My brother and I share A LOT of things in common, and are really close to each other. One big difference however, is for some reason, unbeknownst to me, he has an extreme aversion to spirituality. Some of it I understand, because he associates spirituality with religion, which he has no liking for whatsoever. But even when I have explained to him that you can be spiritual while having absolutely no connection to religion, he still shoots it down. I think we can all agree that being more spiritual will help you learn more about yourself and other, appreciate life more, and all together be a better person.

Even after explaining all this, he still is put off by the spirituality concept. I have actually seen this in a quite a bit of people. There just seems to be a large percentage of people out there who just seem to have an aversion to spirituality, which is strange for me, because I have been spiritual for a large part of my life.

So what do you guys think? Do you need spirituality, do others need spirituality? How do you talk to someone who is absolutely against (IMO bettering themselves)? Are people just that uncomfortable with the concept? Idk... some enlightening words please?

well..I dunno I am sure alot of people can go and have some sort of MDMA or other psychedelic therapy and totally better themselves without defining that as anything spiritual.

Forget the terms and defintions..noone needs them. If spirituality to you means bettering yourself, then so be it..it might not mean that to someone else. Following your own direct experience is what I think is important..

My brother does not seem to care about any esoteric things..we still get along fine. He is chill enough and we can still sit down and smoke a joint and see eye to eye. I know he has been there he just freaked out a bit every time and thats fine..it is not his time to be involved consciousily in that level of reality..we are all on our own personal cosmic journey, and we are all cosmic..noone gets a pass here. Everyone is where they are becasue that is where they are sopposed to be. Dont worry, they are cosmic beings let them make they're journey.

..tigerstrike92, i'm thinking about an 'enlightend' answer attempt, but can i ask if your brother has as much experience with entheogens as yourself (or 'spiritual' friends)?
some people are uncomfortable with or won't accept what they can't see, or haven't experienced..often it takes entheogens or NDEs to make such experience accessible...

I think it depends on how we define “spirituality”. As you’ve already pointed out, spirituality doesn’t imply religiosity. If we define spirituality as humble acceptance of human limitations and acknowledgement that existence is ultimately beyond our comprehension, then I’m a spiritual person. Is my spirituality a need? That’s an interesting question, and I’m not sure how I’d answer it.

I agree that some people seem to have an aversion to spirituality. Here’s my speculation:

Some people want to believe that everything can be known, and that human beings, at least in theory, can know everything. Some people feel very uncomfortable looking at the limitations of human beings and in particular, they feel uncomfortable looking at their own limitations. Some people find it hard to embrace the unknown. They find it frightening. They want answers. Many people are afraid of facing their own mortality. Some people, if they were to contemplate the enormity of existence, would feel small and insignificant, so they choose not to contemplate such things. Others who choose to dogmatically believe in the “primacy of matter” can’t accept spirituality because it would require to drastic a change in their worldview. Change can be uncomfortable, and people generally avoid discomfort.

Neone888- That's probably the only other huge thing separating us. Unfortunately as of yet, anything that isn't alcohol is just " a drug that's bad for you." He doesn't care that I choose to use entheogens, but he definitely is not seeing eye to eye with me on that. From his point, it's "just a phase" I'll go through.

That said, I think I am wearing on him, because in the past he used to not even want to discuss cannabis or be around me when I partook. But at least now he jokes about it sometimes, and accepts with a casual eye roll whenever I partake. He has expressed a minute interest in shrooms, however he thinks that he would just go into a fit of anger and "thinking everything was evil, start breaking stuff and hurting himself or others".

Yeah, he is a huge strictly alcohol partier. He refuses to see the beneficial aspects of entheogens, and instead chooses to get black out drunk.

I'm more or less with Fractal on this: the labels are a big part of the problem.

Let's consider just a few slices of the spectrum along which different people define spirituality. There's gibran2's definition, "humble acceptance of human limitations and acknowledgement that existence is ultimately beyond our comprehension." But to some people, spirituality means having specific beliefs about these areas that are beyond materialistic understanding (good examples would be belief in chakras, chi energy, or other unmeasurable forces). Still others take the word more literally as having faith in the existence and influence of spirits (ancestor spirits, plant spirits, deities, etc.).

Under gibran's definition, I'm a spiritual person. I can bask in the intricate wonder of the known world, and revel in the prospect of all the unknowable mystery. I'm not so comfortable with the other definitions, as they both imply having specific beliefs about things that are really unknowable, which undermines the whole point of acknowledging that there are areas beyond my ability to comprehend.

I think there is a great deal of room for talking at cross purposes on the subject of spirituality unless the term is explicitly defined.

