ultra
Full Member
Offline
Afterlife Knowledge Member
Posts: 119
|
Thomas brings up some really good points, among them 2 that deal with common pitfalls of spiritual aspirants - one by way of comment and the other by way of a question. We seem to end up discussing these two issues here quite frequently and my guess is that it is because the people who come to this site are active, conscious seekers or else people waking up to those possibilities, making these issues prominent or essential.
These are: 1) the issue of what is practical?, and 2) the issue of mistaking or getting stuck in an expedient as the goal itself (ACIM: "forget these words...").
In addressing the first - on the issue of what is practical I would propose that: What is practical is that which serves as an expedient or means for the fulfillment of any intention. It doesn't even have to be a "spiritual" intention, as the definition seems to fit in any case.
The greater, more direct, more comprehensive the fulfillment of the intention, the more efficacious and practical the expedient. Note that paradoxically, "more direct" in the spiritual sense may actually not be so linear, lol. Also the issue of some type of guidance being part of what defines practicality may be pertinent, as we know that the trial and error method is in most cases one of the least efficient compared to adapting individual specific needs to what is already generally known - e.g, If one wanted to climb the tallest mountain on Earth, one could wander aimlessly all over for a lifetime hoping to stumble on Mt.Everest (even if recognized) then attempt a likely disastrous ascent. Or - one could research and consult maps, authentic accounts, guide books, organize or join an expedition, hire a guide, sherpas, etc. and approach it in a more deliberately inter-dependent way - accessing the huge reserve of practical knowledge and wisdom embodied by many people - the results of those who through their own committment of life energy, have acquired valuable actual experience with some, or every aspect of the intended purpose.
In the most broad sense all life experience is "practical" because life is by nature taking place in the physical with its necessary laws of action and reaction, vibration and attraction, attitude and consequence, etc.. However due to a cosmic Ignorance in which we are involved, we are not fully (even partially?) aware of our Divinity, our Identity, and our oneness with God/Source and therefore "suffer" and act in confused ways leading to unfortunate realities both individually and collectively, including and perhaps especially as Thomas says due to our puny intellects, which is a part of the problem. Fortunately we have other options.
While there are practical considerations within the operational realities of Earth life, the results we find are not satisfying, nor do the obscure even if apparently intrinsic opportunities of life present themselves in a way making it obvious what is necessary to break the endless cycles of ignorantly intentioned living with the attendant and necessary painful conclusions - iow's not ultimately very practical.
For most people, even those we would consider "awakened" to the potential - the (for some radical) notion that we are essentially divine, can ascend to Godhood, become God-realized, etc. is only a possibility, a theory or an intellectual concept - until through some expedient or practice it becomes a fulfilled conscious Reality. It is in the reorientation that allows for a conscious, deliberate acceleration of that potential fulfillment - now theoretical and held in place by faith that provides the impetus for any ongoing practice - where practicality takes on a deeper and more refined purpose leading towards that full realization, in the fully practical sense, in the physical.
I do not happen to believe that institutional religion is the representation of "practical spirituality", at least exclusively that is. Yes, religion is an expedient and a means for certain intentions leading towards some spiritual goals, for instance - the necessity for organized communion as reinforcement to individual search, the delineating and adherance to certain basic moral principles, a rudimentary understanding of some type of spiritual "cosmology", etc. I think that at one time in human development it may have been in the forefront of what may be considered practical because of course it is - for its intended purposes. However, there are now large numbers of people for whom the structure and purpose religion as we know it serves intentions that while being practical for some needs, do not address a fuller range of potential now recognized by many who are awakening to greater possibility and are searching for new expedients, and so now that set of applied principles of religion may appear to be limiting to many. I would suggest that there is a continuum of practicality based on the successive transcendance of limitation as intention evolves to meet newer recognized potentials and possibilities of the involved soul. I think beyond this, a good discussion might be had on the intrinsic differences between religion and spirituality, but maybe in another thread. What is theoretical would be what is not serviceable as a means or expedient for the intended purpose, or an intention that is not followed with some enacted practice. For instance as in the discussion above about religion, it might be true and is for many, that given the present shortcomings of religion to practically address newer recognized potentials, people may be actively searching for new ways/means/expedients to become the fulfilling practices of newly discovered intentions. Unless and until these expedients are identified, formulated and enacted, these new intentions will remain theoretical. The means of fulfilling well experienced and previously transcended/mastered intentions, by definition will not suffice.
As one proceeds, one determines what serves and is a successful expedient and what is not, and makes alterations by free will accordingly. It is this process of alignment between intention and means, held together and furthered by faith in positive outcome which is at the core of what is practical. This could also be called aspiration, which is the connecting thread, life-line, inner breath that provides a direct link to that ascending definition of "practicality" - always providing appropriate means, clearing the path, as each step embodies a fragment of the destination.
There is also a subsidiary discussion available on the appearance in history of certain human beings, who's presence figured prominently and uniquely in serving as a focus for major reorientation of whole cultures or in some cases the entire world regarding urgently needed new intentions and expedients - again, probably for another thread.
In the case of what would be "spiritually" practical, it seems that the issue of general orientation is paramount regardless of the specific means or expedient chosen, since many paths lead to what is generally considered the same goal. This brings up the second issue, that of mistaking the form of expedient for the goal itself. Again, using the example of religion, it can be seen that people can get stuck within ritual, practice, structure - form, that does not serve an evolving purpose and so when that happens it is appropriate to seek new forms/ways/means/expedients/solutions that align with newer intentions and recognized new possibilities.
There are 2 cases when this does not happen: When new possibilities are not recognized, there is stasis, an adherance/attachment to outer form, denial of further potential. Eventually this will lead to crystallization, stagnation, dissatisfaction, frustration - iow's crisis. This is the painful difficult way, because it deals with the consequences of attachment and the inevitable destruction of form that is necessary to move on to new forms/means that serve authentic inner necessity, and not the other way around (as in, "God made the sabbath for man", etc.).
The other way is when new intentions are formulated resulting from recognition of new possibilities, dissatisfaction with old useless forms, but as yet - no replacement has been found for the obsolete expedient. Once again, regarding religion, there are many people in total limbo - completely dissatisfied with the old structure - bored, unfulfilled, even stifled - but they do not know where to turn. I believe this is one reason why people come to this site, among many other explorations available as precursors to establishing a practice - seeking answers to questions that the old forms do not answer for whatever reason, or cannot answer because of a fundamental incapacity to do so.
Further on mistaking means for goal - There is a problem when individual aspirants, or institutions for that matter, become attached to one specific form of expedient (their own) and begin to view this as the only practical means to the general "goal" and then alter their behavior to reflect this attitude by seeing their way as exclusive and superior, not allowing for the different other individual practical applications, solutions and acheivements, which are not as obvious in their practicality because they have not been personally chosen and used. Ironically, it turns out that this attitude of exclusivity is not practical, since it is inherently opposed to oneness (and acceptance of diversity), a presumed goal of any authentic spiritual quest. This is a common difficulty of seeking to be overcome and often appears regardless of specific path.
- u
|