactively generate. It is a common but false equivocation.

Given your numerous insipient positions, perhaps it comes down to, that it is really spirituality which is “very insufferable.”

Because somehow - even if not true - but maybe because of an ancestral drama, personal controversy and most importantly - colossal misunderstanding - there is an utterly false assumption that spirituality and material life are somehow antithetical and that material considerations become invalidated and defenestrated upon the pursuit of spirituality, therefore a false path to be avoided.

Spirituality (ooh, scary) then fearfully (but according to a false assumption ironically based in materialistic culture) means giving up all those existential and sentimentally prized bourgeois comforts and conventions; urgent underclass aspirations of socio-economic ascension and the cherished prerogatives and prestiges of their achievement which then represents untenable self-conflict in light of awakening. So therefore spirituality must justifiably be avoided using whatever rationalizations suit ones abilities to make them - regardless of truth. Precisely the case being made through various clever obfuscations and justifications, emphasizing the mundane and superficial aspects of human culture as primary, while excluding the truly spiritual by various less than honest polemical tactics.

Of course, these are likely externalized projections of internal conflict and resistance, which is a normal occurrence in spiritual awakening - meaning that one begins to see the possibilities of spirituality within mundane material life...followed by an understandable reactively rationalized rejection led by the mental-ego. Ergo spirituality doesn’t work and is false, bad things have happened, I might have to give up things I like, I’m afraid of the dark …too many confusing sacrifices and I want my mummy vs. what as seen (before the fact) as untenable sacrifices, which represent conflict with the inexorable awakening. This is the structural description of numerous false arguments played out here. I don’t want to give up my comforts reactively and defensively reasoned by questionable polemical tactics, misconstrued reasoned conclusions, - all evasions which handily and conveniently deny, and avoid discussion of actual spiritual principles in favor of what attempts invalidation of what is feared…the inexorably emerging unknown within. This is a description of consistently demonstrated posture.

Yet as based on irrational fears of losing control and possession of these very important samskara inducing and perpetuating attachments and diversions, which are btw, not inherently antithetical to spirituality if utilized as vehicles of transcendence and transformation. We unavoidably live in a physical material world which must be considered, and addressed or utilized, just not within legitimate spiritual practice be unduly or exclusively emphasized. However if spirituality is avoided by faulty assumptions that require one to preserve obsolete antique ideologies and falsehoods, so as to heroically reject spirituality in principle as a 'false path' as reasoned repeatedly, that is unfortunate, not ironic.

Spirituality is superior to the worldly - even though in essence they are the same, but because Spirit is the source and truth of it in its most authentic form and the secret to its transformation - it is not “against it” the worldly, but the worldly by its very nature without that illumination cannot provide this transformation. To argue against this simply makes the case that the world with all its pain, suffering, chaos and confusion is really all or the best we can expect, and therefore a stoic disposition tinged with cynical resignation, eased and mitigated by the palliations of a few bourgeois comforts if ethically and morally disposed is the entire true truth and the wise way…that’s the rubbish…that spirituality makes people miserable, doesn’t transform life, can’t solve problems etc., when it is actually the ONLY real solution. And further, that any worldly attribute, function, modality, convention that is truly satisfying, did previously originate in and issue forth from spiritual attainment of the past which is now culturally subliminal. People making a bad job of that or denying it doesn’t invalidate that truth or make it go away.

It’s actually the fear of the unknown, the fear of letting go of attachments, of desire - really, it’s the fear of spirituality (by ego-mind) that has to go - not genuine spirituality.


~ J

[Shivani Devi]

Originally Posted by Jyotir

Hi Altair,

Maybe what’s actually “very insufferable” is when someone parrots themselves by repeating exactly the same frail arguments while not addressing a prior cogent response to each and every one of them, all by using the lame facile prevarication of “over-analyzing” and “interrogations”, and puffed-up indignant posture as schoolyard tactics of avoiding actual intellectual honesty and rigor. You seem to play fast and loose with protocol, content, and reason, yet flexible in allowing yourself certain ‘freedoms’, while taking others to task for those very same indulgences, with clever put-downs that serve to conveniently excuse your evasions. (e.g., people refuting falsehoods logically are “interrogating” others. Right)

Am I missing the point? Hardly. But are you avoiding them? There is a confusion regarding the distinction between the intellectual content of abstract concepts and tenets of spiritual practice and apparently very important self-defined moral conclusions of posture they seem to reactively generate. It is a common but false equivocation.

