Spirituality without Religion

Tombo2001

I often hear people talk about their spiritual side.

Particularly, in interviews, people might be asked "Are you religous" and they say "I wouldnt consider myself a religious person, but I am very spiritual".....

To some extent I think this is a bit poncey, trying to have your cake and eat it.

But it does get me wondering, what is spirituality in the absence of a core faith or set of beliefs?

Please note: I am not religious myself (and thats just not going to change, full stop). But I will freely admit, that if I do have a spiritual side that I'm not particularly aware of it.

I did hear someone say once: People without spirituality are emotionally dead. Got me worried, I must be emotionally dead, better fix that....

In all seriousness though, can you be spiritual if you are not religious? How does spirituality manifest itself in this circumstance?

kylith

Many people who don't follow a religion seem to feel that there is 'something' out there, whether it be energy or 'the universe'. Personally I think it's A) nonsense and another way of abdicating responsibility.

lazygal

I don't get the 'I have my own faith, I'm a very spiritual person' malarky. Its usually said by people who like the nice bits of the faith they grew up in, combined with a bit of karma/trusting the universe, and angel beliefs. When I've asked such people what they mean, they never have a real answer, its always 'something bigger out there', 'you have to believe in something' type answers.

Tombo2001

But even that is having a set of beliefs......something bigger out there.......I'd (personally) put that in the same bracket as religion; just not an organised one.

And I'd see it again as trying to have your cake and eat it.

What I'm getting at I suppose is a spirituality that is not connected to beliefs at all, but is connected to oneself.

Is that something that is practiced? What would it look like?

Penn

I think the Spirituality Forum charter explains it well:

*Peoples of all faiths to discuss "faith" in general, what they get from it and how they see it as applicable in their lives.

*People to share their own unique faiths - ones outside existing organised religions.

*People seeking to develop their own spirituality, to find a path that suits them as an individual and to see and learn what they can from those who currently walk that path.

It's essentially being religious without belonging to any religion. It's religion for an individual as opposed to religion for the masses, but usually incorporates aspects of religions such as the idea of a soul, the afterlife, some form of supernatural deity, healing through non-medical means etc.

In a way, I consider it to be a better standpoint than saying you belong to a religion while not adhering to all aspects of that religion (like a la carte Catholics). On the other hand, the general beliefs of spirituality are akin to religious beliefs, and therefore equally unproven and unverifiable.

robindch

Tombo2001 wrote: »

But it does get me wondering, what is spirituality in the absence of a core faith or set of beliefs?

It's exactly what it is when you have a religious belief -- whatever and wherever you want.

For me, the otherworldiness that's a part (or all) of what many religious people describe as "spirituality" is most accessible via music, maths, nature and some people. Other folks may well find it in different places.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

I did hear someone say once: People without spirituality are emotionally dead.

In my experience, that's most commonly said by religious people, especially those with low self-esteem.

sbsquarepants

I think it's kind of semantics, religion is basically organised (or should that be monitised) spirituality. A lot of people "feel" as if they are part of something bigger, which i fully agree with and then assume therefore there must be a plan and a planner - which is where i start to have a problem.
We are obviously part of a bigger interconnected picture (we are in essence made of stardust and powered by sunlight after all, it doesn't come much more connected than that!). I think it is this sense of interconnectivity that people refer to as spirituality. It's human nature to anthropomorphise (is that a word?) things, nature itself is no exception. Nature is quite obviously there and shaping the world around us but some people project human like characteristics onto it, and this to me is spirtuality - it's a kind of low fat religion, for those who can see the flaws in any given faith but still feel as if there still "should" be something going on.
I can see where people are coming from when they describe themselves as spiritual, i just think the word has too many negative, hippy like, argument not really thought out connotations for my liking.

Tombo2001

Penn wrote: »

I think the Spirituality Forum charter explains it well:



It's essentially being religious without belonging to any religion. It's religion for an individual as opposed to religion for the masses, but usually incorporates aspects of religions such as the idea of a soul, the afterlife, some form of supernatural deity, healing through non-medical means etc.

In a way, I consider it to be a better standpoint than saying you belong to a religion while not adhering to all aspects of that religion (like a la carte Catholics). On the other hand, the general beliefs of spirituality are akin to religious beliefs, and therefore equally unproven and unverifiable.

Maybe I should change the title of the Thread.

I would see 'beliefs' 'faith' 'religion' as all being variants on the same thread.

What I was asking about is Spirituality without Beliefs.

Spirituality where you say

"this is me, there is nothing else out there except the world around me"....where you dont 'believe' in anything, rather you accept that the world is what you can see, touch, smell, hear, talk to....

where I am my mind and my body, and if I have a soul, then its just a name for the thing that makes me feel emotions and gives me a distinct personality.

What is spirtuality then......?

Dades

I don't think it's possible to declare yourself (correctly) a spiritual atheist without having some vague, undefined, new-agey type notions. You could also be a Buddhist, of course.

