Spirituality

[Audie]

What is "spiritual"?

[RickD]

This is a good definition.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(əw)əl/
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

[Audie]

This is a good definition.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(əw)əl/
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

I do know how to use a dictionsry.

[RickD]

This is a good definition.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(əw)əl/
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

I do know how to use a dictionsry.

If you did know how to use a dictionary, then you'd realize that there's no "s" in dictionAry!

What are you really asking about spirituality then? Could you be more specific please?

[Audie]

This is a good definition.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(əw)əl/
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

I do know how to use a dictionsry.

If you did know how to use a dictionary, then you'd realize that there's no "s" in dictionAry!

What are you really asking about spirituality then? Could you be more specific please?

People speak of being spiritual, but I dont know what they mean. I kind of dont think they do
either.

Do you?

[1over137]

those who walk according to the Spirit, I guess
See also https://www.openbible.info/topics/spirituality for some Bible verses

for example:
our flesh would like to hate someone
but the Spirit wants to forgive and love

just one example out of many

[RickD]

This is a good definition.

spir·it·u·al
ˈspiriCH(əw)əl/
adjective
1.
of, relating to, or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

I do know how to use a dictionsry.

If you did know how to use a dictionary, then you'd realize that there's no "s" in dictionAry!

What are you really asking about spirituality then? Could you be more specific please?

People speak of being spiritual, but I dont know what they mean. I kind of dont think they do
either.

Do you?

Ooh. That's a tough one to narrow down. It means different things to different people that say that.

Some people even divorce God out of spirituality. There's not a "one size fits all" answer.

[B. W.]

This is a good definition.

I do know how to use a dictionsry.

If you did know how to use a dictionary, then you'd realize that there's no "s" in dictionAry!

What are you really asking about spirituality then? Could you be more specific please?

People speak of being spiritual, but I dont know what they mean. I kind of dont think they do
either.

Do you?

Ooh. That's a tough one to narrow down. It means different things to different people that say that.

Some people even divorce God out of spirituality. There's not a "one size fits all" answer.

There's not a "one size fits all" answer

That is why there needs to be specific question to specific group of people. New Age, Mormons, JW, Satanist,Paganism, Jews, Muslims, Christian, Catholic, EO, Buddhist,etc... etc. and atheist all define spiritual differently.

The dictionary definition Rick gave above is a good basic benign definition all can bounce off and explain.

So Audie, do you want a codified christian definition of spiritual, then, read the link 1over137 provided.
-
-
-

[crackpot]

What is "spiritual"?

When I hear "spiritual" I think of incense wafting...sitars poaging a sorrowful dirge...lit candles...Buddhas and other stupid statues with oranges plus assorted fruit at their base...and other crap mysticism from the Orient.

"Spiritual" commonly denotes a bleeding nutcase who takes herself seriously.

[Audie]

Apparently the word is open to much equivocation.

[Jac3510]

The "secular" way to understand the word--i.e., the way the word is used in healthcare journals--relates to meaning-making. Spirituality is that dimension of the human experience whereby we find meaning or purpose in who we are, what we are doing, and what is happening to us. As such, it relates to the narrative we not only have for the entire world by for ourselves and how the two interrelate.

So understood, spirituality is both objective and intensively subjective. It is objective insofar as there are certain spiritual needs that all human beings have regardless of color or creed. Some of these needs include a sense of hope, a sense of dignity, a sense of community, a sense of agency, etc. All of these (and more) are basic components in the way that we look at the world, our place in it, and how we relate to it (which includes how we relate what is happening to us in it). It is intensively subjective and personal insofar as no two spiritualities are the same--we all have a different story and a different narrative.

You didn't ask, but that contrasts with "religiosity," which has to do with how an individual or community codifies and externalizes their spirituality. The interrelation between the two dimensions gets pretty sophisticated pretty quickly, but I'm sure you can imagine some of that off the top of your head.

Now, when you get away from a secular approach, when you start using a more religious approach to the word, you start getting into major equivocation. A Christian view of spirituality is different from an Islamic view, and both are different from a Buddhist or Hindu view (which are different from one another), and so on. Even within religions there are different views! But that shouldn't be too surprising given what I said above, as religiosity is the codification of a very personal spirituality, and so our spiritual narratives inform our religions, and our religions determine the way we use terms like "spiritual."