Given your numerous insipient positions, perhaps it comes down to, that it is really spirituality which is “very insufferable.”

Because somehow - even if not true - but maybe because of an ancestral drama, personal controversy and most importantly - colossal misunderstanding - there is an utterly false assumption that spirituality and material life are somehow antithetical and that material considerations become invalidated and defenestrated upon the pursuit of spirituality, therefore a false path to be avoided.

Spirituality (ooh, scary) then fearfully (but according to a false assumption ironically based in materialistic culture) means giving up all those existential and sentimentally prized bourgeois comforts and conventions; urgent underclass aspirations of socio-economic ascension and the cherished prerogatives and prestiges of their achievement which then represents untenable self-conflict in light of awakening. So therefore spirituality must justifiably be avoided using whatever rationalizations suit ones abilities to make them - regardless of truth. Precisely the case being made through various clever obfuscations and justifications, emphasizing the mundane and superficial aspects of human culture as primary, while excluding the truly spiritual by various less than honest polemical tactics.

Of course, these are likely externalized projections of internal conflict and resistance, which is a normal occurrence in spiritual awakening - meaning that one begins to see the possibilities of spirituality within mundane material life...followed by an understandable reactively rationalized rejection led by the mental-ego. Ergo spirituality doesn’t work and is false, bad things have happened, I might have to give up things I like, I’m afraid of the dark …too many confusing sacrifices and I want my mummy vs. what as seen (before the fact) as untenable sacrifices, which represent conflict with the inexorable awakening. This is the structural description of numerous false arguments played out here. I don’t want to give up my comforts reactively and defensively reasoned by questionable polemical tactics, misconstrued reasoned conclusions, - all evasions which handily and conveniently deny, and avoid discussion of actual spiritual principles in favor of what attempts invalidation of what is feared…the inexorably emerging unknown within. This is a description of consistently demonstrated posture.

Yet as based on irrational fears of losing control and possession of these very important samskara inducing and perpetuating attachments and diversions, which are btw, not inherently antithetical to spirituality if utilized as vehicles of transcendence and transformation. We unavoidably live in a physical material world which must be considered, and addressed or utilized, just not within legitimate spiritual practice be unduly or exclusively emphasized. However if spirituality is avoided by faulty assumptions that require one to preserve obsolete antique ideologies and falsehoods, so as to heroically reject spirituality in principle as a 'false path' as reasoned repeatedly, that is unfortunate, not ironic.

Spirituality is superior to the worldly - even though in essence they are the same, but because Spirit is the source and truth of it in its most authentic form and the secret to its transformation - it is not “against it” the worldly, but the worldly by its very nature without that illumination cannot provide this transformation. To argue against this simply makes the case that the world with all its pain, suffering, chaos and confusion is really all or the best we can expect, and therefore a stoic disposition tinged with cynical resignation, eased and mitigated by the palliations of a few bourgeois comforts if ethically and morally disposed is the entire true truth and the wise way…that’s the rubbish…that spirituality makes people miserable, doesn’t transform life, can’t solve problems etc., when it is actually the ONLY real solution. And further, that any worldly attribute, function, modality, convention that is truly satisfying, did previously originate in and issue forth from spiritual attainment of the past which is now culturally subliminal. People making a bad job of that or denying it doesn’t invalidate that truth or make it go away.

It’s actually the fear of the unknown, the fear of letting go of attachments, of desire - really, it’s the fear of spirituality (by ego-mind) that has to go - not genuine spirituality.


~ J

You have just so eloquently described the argumentative derision of every single post made in every single thread on this forum since inception...bravo!

Here is some food for thought for both yourself and for others which may also illuminate my position on this forum as well.

For all intents and purposes, I am an "old-school" Hindu...being raised and enmeshed within the ideals of Sanatana Dharma which proliferated during the middle of the last century (and for many centuries before that).

