When I think of my spirituality, I think of an ethereal distance between the known and the potential.

 

For example, my senses can convey an understanding, such as walking on pine needles and twigs in a forest. Treading lightly so as to not disturb the silence and the way the forest evolves. I am a presence that can see what's before me and yet at the same time sense the intracacies that hold the whole together. No matter how quiet and careful or how invisible I try to make myself.....I have disturbed a part of the forest just by being there. Together the forest and I are transformed.

 

Or gazing into the sky and not noticing the constellations and the order of the stars but experiencing the randomness that creates the order.

 

 

From the Sound of Music:

How do you hold a moonbeam in your hand?

How do you catch a cloud and pin it down?

Spirituality: the quality of any activity that drives a human being forward towards the development of their physical, emotional or mental state of their being, in order for the soul to "awaken" within the form.


The fact that organized religions have, to date, monopolized this word is one of the greatest triumphs of evil. Religions do not own this word, as one can become spiritual in "any" activity they do.

To me, religion is like the off-the-rack clothes in a deprtment store; sort of like letting someone else (Parents?  Clergy?) decide what you should wear (or what to believe and how to act).  Spirituality is more like custom-fit garments.  Something made especially for you (indeed, maybe even something made by you)  At forst glance, they may look alike, but there's a very real difference..  'Religion' is something that comes tu us from outside sources' 'spirituality' is something that rises up from within us.  They may be closely related, but are not identical.

 

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

I am also, sadly, sometimes guilty as charged.

I feel and think that we live in a spiritual universe, and that everyday activity and culture can and should be spiritual. My vision of the future, and one that I am actively working toward, is a spiritual human culture. Any religion that works toward that goal is fine with me.

 

But I asked specifically to define "spirituality," so I better answer my own question.

 

Spirituality, in my view, is that which galvanises the universe into one unified whole. It is the interrelatedness and oneness that unites the universe, from its smallest to its largest component, right up to and including its creative source, into one inseparable whole. It is experiencing and expressing the oneness that underlies all diversity and uniqueness. It is acknowledging the universe as an integrated whole, which is pretty much a scientifically confirmed insight by now. In fact, if spirituality were not confirmed by science, it would be a human fantasy.

 

Also, spirituality is creativeness. Because the universe is spiritual, and every one of us a unique edition of the spiritual universe, every artistic expression of experience is a spiritual expression.

 

To me, both the sciences and the arts are spiritual expressions, with the sciences expressing the spiritual universe in terms of logical and mathematical truth, and the arts metaphorically.

 

Because the cosmic analysis fragments the universe into its components, it does not and cannot reflect the ultimate state of the universe, which is a unified state of inseparable oneness. Reality, as it really is—as an inseparable whole in a state of synthesis—can only be intuited or experienced and expressed metaphorically. The sciences and the arts are complementary expressions of the same spiritual universe.

 

"All My Relations" is the sacred spiritual benison of our aboriginal brothers and sisters. It sums up my definition of spirituality rather nicely.

 

 

ALL MY RELATIONS,

 

Arminius

Spirituality is too often "a religion for one". Not to me. Any spirituality worth its salt recognizes that "we are not alone". If "all our relations" - to the earth, to each other, to God, to our future selves - are not included, that's a pretty limited spirituality (and frankly, not very meaningful to me, for it cannot address so many of the issues of daily life in which we are constantly in contact with our relations).  To some, spirituality is that which provides a sense of peacefulness. To me, the same quality can be achieved in a cemetery. Deep spirituality is that which engages us with "all our relations" in ways that are just, peace-seeking, and affirming. Peacefulness may be the outcome of that, but it is not the primary objective, for it is too easy to achieve our own peacefulness at the expense of "all our relations". And a final quality of spirituality is that it can be shared in some way. It is a poor person indeed that has nothing to share. If you can't even share your love, what do you have?

