Spiritual v. Religious?

[1213]

...
It is the fundamental purpose of religions for people to be Spiritual.

It is the guiding light of the Baha'i Faith to becone a spiritual being, to become more than the flesh.
...

Why call it religion?

 

[loverofhumanity]

I accept everything as a manifestation of the Divine. "Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin: yet I say unto you, that even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these." One does not need to single out certain religious individuals as above others in order to be accepting the manifestation of God. Jesus himself considered flowers in the field to be more an expression of God than Solomon himself.


Or worshipping the sun and ignoring the earth? Aren't both missing the point?


As well as every living creature in the universe, for, "The heavens declare the glory of God, the firmament showeth his handiwork, say unto day uttereth speech, night unto night sheweth knowledge". The "spiritual but not religious", finds God everywhere, both within and beyond religion. Whereas it seems the religious need a religion to see God. For me, the world is my church, I like to say.

Spirituality is not based upon accepting this or that prophet as the real deal or not. No one's spirituality should be based upon beliefs or opinions such as that. Those are just ideas of the mind.

I see your point. But say I accept everything that is pure and good but reject the One Who taught ‘love one another’. Does that make me spiritual?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Why call it religion?

That would most likely tie into the evolution of language.

It is basically a chosen faith in God in knowledge that we are more than flesh.

The only way we can know of God is via a Messenger. Thus Faith is exceptance of the Messanger and Spiritually is connecting to that Message and implementing those teachings into one's own life.

Religion would be the word that covers the practice of teachings, which in reality is a spiritual understanding and resulting actions.

So one can also offer an Athiest can also be spiritual and religious, if they hold and practice core values and morals, they may not have Faith in a source of those virtues and morals. The issue here is, that spiritualy in this case, has been limited.

Regards Tony

 

[Windwalker]

I see your point. But say I accept everything that is pure and good but reject the One Who taught ‘love one another’. Does that make me spiritual?

Rejecting in what sense? Rejecting that teaching? Of course you wouldn't if you had a spiritual heart, you would know that is truth. Not believe that the person who taught that was a prophet of God chosen for the current age however, is not a requirement of being spiritual at all. That's a religious belief. But not accepting that point of view, that religious belief, is not the same thing as "rejecting them", or rejecting the teaching. Framing it that way, is not fair.

That's like saying I reject the book of Genesis, if I believe in evolution, whereas in reality I simply understanding it differently. That's not the same thing as rejecting it. Not believing it should be read as a book of science, not believing it literally as history, is not the same thing as saying I reject the book, or the teacher and such. One can understand truth, in many different ways without having to conform to one set of ideas or perspectives. That's the problem with religion, IMO, it makes belief in doctrines the same thing as "spiritual belief", which it is not. It's what is in the heart that matters, not how we conceptualize it.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Spirituality is not based upon accepting this or that prophet as the real deal or not. No one's spirituality should be based upon beliefs or opinions such as that. Those are just ideas of the mind.

It could just as well be the other way round.

Not to except the Messengers may mean our spiritually is born only of our own mind and not connected to the whole.

Regards Tony

 

[Secret Chief]

Thanks everyone, some interesting responses. It seems to be a matter of semantics. Broadly speaking, "religious" is taken to mean being involved in organised religion, while "spiritual" is taken to mean being other-worldly but not involved in an organised religion. Sort of!

In this neck of the woods, describing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they go to church a lot...

 

[lukethethird]

In this neck of the woods, describing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they go to church a lot...

In my neck of the woods, decribing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they are very superstitious.

 

[Secret Chief]

In my neck of the woods, decribing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they are very superstitious.

Well it might mean that too! I just meant it's a sort of shorthand.

 

[ppp]

In this neck of the woods, describing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they go to church a lot...

Same here

 

[Windwalker]

It could just as well be the other way round.

Not to except the Messengers may mean our spiritually is born only of our own mind and not connected to the whole.

Regards Tony

Spirituality is of the heart, not of the mind. So it's not born of the mind. What I hear you saying sounds sort of like saying unless you believe Jesus is the 2nd person in the Trinity, you aren't spiritual. Or, unless you get baptized in Jesus name, you aren't saved. These are religious beliefs, not matters of one's spirituality. The problem with this is, the second you say this person or that person is not spiritual, because they don't accept your religious beliefs, you are no longer spiritual, but religious. That is not seeing beyond mental conceptions.

Spirituality is literally "beyond belief", not grounded in it. Spirituality is grounded and rooted in Spirit, not beliefs. Beliefs are simply supports for faith. My first personal spiritual experiences, happened long before I learned anything from any religion. Spirituality is innate in human beings, not dependent on religious teachings.

 

[Jacob Samuelson]

Religion is Man's measurement of the understanding of God and the Universe, Spirituality is Man's relationship to God and the Universe..