Spirituality was all about "what is it that I must lose?" rather than "what is it that I hope to gain?" The whole emphasis was placed squarely upon penance, austerity, dedication, patience, surrender, focus....TAPASYA. This rigorous practice was implemented to sort out the true seekers of the Truth from the whining "mummy boys" who obviously didn't want Moksha BAD enough to relinquish all their bougoise comforts to attain it...they wanted the best of both worlds, yet could never find peace in either of them ..so, they ended up criticising and blaming a long standing practice and tradition which existed for thousands of years, because it did not cater or tailor to them and their egos personally and thus, the New Age was born, with such people opting for a totally diluted, watered down version of Hinduism, and the overall practice of Sadhana, if that meant they didn't have to make any adjustments to their current lifestyle or mindset ..merely "wanting" to be on a spiritual path, but not really having what it takes to actually BE on one...and we can see the whole fallout from all that over the past 50 years or so.

If anybody found it "insufferable", the teacher would simply tell them to go away and to return again when they were able to suffer it. It was all a lot simpler back then.

....but like I said, I am of the traditional lot, but I also cannot help but feel in my heart of hearts, this is why religion is on the decline.

It is not because of the waning belief in God, nor is it due to any past track record of "organised spirituality"....it is because of the commitment to convention, or rather the total lack of it. People don't like rules, regulations, being told what they need to do to achieve spiritual progress, being shown any scriptures...they want everything done their way or no way at all and this has led to the quagmire of confusion, irrationality, charlatans and questionable practices which now passes itself off as "modern spirituality" and it is also the whole reason why it is that I have had quite a difficult time intergrating into this whole scene, because all I find myself forever muttering is "such is Kali Yuga".

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by Shivani Devi

it is because of the commitment to convention, or rather the total lack of it. People don't like rules, regulations, being told what they need to do to achieve spiritual progress, being shown any scriptures...they want everything done their way or no way at all and this has led to the quagmire of confusion, irrationality, charlatans and questionable practices which now passes itself off as "modern spirituality" and it is also the whole reason why it is that I have had quite a difficult time intergrating into this whole scene, because all I find myself forever muttering is "such is Kali Yuga".

True almost all organized spirituality or so to say religions have suffered substantial decline in 20th century. The key reason is lack of reason in it ,blind dogmatic superstitious practices all leading to sorry state of its followers .

Having said this , rise of spirituality is possible only through infusion of reason in spirituality . People definitely follow rules if they find it authentic , legitimate,equitable and reasonable for all. You can find people following rules everywhere but spiritual/religious life. Science and technology is all about rules. So the challenge is to lead a life of highest reason with highest faith which inspire the confidence of people in spirituality / religion.
Definitely most religions have gone through such infusion of reason in the past which may be called reform / renaissance /rejuvenation .

Originally Posted by inavalan

I didn't follow the whole dialogue, but this is funny. :) Trying to win an argument no-matter-what can push us to claim things we never would ... when sober.

Thank you, that's the karmic brownie points done for this calendar month.

One day I was having some times to simply ponder with nowhere in particular to go, when a voice popped into my head. "What's the Spirituality of sitting on the toilet?" Ask yourself that question, but as soon as you've answered it ask yourself "What just happened?" Understanding that is the key to 'unlocking' so many Spiritiual realisations - and some self awareness for a bonus.

However, some go beyond rationality to project their status, not realising that it's self-defeating. Even when sober.

Originally Posted by BigJohn

GREAT OBSERVATION
But then...... some people love pointing their finger at others probably because they have nothing better to do.
SAD

Thank you. It always comes down to the human factor at the end of the day, which is all part-and-parcel of the individuation of Spirit into this dimension of reality. Re/incarnation implies that it didn't begin 'here' but that it began 'up there', if so isn't the religious model that Spirituality is based on backwards?

Oopsies, here's the Spanish Inquisition again.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Re/incarnation implies that it didn't begin 'here' but that it began 'up there', if so isn't the religious model that Spirituality is based on backwards?

Shows you don't understand what's going on, IMO. It's all ONE SPIRIT Being-Doing. You're just being reactive in relation to the 'opposite' down vs. up view, again just sharing my perception-based opinion.

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Oopsies, here's the Spanish Inquisition again.

Need I say more?

Originally Posted by davidsun

Shows you don't understand what's going on, IMO. It's all ONE SPIRIT Being-Doing. You're just being reactive in relation to the 'opposite' down vs. up view, again just sharing my perception-based opinion.

Most don't understand the concept of "You have always been here."