Spirituality is experiencing the truth of being… it's the peactice of engagement with life, with existence. It is a need to express gratitude. It is most definitely not isolationist… for me it is a feast of diversity and very exciting. It's my stimulus to relationship and my source of joy. I do not experience spirit living as peace so much as energy and an impulse to love more than I know how. It's time with "god", with "mystery", with humanity and all of nature — it's a fire of curiosity…

 

Sharing it is not always easy, SpiritBear. Many people move too fast and pursue too many contradictory impulses to start "worrying" about spirit stuff "as well", not realising that worry is not a part of it.

 

Thanks redbaron. sounds about right for me.

Spirituality is my personal relationship with existence, with or without a God involved. IOW, it isn't about "spirit" in a supernatural sense but rather "spirit" in the sense of one's inner life. It is about defining my place in the world and, to some extent, my values.

 

Religion is when I enter into community to express, share, explore, and celebrate my spirituality. Or should be. The problem, as others suggest, is that religion can be used to try to place external control on individual spirituality instead of being a forum for communal expression thereof. UUs can be as bad as others in this regard, by the way, though by the terms of our own principles we should know better.

 

Mendalla

 

Guilty of what Witch, monopolizing the word "spirit"? It's a pretty natural thing that humans have done for a long time. I know I have. But eventually we need to see the greater picture and realize that our individual view points of the centre change all around the world, yet the world remains. This is, I believe, the esoteric meaning behind the scriptures Psalms 93:1 and Chronicles 16:30 that claim the world to be "immovable and firm". While our points of view differ, the world remains firm.

An academic study of the proper use of the term "spirituality" would probably be boring, despite that fact that it would more accurately reflect modern literary usage.  Posters are just expressing what the word means to them.  For me, such discussions can only be interesting and helpful,(1)  if they try to distinguish the word from religion, mysticism, morality, and humanism, and (2) if they try to distinguish true spirituality from false spirituality. 

Spirituality is that which a person finds to be deeply meaningful; from meaning comes purpose

 

Spirituality is transmitted through myths, tales, stories, symbols

 

My spirituality includes 'sharing in the common human experience', laughter, gaming, puzzles, language, certain music, certain poetry, individual freedoms, curiosity, questions, isomorphisms, en-light-enment, hilaritas/gravitas, metaphors, certain literature,certain individuals, fiction, physics, science, synthesisanalysis, uncertainty, model agnosticism...

 

Hi uccprogressive:

 

So how do you distinguish spirituality from religion, mysticism, morality, and humanism? And how do you distinguish true spirituality from false spirituality?

 

 

 

Arminius,

 

Let me focus on the distinction I draw between spirituality and both mysticism and religion. My concept of Christian mysticism is anchored to texts like 2 Peter 1:4 which teaches that we are destined “to participate in the divine nature.” Our creation in God's image means, among other things, that the purpose of heaven is to facilitate an ever increasing experience of oneness with God. Mysticism, then, refers to methods or spontaneous experiences of the oneness and interconnectedness of all things. The ethics of that interconnectness can be expressed by the following Christian principles: None of us ultimately make it unless we all make it. Your failure is my failure; your success is my success. So I am connected via the Collective Unconscious to all souls and, in a sense, I harm myself if and when I harm others in word or deed. It is in that sense that I understand Paul's principle, “If one part [of the Body of Christ] suffers, every part suffers with it (1 Cor. 12:26).”

 

I once had an experience of the Holy Spirit that became so progressively powerful that I actually pleaded with God to stop it because I felt my mind in the process of being absorbed into God mind and, with that, a loss of personal identity. But despite the terror, it was also an experience of profound loving unity with God.

 

My transition from mysticism to spirituality developed as I reflected on how I could surrender my life to Christ in a life of contemplation and service to others. So spirituality, for me, is my lifestyle response to mystical experience.

 

“Religion” refers to my church practices, my belief system, morals, and the resulting life patterns. “Spirituality” refers the quality and purity of (1) my core longings, (2) my contemplative life, and (3) the moral life I live as the result of these beliefs, values, and patterns. The distinction between true and false spirituality is very real but somewhat elusive, because it depends on the quality and purity of (1)-(3), that is, on whether or not I'm making progress towards pure unconditional love in my attitudes, longings, and deeds. But I don't think it is proper to speak of spirituality apart from a focus on ultimate meaning and the mystery of life. That focus may or may not include faith in a god to qualify as “spiritual.”