I think a lot of people define themselves as spiritual because, in the absence of an actual belief in something, they feel there's a gap to be filled whether they subscribe to any of it or not.

Tombo2001

sbsquarepants wrote: »

We are obviously part of a bigger interconnected picture (we are in essence made of stardust and powered by sunlight after all, it doesn't come much more connected than that!). I think it is this sense of interconnectivity that people refer to as spirituality. It's human nature to anthropomorphise (is that a word?) things, nature itself is no exception. Nature is quite obviously there and shaping the world around us but some people project human like characteristics onto it, and this to me is spirtuality - it's a kind of low fat religion, for those who can see the flaws in any given faith but still feel as if there still "should" be something going on.
.

We are but that doesnt mean we need to build a belief system around it. Everything is connected to everything else in some way......7 degrees of Kevin Bacon and so on.....but so what......


the belief system is what makes you say "there must be a bigger force out there behind the scenes joining all the dots " .....I'm not interest in knowing about that........dont care, will never find out.....

loveisdivine

I wouldn't consider myself spiritual and definitely not religious. But I do favour a pantheist approach to life. I believe that we are all connected to each other, the planet and everything that lives on it. I also think modern day humans have completely lost touch with this and don't respect that we are only as important as everything else. We think we are greater than everything else, including nature itself.

I don't believe in any divine creator. I don't feel a need too. Nature and the facts of the universe are far more awe inspiring than any made up nonsense.

However when I say something like the above to someone, they consider me spiritual. So maybe I am.

sbsquarepants

Tombo2001 wrote: »

We are but that doesnt mean we need to build a belief system around it. Everything is connected to everything else in some way......7 degrees of Kevin Bacon and so on.....but so what...........

Everything is connected but so what??
I find that quite a puzzling, ostrich like attitude. If everything is connected as it certainly appears to be, i for one would quite like to know how. As for a belief system, yes we absolutely should build one around it - we should just base it on something verifiable and ammend it when it becomes clear one of our beliefs is wrong. That's the very basis of science.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

the belief system is what makes you say "there must be a bigger force out there behind the scenes joining all the dots " .....I'm not interest in knowing about that........dont care, will never find out.....

Well, if your not interested in finding out, why bother asking a question? There is always something behind the scenes joining the dots as you say, finding out what that thing is and how the dots join together would be amazing. Who knows what we could do or where we could go.
Again, i'm puzzled by your attitude.

biko

People have battled over the One-ness of it all for ages. Religion just hijacked the concept.

Science also subscribe to One-ness in a way in that "we are all made of star matter and will return to matter" (but we were matter all along).

Both Jung and metaphysics believe there is connections between people we can't yet understand. New agers have built on that.

Sarky

biko wrote: »

Science also subscribe to One-ness in a way in that "we are all made of star matter and will return to matter" (but we were matter all along).

Except for when we weren't matter. And we'll eventually decay into energy. And f*ck knows what everything was a few picoseconds before the big bang changed the state of everything. It is, unfortunately, and despite what any religion will try to tell you, all a bit complicated.

Tombo2001

loveisdivine wrote: »

I wouldn't consider myself spiritual and definitely not religious. But I do favour a pantheist approach to life. I believe that we are all connected to each other, the planet and everything that lives on it. I also think modern day humans have completely lost touch with this and don't respect that we are only as important as everything else. We think we are greater than everything else, including nature itself.

I don't believe in any divine creator. I don't feel a need too. Nature and the facts of the universe are far more awe inspiring than any made up nonsense.

However when I say something like the above to someone, they consider me spiritual. So maybe I am.

Do you feel spiritual? Do you feel there is a spiritual part to your life? What is that?

Tombo2001

robindch wrote: »

For me, the otherworldiness that's a part (or all) of what many religious people describe as "spirituality" is most accessible via music, maths, nature and some people. Other folks may well find it in different places.

Funny thing, while I am not at all religious, I might go to a church to seek out what I believe to be a spiritual experience.

For example, I might go to the Christmas Carols in Christchurch......being in that beautiful church in a group of several hundred people singing a beautiful hymn, with candles lit all around.....that is spiritual, or it feels as such. But I have absolutely no religious beliefs of any sort, or disbeliefs for that matter.

I might have a very similar experience at a concert in Vicar street.

sbsquarepants

biko wrote: »

People have battled over the One-ness of it all for ages. Religion just hijacked the concept.

Science also subscribe to One-ness in a way in that "we are all made of star matter and will return to matter" (but we were matter all along).

Both Jung and metaphysics believe there is connections between people we can't yet understand. New agers have built on that.

The one-ness thing seems fairly hardwired into the fabric of the universe if quantum entanglement is correct (as it appears to be, but that's a bit above my pay grade to either confirm or deny!)

Sarky wrote: »

Except for when we weren't matter. And we'll eventually decay into energy. And f*ck knows what everything was a few picoseconds before the big bang changed the state of everything. It is, unfortunately, and despite what any religion will try to tell you, all a bit complicated.