 

[lukethethird]

Spirituality is of the heart, not of the mind. So it's not born of the mind. What I hear you saying sounds sort of like saying unless you believe Jesus is the 2nd person in the Trinity, you aren't spiritual. Or, unless you get baptized in Jesus name, you aren't saved. These are religious beliefs, not matters of one's spirituality. The problem with this is, the second you say this person or that person is not spiritual, because they don't accept your religious beliefs, you are no longer spiritual, but religious. That is not seeing beyond mental conceptions.

Spirituality is literally "beyond belief", not grounded in it. Spirituality is grounded and rooted in Spirit, not beliefs. Beliefs are simply supports for faith. My first personal spiritual experiences, happened long before I learned anything from any religion. Spirituality is innate in human beings, not dependent on religious teachings.

I read your posts, without going into it you are not nearly as spiritual as I am, not by a long shot.

 

[rational experiences]

My human only spiritual teaching is not any type belief thesis of science.

Spirit. I own life body image messenger of the eternal life spirit.

Not God. O mass. O maths. O light themed calculus.

The teaching hence I am not a God. No man is God was concluded. After science attacked us by God O thesis machines.

Eternal owned spirits like humans in its own body and always had. The exact creator only.

We are direct.

O God was how we left. Is the teaching.

O God was Satan first fallen angels out of the eternal form. We aren't Satan either who went to hell FIRST burning.

O then god cooled evolved presence. Some O Satan's bodies scattered as rebelled..rebelling still suns O... the space cosmic God teaching.

We are the body direct owners out of the eternal. Spiritual only not religious science the warning. I have to discuss science but didn't want to discuss science to warn you all.

Maybe science shouldn't have been used in thinking status spiritual. Religious version.

Self is first human.

O pressure holds cells. O ovary our baby life is held by Gods law. Cells O held by gods law.

We are from eternal body first.

The exact human teaching as I advise myself about God. Knowing as parents direct out of the eternal owning image body creator. So we are their small version body type.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Rejecting in what sense? Rejecting that teaching? Of course you wouldn't if you had a spiritual heart, you would know that is truth. Not believe that the person who taught that was a prophet of God chosen for the current age however, is not a requirement of being spiritual at all. That's a religious belief. But not accepting that point of view, that religious belief, is not the same thing as "rejecting them", or rejecting the teaching. Framing it that way, is not fair.

That's like saying I reject the book of Genesis, if I believe in evolution, whereas in reality I simply understanding it differently. That's not the same thing as rejecting it. Not believing it should be read as a book of science, not believing it literally as history, is not the same thing as saying I reject the book, or the teacher and such. One can understand truth, in many different ways without having to conform to one set of ideas or perspectives. That's the problem with religion, IMO, it makes belief in doctrines the same thing as "spiritual belief", which it is not. It's what is in the heart that matters, not how we conceptualize it.

I chose my belief on what I considered was best for humanity because I see a lot of injustices and much suffering as a result. If my beliefs are only going to benefit myself then they would be of no real use to me because society has very serious problems which need to be addressed such as racial prejudice, religious animosity and national hatreds.

Meditation and prayer or just being spiritual is not going to fix these things. We need a comprehensive plan on ‘society building’ and how to recreate a society free from these destructive prejudices. Baha’u’llah has brought a plan for the spiritualisation of mankind for the individual, society and institutions which involves a new global ethic based on the oneness of humanity.

And so by educating our children, youth, society and institutions to be free from prejudice, the foundation for a permanent, lasting peace will have been built. This will take time but I believe that consciously working for the betterment of humanity is what is required at this time in history.

 

[rational experiences]

I read your posts, without going into it, you are not nearly as spiritual as I am, not by a long shot.

Fact of everyone's ignorance.

A baby boy was born. Was a man. Basic human advice without self idolisation. Humans owned expressed problems from inherited irradiated brain chemistry.

He was life bodily attacked lived and was saved survived to discuss all reasons why. Just a human only.

The teacher always was hurt to say science is evil. Machines.

He taught the concept a man by advice of ice was our life stability saviour kept water cooled gas spirit cooled.

Otherwise it just combusted as spatial caused irradiation already UFO present.

Teaching said cloud mass kept life protected why it flooded and still does.

Man spiritual self taught why life lived on saved as ice was sacrificed as was his owned baby man's life.

Evidence newly born babies mutated.

An exact teaching only.

Not spiritual by any terms nor is life sacrificed holy.

Satanists are by mind self destructive personality human disordered. AI said can I use the advice as a weapon is his belief. Human domination by threat fear tactics.

You all were taught who he is the scientist. You were taught to organise community world support to stop him.

We don't survive in heated atmospheric holy water.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Spirituality is of the heart, not of the mind. So it's not born of the mind.