I would define spirituality as being the sum of relationships occuring in one's life.

of course, the best spirituality is Christian spirituality, as it includes a relationship with the Triune God.

Why is team Triune God the best? Did they beat all the other God teams and win the Stanley Cup? Some people even think The Leafs are the best team. Go figure.

Hi Arminius,

 

 

I prefer dictionary definitions whenever possible simply because it indicates some kind of agreed understanding of what is being discussed.

 

So, spirituality is defined as a) the quality or fact of being spiritual b) incorporeal or immaterial nature c) predominantly spiritual character as shown in thought, life, etc,; spiritual tendency or tone d) often, spiritualities, property or revenue of the church or of an ecclesiastic in his or her official capacity.

 

Of the four I think that definition a) is the most common definition and as such means that the focus is beyond what we typically regard as physical/material.

 

Translating that into my personal life it would be those areas of concern which go beyond basic necessity.  Theology and religion are spiritual endeavours though they are by no means the limit of spirituality.  Art, music, literature, philosophy all have spiritual components though neither discipline limits spirituality.  All appear to be facets to spirituality.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi uccprogressive:

 

Thank you for your "bold" explication. It resonates, for the most part, with my own spiritual experience and thinking.

Dreamerman, the Triune God is best because He is the one true God. he is real, genuine, authentic. He is also all-knowinhg, all-powerful, all-present, and all-loving. He is both imminent and transcendant. Praise His holy name.

 

Hi John:

 

I am glad that someone finally brought the dictionary definition into the discussion.

 

Yes, I agree. "Spiritual" is most commonly defined as immaterial or incorporeal: something beyond the physical or material.

 

If we look to science for something that is beyond the physical or material, then there is the wave nature of the universe. The smallest cosmic particles also act as waves, radiating the physical action of the universe endlessly into space. The interference pattern from this radiation constitutes a hologram.

 

In the physical universe, the moment is over when it's over, but in the holographic wave universe, the moment gets written into cosmic memory and stays there. The physical universe, as it unfolds, writes the memory of its unfolding into the spiritual universe. Thus, in my imagination, the spiritual universe is the same as and the opposite of the physical universe.

 

Furthermore, I think and feel that the totality of holographic memory is one memory body—omniconscious and omni-aware, though not omnipotent—and that we are connected with it. The physical universe and the spiritual universe are complementary opposites: The same yet not the same, opposite but also one.

 

What I just said is, of course, speculation. But the speculation is not idle speculation. It is rooted in a powerful, mind-changing mystical experience I once had, where I saw and was the unfolding physical/spiritual universe.

Hi Arminius,

 

 

If I may quibble a bit.  The wave nature is material.  If it isn't measureable in some way it isn't covered by science.  So the wave nature is still dealing with the physical/material and not the spiritual.

 

 

This, I think, reflects some of the issues raised in my testimony thread, particularly the communication aspect. 

 

What I read you saying here is not so much I believe this because of this but rather, this is because I experienced this.  Your experience becomes the ultimate determinate of another's reality.

 

Not sure where to go from here.

 

Holograms are not spiritual since light is physical.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

 

No, John, my experience is not the ultimate determinator of other people's reality, not even my own. It is just that the explanations I have derived from my experience are the best I've come up with—so far. For all I know, I may have a better explanation tomorrow or next year.

 

I am a naturalist; I don't think there is anything that isn't natural. To me, "spiritual" does not equate "supernatural," but is still within the realm of the natural, though it may not (yet) be measurable, and may indeed be supernal. That's why my juxtaposition of particle-wave universe, and my definiton of the wave universe as spiritual, is within the natural.

Isn't "light" that one element in our Universe that is both physical and spiritual?

John wrote:

 

"I prefer dictionary definitions whenever possible simply because it indicates some kind of agreed understanding of what is being discussed.

 

So, spirituality is defined as a) the quality or fact of being spiritual b) incorporeal or immaterial nature c) predominantly spiritual character as shown in thought, life, etc,; spiritual tendency or tone d) often, spiritualities, property or revenue of the church or of an ecclesiastic in his or her official capacity.