What if we defined spirituality like this:

meaningful experiences or thoughts that lead to a deeper understanding(of anything and everything).

Even with such a vague definition, I still feel like there are some people out there who want nothing to do with it.

It is hard for me to grasp the concept of not wanting to further ones understanding. However, I do acknowledge that no one person's cosmic path is the same as the others... but still...

In this modern day world, to get on and be "successful", all you need to do is simply work in a job that pays a good wage, and the rest will sort itself out. I mean the god of society is money, right??

--Spirituality has little to do with the way society operates. It's just a money creating thing that we function in. However the need for us to understand our true selves , our past, the people and the world we live in , is a natural inclination that we all need to connect to at certain points of our lives, to make life seem worthwhile and understandable. Without the most basic of spirituality, modern day life has very vain and rocky foundations.

“I believe in nothing, everything is sacred. I believe in everything, nothing is sacred.”- Tom Robbins.

I often find that if someone espouses a lack of spirituality, they are protecting that which is sacred to them. It is painful to have someone that claims to share your deepest beliefs distort them, or speak in what you feel to be a disrespectful way. The deniers of spirituality are often just upholding their individual experience over any shared experience. It takes faith to be an atheist.

Have your brother watch some Adyashanti videos. That guy's message is definitely spiritual, while lacking all the esoteric mumbo-jumbo which tends to offend practical people.

http://www.adyashanti.or...ndex.php?file=watchvideo

Thanks for the suggestions and ideas everybody.

Lets take some focus off of my individual situation. Do you think that some people really are just content to live life at face value?

'Taking life at face value' I take it would mean focusing on day-to-day concerns, spending minimal energy and time considering issues related to the purpose of life, what death is, the origins of the universe, the difference in scale between our experience and that of the universe, the meaning of justice, etc.

All of these concepts are so far outside of our direct experience and understanding that they require faith (faith as in "belief not based in proof' to process or engage. A topic full of unknowns requires that we go with a gut feel, a sense of what 'should' be. In my book, the dependance on 'should' makes it a spiritual concern (spiritual= incorporeal).

So, sure, some people are content to experience life at face value for most of the time, and not consider the 'big issues'. Almost everyone hits a point in their life that goes beyond everyday experience, however. There is no 'face value' when having the extraordinary experience.

Exactly.

Tiger, when you say you brother rejects spirituality, what sort of ideas are he rejecting in particular? What flavor leaves a bad taste in his mouth? The idea that there's any deeper meaning to life? The idea that he's a part of something greater than himself? That he's a creation of a deity? Etc.

I know you gave your own definition of spirituality. I'm just curious about your brother's situation in particular, and HIS definition of "spirituality". Looking closely at his case might give us some insight into the nature of these "spirituophobes".



Here's the deal. You can't change what someone values. (Unless you manage to get them to take high-dose psychedelics, of course.) You can only appeal spirituality to their preexisting values. So, if someone's primary interest in life is getting wasted, you've got to convince them that some form of spirituality is going to help them get wasted (not easy). If someone's primary interest in life is becoming wealthy, you've got to convince them that spirituality is the road to making bank (also difficult). However, if their primary interest is to become more aware of the true nature of themselves, and the greater reality of which they are part, then, well, they're already on a spiritual path by definition.

An inquiring attitude which is genuinely interested in what really is inevitably leads one to the discovery of spirituality. Leaving "spirituality" (the labels) behind, and living life at face value may be a much more spiritual approach than constantly talking about ideas of spirituality.

The beauty of "living life at face value" is in the freedom it brings: if reality is 100% enough as it is, in every moment, then there is no need to complicate it with religious concepts. Some people who claim themselves to be atheists feel more spiritual to me than people who use most of their energy to adamantly protect their religious views.

Good call on that, TAC. I suppose it all does depend on what HIS definition of spirituality is, which if found out, could explain why he is so uncomfortable with it.



I was never trying to incorporate any sort of religious tone to this, my apologies if I came off that way. But would you say that those athiests who feel more spiritual to you, are only taking life at face value, with no true deeper appreciation for things?

Say, have you and your brother discussed the differences between what is spiritual and what is religious? Obviously, without having a "spiritual" instinct, inspiration or an intuition of some kind, there would be no religions. Still, I feel there is a distinction between being a spiritual person and a religious person. It has much to do with our perceptions and our concept of Divinity

As is usually the case, semantics weigh heavily in our ability to communicate about such aspects of human existence as spirituality and what we might conceive of as any organized religion. I wholeheartedly agree that to be a spontaneous and spiritual individual is hardly the same as being a devoutly religious person.