If I can offer something like a "mere Christian" view of spirituality, though--that is, something that all versions of Christians would more or less agree with (some more, some less)--I would say that the spiritual person is one who is actively living in and in accordance with their relationship with God through Christ. This has less to do with behavior as much as it does with a union with God through Christ. Now, by way of analogy, much as you would expect someone deeply in love with their spouse to behave in a certain way without reducing their love to that behavior, just so with how the spiritual Christian behaves. There are certain "behaviors" that a spiritual person demonstrates, even though their spirituality is not reducible to those behaviors. As best as I can put it, to be truly spiritual is to be truly human, only better.

Let me try one last approach to clarify what I'm trying to get at. Hopefully you would agree that there is a sense in which some people are better at really being human than others. Have you ever heard someone accuse someone else of "acting like an animal"? Implicit in the insult is the recognition that, whatever scientific classification we apply to homo sapiens, the fact remains that we are somehow "more" than animals. Here we are, of course, talking about our rational natures, but even more than that, just the whole idea of living in community and our sense of morality. Again, whatever rationality or morality you find in "lower" animals, no one can doubt that in human beings, these senses are much more developed and thus dramatically affect the way we live and expect others to live. So, back to my point, people who have absolutely no control over their emotions, who are impulsive, who refuse to be rational, people who too easily flit from one idea or one experience or one high to the next, we might say that they aren't fully living out their potential as humans--the ability to rise above mere instinct and press on to higher and ultimately more satisfying goals. In that sense, some people are "better" than others.

So by that analogy, the spiritual person is the best of all . . . certainly not because of certain spiritual behaviors (i.e., long periods of meditation or giving generously to a religious organization or understanding a theological doctrine). Rather, because they have tapped into this mystical Life that is above all in all and through all, they not only live in full accordance with their human natures, but they somehow seem to be above and beyond them. To quote Paul, they exhibit love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. In this life, such a person alternates between being spiritual in that sense and then falling (and so failing) back into their old, fleshly, animalistic natures, where they become jealous and envious and bitter and other such things. But soon the spiritual person reconnects with God and finds Him living in and through them again, and once again, they seem to transcend to merely human.

Now, to be sure, there are people who claim to be spiritual and are not! But that's another issue entirely (or at least, another issue distantly ).

On a closing note, what separates this from mere psychology or mental health? Two things. First, a person can be mentally healthy and never transcend the daily toils and amusements of life. Spirituality is more than mental health because it is deeper than mental health. It goes to the core of what it means to be human. And that's the second difference. Taken seriously, spirituality points to a real constituent part of reality that mental health does not address. I am seriously proposing that you have a spirit, that you are more than just a bag of chemicals interacting with one another, that connection and life are real causes and not just effects. I'm saying that the highest life, the highest cause, the highest connection, is what we are calling God--and being the Highest, it (He) is in and through and connecting and causing all things. Including me. Including you. So spirituality, unlike mental health, is about something and someone other than yourself. It is necessary others-oriented, and ultimately oriented towards the First Other. Spirituality, in a word, is about connection with God and all that entails (being raised up in Him to be more fully what we already are in a way we could not be otherwise.) Mental health is just about you and your bag of chemicals operating properly. Hey, that's a good thing! But if what I'm talking about is real (and in my experience, it is), then it isn't anything like the whole ball of wax.

So . . . yeah, too much equivocation? No doubt! It's one of my frustrations in the field I'm in. But I don't think that's an insurmountable problem.

[Audie]

Jac, I want to give you a special thanks for your time and effort with all you wrote.

I will go back and read it again, and work thru the ways it matches my own views, different as our ways of expressing them are.

I do appreciate the implicit acceptance that my complete lack of religiosity has nothing
at all to do with my own spiritual life.

[crochet1949]

Spirituality -- maybe acknowledging the spiritual part of a person and taking part in some type of religious group that would attempt to meet the inner spiritual needs.
Everyone has spiritual needs -- an inner searching for 'something' that is beyond themselves.

[melanie]

The "secular" way to understand the word--i.e., the way the word is used in healthcare journals--relates to meaning-making. Spirituality is that dimension of the human experience whereby we find meaning or purpose in who we are, what we are doing, and what is happening to us. As such, it relates to the narrative we not only have for the entire world by for ourselves and how the two interrelate.

So understood, spirituality is both objective and intensively subjective. It is objective insofar as there are certain spiritual needs that all human beings have regardless of color or creed. Some of these needs include a sense of hope, a sense of dignity, a sense of community, a sense of agency, etc. All of these (and more) are basic components in the way that we look at the world, our place in it, and how we relate to it (which includes how we relate what is happening to us in it). It is intensively subjective and personal insofar as no two spiritualities are the same--we all have a different story and a different narrative.