 

Of the four I think that definition a) is the most common definition and as such means that the focus is beyond what we typically regard as physical/material."

 

---

 

Dictionary definitions undoubtedly have a value, John.

 

But dictionaries do not explain that language is the human struggle to represent realities in a way that permits them to be discussed. Dictionaries do not explain that different languages make assumptions about reality based on the culture of which each is an inseparable part. And the assumptions can be very different from one culture to the next.

 

Often it's about the way we look at things.

 

"Half full" is the same as "half empty" in "reality" but not in their meaning or the conclusons we're encouraged to draw from each. 

 

In the same wny, "end" is the same as "beginning": again we make a lot out of the meanings we draw from either word and the feelings we attach to each. But to realise that end=beginning can be liberating.

 

Some words rise to prominence in a culture for reasons that have nothing much to do with the word's meaning: "change" is an example. Life, existence… there is no such thing as "stasis" against which "change" can stand. What we do have is different rates of change and these mostly go unnoticed. We twig, as a rule, only when they change in relation to each other or (quickly) their own: relative "acceleration" and "deceleration" are more accurate ways of interpreting experiences of transformation… but some people say god never changes. That's pretty close to saying god is "dead"… despite our experience of dynamic energy in everything we can experience.

 

"Spirituality" cannot be defined as an expression of what's "spiritual"any more meaningfully than defining "dog" as a creature that expresses "dogginess" — and to assert that "spirituality" is about what's "incorporeal" or "immaterial" is demonstrable nonsense.

 

Spirituality doesn't just drift about in some ether: it is embedded in substance in a way that's similar to but different from the way that matter and energy are just different ways of talking about the same thing.… and spirituality is just a way of talking about and experiencing corporeality (Jesus used his corporeality to talk about god/spirit …and often used imagery of food and wine… basic sustenance… to explain to people mired in the consciousness of his time and culture the necessity of god/spirit/love to sustain our spiritual existence —  but existence is just existence": spirit-body like matter-energy.

 

Living without egagement with life in its wholeness — spirtual and corporeal in oneness — is a bit like blinding oneself in case something horrific presents itself unexpectedly; or not eating an "exotic" or unfamiliar food because it might taste awful, or not swimming for fear of sharks… it is a form of self-maiming, self-limitation, our of fear.

 

There's no "other" here, just what we choose to ignore or accept.

 

And we slice and dice reality into little bits with our languages and pretend to be talking about discrete "things" that have their own independent existence. That may be an attractive theory to help us hide in little corners of our heads, but it is hopelessly, dangerously untrue.

 

Religion? Religions have too often been meddled with by people — organisers — who slice and dice existence into dualities, tri-alities and remove god from their own awareness of being in order to "get the job done" … enter the "model", the canon, "correct" dogma and doctrine, ideology, distrust of diversity, distrust of personal spiritual experience and the coercion of it into collective experience. Then the persecutions can begin.

 

We all have crying needs to be encouraged instead in the growth of an informed and discerning personal spirituality, in the wholeness of being and love of existence that's the necessary foundation of faith.

 

 

 

Yes, Neo, I quite agree.

more inspired riffery

 

 

 

*giggle*

 

I think you are mixing up statements of art & statements of science here -- your notion of what is and isn't 'spiritual' is a statement of your art (what you find to be deeply meaningful), while 'wave nature', 'physical' & 'science' are science statements :3

 

If you can think of something, don't that make it measurable?

 

If you can't think of something, then isn't it not measurable?

 

Aren't ideas not material?  Future actions?  Past actions?  Dreams?

 

Richard Feynmann supposedly said "It is important to realize that in physics today, we have no knowledge what energy is. We do not have a picture that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount..."...we have potential energy and then we have energy that is doing work -- as potential energy declines, the energy that is doing work increases...all of this sounds quite 'immaterial' to me :3

 

Also, there is something called the wave function, which is both a description of how anything changes over a time period and something that actually 'exists' (though there are at least 13 different worldviews/interpretations of this, not all of which take the wave function as an actual entity) -- this wavefunction and all of what it describes (you, me, the computer you use, your past, your regrets...) exists in a kind of potential until it gets 'observed' (and there are multiple interpretations as to what that means) and then the wave function is said to collapse into you, me, the computer you use, your past, your regrets, etc...