Frankly, religious thought is more often than not, a case of complete blind faith of believe in an Omniscient authority, when one has no quantifiable proof of it's existence. This does not make such belief untrue, however, and cultures across the globe have shared many of these inspired hypotheses (despite the lack of scientific evidence, so sought by reason).

By in large, humanity chooses to project anthropomorphic characteristics upon their chosen (or their family's or culture's chosen) Deity and do not seem to have any direct experience of the Divine in their daily lives. In this way, I can relate to honoring atheists for not needing to buy into the processed package of religious dogma, itself responsible for many of humanity's woes.



So, for those who have faith in an unseen GOD, who creates the universe we all exist within and is the ultimate force in said play of life, it's not something to lightly mock. Atheists seem to have a contemptuous attitude to all "believers" and imply they are of inferior intelligence. This is both, unkind and quite egocentric. Neither is it fair to generalize about the awareness of of such peoples.

Conversely, many so-called "religious" folks have such negative and rigid view of this multiverse, that it stains the inspiration which the living Spirit instills in the hearts of it's followers (as personified by the illumined founders of it's doctrine). After all, locking our heads into the conceptual confines of human religious thought can be anything but spiritual. Right?

No doubt there is an alternative stance, born of direct contact with the One and a seamless synthesis of logic and faith. In my opinion, it behooves humankind to modify it's conceptual format for contemporary religious thought. I would suggest broadening the belief in a Divine presence to include ourselves and all others in this very same Field of Indivisible Consciousness... as with the Chinese idea of the eternal and ever-changing Tao. After all, is not all of existence a harmony of polarities, a singular force expressed through myriad variations of diversity? :idea:

Granted, it's a matter of perspective and highly susceptible to our subjective impressions of said totality. In other words, if we accept that the universe is composed by a mysterious or mystical force, which through it's very nature of being, causes quantum fluctuations and initiates The Cosmic Dance... we needn't feel apart from such a Field of Unified Energy. We are all that essence of unity, for if having a spiritual experience means anything, it seems to point towards an interconnection to everything else in the paradigm of life as we understand it.

It is not simply another hypothesis culled from our brain's organic circuitry, another conceptual projection... if one perceives it directly within oneself, AS ONESELF. Seeing is believing. Understanding is knowing. And so, a symbiotic interphase is key to unlocking the central Truth of our being, the whole of being. Naturally, the birthing of The Godhead, through our immersions within the immanence of the spiritual realm, awakens the Omniself. For it's much, much more than just a deep feeling or an profound idea... it is an active REMEMBRANCE and a lucid type of inner KNOWING. This is clearly realized in a state of pure awareness, within the silent cessation of our mental dialog. Stopping the mind ... to perceive the soul in it's all it's naked glory.



We might ideally embrace each moment as completely new and full of an infinite potentiality, in the HERE & NOW. In so doing, we do redefine our perception of reality, our thoughts/ideas about God and the totality of existence (both perceived and imagined). To my understanding, this is what being spiritual is all about. One perceives MORE than just the appearance of the gross material and utilizes an integral union with No Mind to step beyond the predictable outcome of the dynamics of pragmatic cause and effect.

We are the present witnesses to this existential phenomenon. It is absurd to think that together we can come to some reasonable consensus about the burgeoning birth of a fusion of scientific reasoning, coupled with transcendental levels of mind? I personally feel this is the most worthy direction for our collective inquisitiveness.

The quest for direct immersion within the Divine Being needn't be structured into a dogmatic theology. Nature is our greatest teacher; echoes and reflects the all-pervasive Spirit of The One. Are we not called to psychonautical flight by this very universal mind, awakening through our discoveries within an expanded awareness?

I think the distinctive quality could be called "depth of experience". A spiritual person can "feel into" the present, and therefore find much deeper satisfaction and enjoyment in what is than someone who can only experience the "outer layers" of the world (someone whom you could call "shallow" - perhaps that's what you mean by "living life at face value" ).

An atheist who can get into the mysteries of the universe - as studied by physics or astronomy for instance - and marvel at the greatness of it is spiritual: by this experience alone he gets connected with what I call Spirit (in my ideology: God enjoys creation through the senses of this particular created being), even if he/she doesn't acknowledge it as such (doesn't conceptualize this connection). (Actually the fact that he/she doesn't conceptualize protects him/her from a lot of fallacies which bind the religious person.)

I wholeheartedly agree, and as Terrance McKenna once said, "Nature loves courage". ...Maybe that's what my brother is lacking... the courage to so either communicate his spirituality and let others in / himself out. And thanks for the words of wisdom Rising. They will be dually noted.

That is somewhat what i mean. Not shallow in terms of judging things only by appearence, he is far from. Maybe its that he only acknowledges the "shallow" layers of existence/reality? If that makes any sense?