Firstly I am not saying what you offered as examples.

I see spirituality requires heart and mind. One does not work without the other, and that is also plain logic in science as well.

Now how we both see that, can be further explored. For me it requires an understanding of the 5 levels of spirit that work in this matrix.

Happy to discuss if tou are.

Regards Tony

 

[loverofhumanity]

In my neck of the woods, decribing someone as "very religious" is taken to mean they are very superstitious.

By todays dogmatic standards I can agree. However religion as originally taught by the Teachers such as Buddha, was about being virtuous and possessing an upright character. Now for example look at Myanmar. The military worships Buddhist statues and prays to monks then commits genocide, war crimes and rape. And they call themselves religious and Buddhist. Buddha forbade violence of all kinds. The military only believe in superstition.

 

[lukethethird]

By todays dogmatic standards I can agree. However religion as originally taught by the Teachers such as Buddha, was about being virtuous and possessing an upright character. Now for example look at Myanmar. The military worships Buddhist statues and prays to monks then commits genocide, war crimes and rape. And they call themselves religious and Buddhist. Buddha forbade violence of all kinds. The military only believe in superstition.

Are we to expect something different from a religion that claims to teach virtue and upright character?

 

[Windwalker]

I chose my belief on what I considered was best for humanity because I see a lot of injustices and much suffering as a result. If my beliefs are only going to benefit myself then they would be of no real use to me because society has very serious problems which need to be addressed such as racial prejudice, religious animosity and national hatreds.

This doesn't really have anything to do with saying that people who don't accept the Bahia's prophet as the Messanger for the current age, cannot be spiritual, as you said. Are you not planning to defend that anymore, since I've shown how that's not valid to say that?

Meditation and prayer or just being spiritual is not going to fix these things.

A changed heart and mind will however, and meditation and prayer are tools for just that.

Baha’u’llah has brought a plan for the spiritualisation of mankind for the individual, society and institutions which involves a new global ethic based on the oneness of humanity.

How long ago was that? The world is evolving at an enormous pace, and social programs 150 years out of date, may not be adequate. As far as spiritual pathways, those tend to be timeless, and there have been and are plenty of guides for that already, from thousands of years ago, to days ago. I personally find the idea of only one voice every 1000 years, to be a rather limited perspective. I think new voices can be found every day, coming from those who have developed spiritually enough.

And so by educating our children, youth, society and institutions to be free from prejudice, the foundation for a permanent, lasting peace will have been built.

We try to do that today in our progressive and liberal institutions. But conservatives prefer tyrants and power over minorities as the godly way, it seems.

This will take time but I believe that consciously working for the betterment of humanity is what is required at this time in history.

It also takes voting to stem the tide backwards towards enslavement.

Anyway, my original point was that someone does not need to accept the Baha'i prophet in the way the Bahai'is do to be spiritual, as you said, anymore than you need to accept Jesus is the 2nd person in the Trinity to be spiritual. Those are religious beliefs, and spirituality is not dependent on those. Spirituality is innate to all humans, and does not come from prophets outside of ourselves, or teachers, or anyone else. They may help point the way to find that in ourselves, but they aren't necessary for spirituality. SBNR is proof of that.

 

[Windwalker]

Firstly I am not saying what you offered as examples.

I see spirituality requires heart and mind.

It requires it only in the sense that it may help guide the spiritual, like a rudder helps guide the sailboat from the wind blowing in its sails. But the rudder is not the wind, and spirituality is not based on reason. It's based on Spirit.

But rudders can be made of many different types of material and be of many different shapes. Wind is wind, but rudders can be replaced. Rudders are beliefs, wind is Spirit.

One does not work without the other, and that is also plain logic in science as well.

Oh, the rational mind can do plenty without Spirit. That's what gets it into so much trouble! Same thing for spirituality without the rational mind. You can end up with some pretty misguided beliefs, as is found in a lot of fanatical religions, anti-reason, anti-science, denying evolution, etc. It lacks grounding. It can become "woo", in other words.

Now how we both see that, can be further explored. For me it requires an understanding of the 5 levels of spirit that work in this matrix.

Personally, I like doing comparative analysis of such models. I don't take any of them as absolute, but there are maps of the terrain versus the terrain itself. I have an understanding coming out of Integral Metatheory, which is based upon modern researchers in cross disciplinary fields of study. I must admit a certain skepticism of these things that come from a "prophet". But that's not to say there may not be valid insights it it. I just don't like to dress it up too much with "revelation" language.

I think in terms of developmental structures and stages, as well as states of consciousness, but that could get rather complex to try to discuss, unless you are interested in that. Spiritual experience is not dependent upon teaching and the rational mind however, as I've said. And therefore, yes, you can be spiritual without believing Bahaullah, as I believe you were trying to suggest was necessary earlier?