 

Maybe 'materialism' and the words for/against it are as outmoded as the 'objective'?

 

or something like that...

Hi Arminius,

 

 

I'm not arguing for a supernaturalist understanding of spiritual.

 

I'm simply pointing out that spiritual is not material, by definition, and so when we start discussing the material (ie., light) we are not discussing spiritual we are discussing material.

 

 

And that is what I am taking issue with.  The particle-wave universe is a material universe, not a spiritual one.  It isn't a matter of nature or supernature it is a matter of physical and more physical.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi MikePaterson,

 

 

Agreed.  Language is limited.  I don't think that presents a problem between the physical and the spiritual as both are concepts which appear to be understood universally.

 

 

Half full is not the same as half physical or half spiritual nor is half empty.

 

 

That it has been so defined puts paid to your contention that it cannot be so defined.

 

Whether or not the definition is acceptable or even helpful is debateable.  Sort of like telling somebody that they cannot park there when, as a matter of fact, they have indeed parked there.

 

 

Agreed.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Hi InannaWhimsey,

 

 

Does the thought of a pound of feathers weigh the same as a pound of feathers?

 

 

Good question.  Although If I can't think of that something do I care if it can or cannot be measured?  Do you lose sleep wondering about the size of things you haven't comprehended yet.

 

 

Let me wade through the negatives for a second.  Yes, ideas are not material.

 

 

That could very well be.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Just wanted to add to my previous post here is an excellent series teaching Physics (the 'language' of how reality behaves) called 'The Theoretical Minimum' -- going over, step by step, the minimum knowledge necessary to grok the language of how reality works & to be able, then, to investigate for yourself :3

 

Enjoy fishing, my fellow fishers :3  Enjoy learning and then using the language that your Creator Deity(ies) uses :3

I just went to look again at my paintings.

I think I committed blasphemy....

(As soon as I learn how, I'l    show them here...)

Van Gogh and I share Soooo much: Well, there's the fact that we both sold one painting.

Wrong button pushed.

*Sigh*

When in doubt, push wrong button again........

Sorry… messed up my responses here. I think this should be okay now…

I am wondering why we are keen to differentiate spiritual and corporeal so definitively: is it not a little schizoid to tear ourselves apart in this sort of a way? How is the distinction helpful?

 

John, you replied:

"Agreed.  Language is limited.  I don't think that presents a problem between the physical and the spiritual as both are concepts which appear to be understood universally."

 

---

 

Sorry… I don't think I can agree with you there. Very little is privileged with being understood unversally. "Physical" and "spiritual" are most certainly NOT understaood in he same way universally, and the distinction between the two is not nearly as sharp as you make it.

If you doubt this, you might like to express what happens in the shape shifting that is accepted as "real" but neither spiritual nor corporeal in senses that Westerners would understand them.

Nor are these concepts simply "imagined". I have had this expelained to me by a Papua-New Guinean, a Kalam tribal representative, who spent time in Auckland where I was studying anthropology.

He was not a shape-shifter but did know several elders who were. He explained it to me with unshakeable authority and persuaded me that it is genuine, that it provides wisdom in the context in which they traditionally live, and that it is neither a spiritual not physical transition but a "whole" one (and he was talking to a materialistic atheist, me, at the time).  Similarly, I've  had the privilege of meeting a storm shifter from Vanuatu, several Polynesian navigators and and shark caller from Rotuma. All of these practices are "arts" that incorporate physical and spiritual as a unity of being.

In many cultures, there is not a sense of "doing" or "learning" a life "skill". A traditional Pacific navigator does not "navigate" ("he" because it seems to be a male "thing) does not learn a set of skills and implement these when they are needed; he becomes a navigator. There is a world of difference, and, within that other way of engaging with "reality", the difference between "spiritual" and "physical" is so blurred as to be irrelevant.