You didn't ask, but that contrasts with "religiosity," which has to do with how an individual or community codifies and externalizes their spirituality. The interrelation between the two dimensions gets pretty sophisticated pretty quickly, but I'm sure you can imagine some of that off the top of your head.

Now, when you get away from a secular approach, when you start using a more religious approach to the word, you start getting into major equivocation. A Christian view of spirituality is different from an Islamic view, and both are different from a Buddhist or Hindu view (which are different from one another), and so on. Even within religions there are different views! But that shouldn't be too surprising given what I said above, as religiosity is the codification of a very personal spirituality, and so our spiritual narratives inform our religions, and our religions determine the way we use terms like "spiritual."

If I can offer something like a "mere Christian" view of spirituality, though--that is, something that all versions of Christians would more or less agree with (some more, some less)--I would say that the spiritual person is one who is actively living in and in accordance with their relationship with God through Christ. This has less to do with behavior as much as it does with a union with God through Christ. Now, by way of analogy, much as you would expect someone deeply in love with their spouse to behave in a certain way without reducing their love to that behavior, just so with how the spiritual Christian behaves. There are certain "behaviors" that a spiritual person demonstrates, even though their spirituality is not reducible to those behaviors. As best as I can put it, to be truly spiritual is to be truly human, only better.

Let me try one last approach to clarify what I'm trying to get at. Hopefully you would agree that there is a sense in which some people are better at really being human than others. Have you ever heard someone accuse someone else of "acting like an animal"? Implicit in the insult is the recognition that, whatever scientific classification we apply to homo sapiens, the fact remains that we are somehow "more" than animals. Here we are, of course, talking about our rational natures, but even more than that, just the whole idea of living in community and our sense of morality. Again, whatever rationality or morality you find in "lower" animals, no one can doubt that in human beings, these senses are much more developed and thus dramatically affect the way we live and expect others to live. So, back to my point, people who have absolutely no control over their emotions, who are impulsive, who refuse to be rational, people who too easily flit from one idea or one experience or one high to the next, we might say that they aren't fully living out their potential as humans--the ability to rise above mere instinct and press on to higher and ultimately more satisfying goals. In that sense, some people are "better" than others.

So by that analogy, the spiritual person is the best of all . . . certainly not because of certain spiritual behaviors (i.e., long periods of meditation or giving generously to a religious organization or understanding a theological doctrine). Rather, because they have tapped into this mystical Life that is above all in all and through all, they not only live in full accordance with their human natures, but they somehow seem to be above and beyond them. To quote Paul, they exhibit love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. In this life, such a person alternates between being spiritual in that sense and then falling (and so failing) back into their old, fleshly, animalistic natures, where they become jealous and envious and bitter and other such things. But soon the spiritual person reconnects with God and finds Him living in and through them again, and once again, they seem to transcend to merely human.

Now, to be sure, there are people who claim to be spiritual and are not! But that's another issue entirely (or at least, another issue distantly ).

On a closing note, what separates this from mere psychology or mental health? Two things. First, a person can be mentally healthy and never transcend the daily toils and amusements of life. Spirituality is more than mental health because it is deeper than mental health. It goes to the core of what it means to be human. And that's the second difference. Taken seriously, spirituality points to a real constituent part of reality that mental health does not address. I am seriously proposing that you have a spirit, that you are more than just a bag of chemicals interacting with one another, that connection and life are real causes and not just effects. I'm saying that the highest life, the highest cause, the highest connection, is what we are calling God--and being the Highest, it (He) is in and through and connecting and causing all things. Including me. Including you. So spirituality, unlike mental health, is about something and someone other than yourself. It is necessary others-oriented, and ultimately oriented towards the First Other. Spirituality, in a word, is about connection with God and all that entails (being raised up in Him to be more fully what we already are in a way we could not be otherwise.) Mental health is just about you and your bag of chemicals operating properly. Hey, that's a good thing! But if what I'm talking about is real (and in my experience, it is), then it isn't anything like the whole ball of wax.

So . . . yeah, too much equivocation? No doubt! It's one of my frustrations in the field I'm in. But I don't think that's an insurmountable problem.

And that is how you answer an almost unanswerable question!!
Props Jac
A little piece of brilliance

[Jac3510]

Thank you, mel!

And thank you, too, Audie. As much as we phrase things differently, I hope there's something there you can find agreeable enough that it has real meaning to you.