It certainly is. I personally don't think we'll ever get to the end of it, but it's still a fascinating and extremely worthwhile journey nonetheless don't you think. Religions come and go, all the old ones were total bullshít, all the current ones are too and all the new ones most likely will be as well.

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Funny thing, while I am not at all religious, I might go to a church to seek out what I believe to be a spiritual experience.

For example, I might go to the Christmas Carols in Christchurch......being in that beautiful church in a group of several hundred people singing a beautiful hymn, with candles lit all around.....that is spiritual, or it feels as such. But I have absolutely no religious beliefs of any sort, or disbeliefs for that matter.

I might have a very similar experience at a concert in Vicar street.

Sounds more like an appreciation for music than anything spiritual to be quite honest!

Tombo2001

sbsquarepants wrote: »

Sounds more like an appreciation for music than anything spiritual to be quite honest!

No its not.

Its about the whole experience, but particularly about the feeling of being part of something bigger.

sbsquarepants

Tombo2001 wrote: »

No its not.

Its about the whole experience, but particularly about the feeling of being part of something bigger.

I think i understand what you mean, i've felt that way myself a few times (lost in the moment at sporting events, or concerts and so on) but i'm not sure i'd describe it as spiritual, just happy - ecstatic even.
The only time i've ever really felt deeply connected to the universe or something like that, that i would call a spiritual experience would be when under the influence of various chemicals - and i'm not at all sure i can trust that feeling is anything "real" I'm not too quick to dismiss either by the way, but lets face it, it ain't all that trustworthy a source!

freyners

I had considered myself this for a while, tbh it was more of a comfort blanket after I admitted to myself I didn't believe in what I been brought up to believe in or anything else remotely like it.

The reason I used to cling to it was I had a real trouble giving up on the concept of an afterlife. TBH its still something that I still struggle with from time to time as it can be a bit of a downer to think that when your dead that's it. But if you look at it from another POV its an encouragement to live your life to the fullest.

Sarky

sbsquarepants wrote: »

T
It certainly is. I personally don't think we'll ever get to the end of it, but it's still a fascinating and extremely worthwhile journey nonetheless don't you think.

Christ, can you imagine how boring life would be if we had all the answers?

maguffin

Sarky wrote: »

Christ, can you imagine how boring life would be if we had all the answers?

Interesting that an Atheist should call on 'Christ'.....don't you think? A 'Spiritual' moment maybe?

sbsquarepants

Sarky wrote: »

Christ, can you imagine how boring life would be if we had all the answers?

I kinda think the opposite way to that - imagine the possibilities!

Obliq

maguffin wrote: »

Interesting that an Atheist should call on 'Christ'.....don't you think? A 'Spiritual' moment maybe?

I see "christ" in the context of Irish speech mannerisms as more like "Fcuk sake lads"

Sarky

"Christ" is a nice little monosylabbic utterance. It's not exactly rude, but it has a wonderful harsh start, a sibilant middle and a harsh ending that just sounds loaded with vitriol. It's a perfect swear word. That it upsets religious people is just a bonus. They shouldn't have beaten religion into me alongside science as a child if they didn't want me to be an unrepentant blasphemer as an adult.

If it makes you feel better about it, you can see me calling on your Lord and Savior as a challenge. 15-odd years of shameless sin and not a single lightning strike, traffic accident, sudden unexplained illness, surprise pregnancy, or other misfortune. He'd want to up his game, because that's a shoddy record of omnipotence.

Geomy

Sarky wrote: »

Christ, can you imagine how boring life would be if we had all the answers?

I agree with you sarky :-)

Thats an awakening in itself, me warming to Sarky ;-)

Sarky

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I kinda think the opposite way to that - imagine the possibilities!

I dunno. I think it's the searching for answers that makes humanity awesome. That's why I have little but contempt for easy answers like religion, some of which actively discourage one from questioning.

If there was nothing left for us to question, I think we'd die of boredom, no matter how many flying cars we had. Or we'd invent new things to tear eachother apart over. like, say, a new religion.

Tombo2001

Sarky wrote: »

"Christ" is a nice little monosylabbic utterance. .

Brought my two year old to mass a few months back.

Priest was delivering a prayer....

.....she says really loud....."He said 'Jesus Christ'"......

(she thinks its a bad word).

sbsquarepants

Tombo2001 wrote: »

Brought my two year old to mass a few months back.

Priest was delivering a prayer....

.....she says really loud....."He said 'Jesus Christ'"......

(she thinks its a bad word).

It is!

Also for someone who isn't religious, you sure seem to spend a lot of time in churches!

Sarky

sbsquarepants wrote: »

It is!

Except when it's not. Huzzah for doublethink!

Sarky

Geomy wrote: »

I agree with you sarky :-)

Thats an awakening in itself, me warming to Sarky ;-)

Treasure the moment, I'm sure before long I'll say something logical, witty or backed up by evidence and you'll hate me all over again.