We tend to make a big deal of it because of the "Enlightenment". Prior to that, many Europeans found relatively little use for the idea of body and soul as separate entities.

 

Really Innana? There's almost 20 hours of lecture there, and from some guy who in the first minute refers to the French as "crazy".


Seems to me that the "material" world is an illusion of frozen energy. And if the latter is thought to be "spirit" in Latin (or breath or wind as it literally means), then the material world is an illusion of frozen spiritual energy.

 

Nice reading your first impression and reading you putting yourself in the way of what is 'really there' :3

 

Enjoy the series -- at the end, and with work on your part, you should be able to actually do Physics :3  and perhaps grok, yourself and in your own words, why 'E=mc^2' etc etc etc

 

Enjoy!

 

 

I feel and think that energy is the physical as well as the spiritual substance of the universe. Actually, it is the only substance there is, and it is a singularity.

 

I also feel and think that there is a transcendental power or force that transforms energy from one form into another. Although the transformative force could be seen as power separate from the energy it transforms, it can't be totally separate. Transformer necessitates transformed, and vice versa. The two are diametric opposites that complement each other, and ultimately are one indivisible whole.

 

We are inseparable parts of a singularity of self-creative energy, a.k.a. God, but I hardly dare use that word because, like spirituality, it is a loaded term with many and sometimes conflicting meanings.

 

 

 

Hi John:

 

Yes, John, the particle/wave universe is the physical universe, only that its particle function is the opposite of its wave function. That's why I said that the particle universe could possibly regarded as the material universe, and the wave universe as the spiritual one. But, as you said, both the particle and the wave universe are part of the physical universe.

 

It's all quantum magic.

 

 

Electrons fade into and then out of our Universe, so much so that we can only estimate where an electron will be at any given time. But we know they exist.

 

The fire of the electron is where the rubber meets the road and the spiritual becomes the physical. God is a consuming fire.

 

Very nicely done!

 

I'll just settle back holding on to the few things I know that are absolutely true:'

It's really only common sense; nothing can be in two places at the same time, any more than two things can communicate no matter what  the distance between them, much less communicate faster than the speed of light. You can't slow down time much less can it be made to stop. And hey, we all know that their's only 96% of our universe that we know nothing about...

But we will shortly, it'll be on all the networks...please stand by.

 

    

"So what is "spirituality" to you? Your personal definition, and/or dictionary definition, and any experiences and feelings that define spirituality for you."

 

The tremendous experience of the immeadiate, the mometary slip beyond the surly bonds of the defined and the definers.

 

A whole transcendant of the parts; the realization of being at perfect liberty within a cosmic law.

 

Went off to an event in Bimidji, the home of Paul Bunyan and his Great Blue Ox. About forty men gathered to have an experience with God.

 

I tend to the solitary. Stood aside and watched the gathering persons. The rituals and habits of social interaction. Wondering about the opening of my way in the days to come.

 

Looking about I saw parallel power lines. On one a number of small black birds. On the other a single small black bird.

 

While my companions began the shared process, I wandered off into the woods. Found a quiet shade with mature deciduous and conifer. Lay down on my back in a sun dappled clearing.

 

In the way a friend would talk with a friend, I asked for a manifestation. The quiet voice inside told me to be still, wait and notice.

 

The forest grew deep quiet. Into the perfect stillness broke the sharp chatter of a squirrel. I nearly flew out of my hide.

 

That was my manifestation. I have no lingering longing for proofs as the result.

 

I like to sit with listening musicians. We are tuned to a common frequency. By that frequency each instrument and voice takes its bearings. Musicians of every time and place know the joyous experience of disappearing in the movement of the music..

 

The spiritual life is a playful life, played in earnest.

 

With appreciation for the invitation to ramble on...

 

 

And the squirrel caused a revival in a church down south---Ray Stevens!

It was a'mire sensation across anole b'idée's thigh ... just beyond the shin bone as basis of scrimshaw that can develop into myth! The story of love as primal energy must go on with some awareness ... thus the negative energy-function ... contrary to the positive wiles people! They that don't believe in foggy experiences with the abstract ... are generally absolute stoics and such romantics are consevative regarding things they cannot grasp in the nature (sublime) of thought. Isn't that just outside or beyond reality? Generates underlying functions ... pure aÐ-mist!

 

One has to be half way out of reality to experience the other side of mind ... that's abstract instead of absolute. Recall that few things are absolute in god's world leading to the Zero Sune function in reality!

 

On light! The Romans resisted it for an enlightened man was dangerous to the stoic ... could cause some shape shifting in the mortal pool ... ethical being beyond that as a post-hole, or sometimes a'postolic ... keep yourself posted so youll see the revolution of light as it weaves about in the Shadow. In the world of officialdumb (officialdom?) such light can be treason (royal) heresy (religious) or just crazy (business realm). The latter often appears when people like Miqal Duffus pop up in the courts with I did no wrong, and they didn't for they never really had a negative emotion about it (or otherwise thought).

 

Such is the nature of subliminal light in heaven, a light unseen? perhaps I'll go to elle for this, but the enlightened belle will assist me under the label pf psyche ... something basically denied in many religious circles.

 

If a person denied the greater mind (soul, psyceh, whatever) would there be a vicious comeback? That's like echo, ek-Oz, or even ego in the Cyrillic form (once known as hommoe in Classic Greek koine, as vernacular) that is sentient as an old salt over your shoulder ... or an ion whipping about in your brain ... neuroschnapps? This could be an intoxication in thought ... or the synaptic gap personified as something to get over in the long route ... some dipping required ... just for the giggle ...

 

Anyone read Sous-La? It was a dark novel in genre ... sort of like the SHACK that I've been told by theologians is like pastry ... full of hot Eire ... virtually nut'n tuit ("O")? Then I've been told love and God are nut'n ... like a fluiid dream passing or is that a soggy spirit like a semenal creature on high Seis ... that the word as developed and developing complexly so mortal can have freedom from it ... understanding that is! Sort of like lightin the inking, blinque'n an node ... node being a small black point ... pure I owed ... or period in another tradition ... mire dialexis where the lines cross? The damned spot of dorothy ... didn't appear when it was supposed to so the honeymoon in the garden was over and thought insued over how this lovechild could be avoided as wee ID e'mon ...

 

They say to go find yourself, but most authorities don't really mean that defining metaphor, acronism, allegory and other bloody dark humours and hues ...

 

Thus light is consumed by the underlying factors ... the other side of the brain we call mind ... an absolute abstract ... everything as it isn't ... puts all Genus's in dithers ... over what they didn't know ... collective unconscious syndrome?

 

Some tell me thinking this way makes their head hurt in the spin ... vernacular or CaDuces as Jah Nous ... that double helix thing is hell to a one way sol'! Then there's the wahl to deal with ... big bones to erect, to a' muse the taller tales? Expanded myths are powers just beyond us ... abstractions! Hued or carved from the Shadow of tree ... tamiyr than of mortal would conceive ... approaches incarnation but nut'n is perfectly pure and sometimes they pop up ina thing called quantum that is really misunderstood as light in a dark pool! Can divine the inhabitants into binomials ... but that too is just theory ...

 

I've been told that light is absolutely physical matter by some theologians when it is generally accepted to depend on which way it is observed ... a lunar perspective on reflection coming round again? Infinite thought on a bent ... creates dimples/bumps in space --- Einstein! Especially when light is arrested ... become matter over mind ... mental being an internalized space when well regressed ... recessed ... crevassed ... bicracky ... that's Ur ... (right out of Australia; down-under as a mire icon of something that isn't)!

 

Some people don't believe in things that couldn't be real like Piscine thoughts ...

 

I like that!

Have thoughts and cares ... ain't that de deuced ist thing you ever heard?

According to a recent Gallop poll, 77% say religion is losing its influence in America, but 75% say America would be better off it were "more religious." 

According to a recent Gallop poll, 77% say religion is losing its influence in America, but 75% say America would be better off it were "more religious."