What is Spirituality?
One must separate the mythological from the spiritual. Spirituality is often associated with supernaturalism. This is fallacious.
The soul is the fundamental uniquity which belongs to an individual. No matter if another shares so many characteristics in common that no other may distinguish between the two individuals, the fact remains that those two individuals recognize the other as a different individual. This is the soul.
"Spirit" carries many more meanings. It can mean the same thing as the word "soul", or it can mean true intent (as in "The spirit of the Law"), or it can mean the general disposition of the individual. This is not supernaturalism in the classical sense.
In a different sense, both of these terms are a part of supernaturalist thinking. Once again, however, one must separate mythology from these core teachings of religious thought. Supernaturalism can easily be defined apart from mythology by considering anything which cannot be understood in a rational, objective manner to be "supernatural". The self (possibly the only thing I consider "supernatural") cannot be known objectively. You cannot define what the self is, only what it is not. You stand in a room. You perceive the things around you. What separates yourself from those things? You cannot know. You can only say that those thing are not yourself. You cannot say what is yourself.
But, you can know the processes which give rise to the self. You say, this is proof that the self is not supernatural. Why? This comes from an error in interpretation of the word "supernatural". It does not imply a hierarchal relationship between the natural and the supernatural. The natural gives rise to the supernatural, and also the reverse. The processes of the bain (perfectly rational, understandable, and most importantly objective processes) give rise to something as mysterious as the self, which can only be experienced. However, in the same token, the self may alter those very processes which give rise to it. No one else can experience the self of another. As I said, this uniquity constitutes the soul. The soul is the separation of one "self" from all other "selves", and so the soul shares the aspect of supernaturality with the self. Spirituality is the general disposition of the self, the "state of the soul". And thus, it also shares the aspect of supernaturality.
But I said that spirituality is not supernatural. This is true. It is not, but at the same time it is. What does this mean? It means that there is no supernatural, only aspects of the natural which we, as individuals, cannot understand rationally. In other words, the difference between the supernatural and the natural is a fundamentally arbitrary semantic distinction.
And what is Sanctity? Something which is sacred has irreducible value. This forces us to define where value comes from. Value comes from the self. It is assigned by the self upon other things. Therefore, sanctity also shares an aspect of supernaturality. The supernatural and the natural are one and the same.
One must separate the mythological from the spiritual. Spirituality is often associated with supernaturalism. This is fallacious.
The soul is the fundamental uniquity which belongs to an individual. No matter if another shares so many characteristics in common that no other may distinguish between the two individuals, the fact remains that those two individuals recognize the other as a different individual. This is the soul.
"Spirit" carries many more meanings. It can mean the same thing as the word "soul", or it can mean true intent (as in "The spirit of the Law"), or it can mean the general disposition of the individual. This is not supernaturalism in the classical sense.
In a different sense, both of these terms are a part of supernaturalist thinking. Once again, however, one must separate mythology from these core teachings of religious thought. Supernaturalism can easily be defined apart from mythology by considering anything which cannot be understood in a rational, objective manner to be "supernatural". The self (possibly the only thing I consider "supernatural") cannot be known objectively. You cannot define what the self is, only what it is not. You stand in a room. You perceive the things around you. What separates yourself from those things? You cannot know. You can only say that those thing are not yourself. You cannot say what is yourself.
But, you can know the processes which give rise to the self. You say, this is proof that the self is not supernatural. Why? This comes from an error in interpretation of the word "supernatural". It does not imply a hierarchal relationship between the natural and the supernatural. The natural gives rise to the supernatural, and also the reverse. The processes of the bain (perfectly rational, understandable, and most importantly objective processes) give rise to something as mysterious as the self, which can only be experienced. However, in the same token, the self may alter those very processes which give rise to it. No one else can experience the self of another. As I said, this uniquity constitutes the soul. The soul is the separation of one "self" from all other "selves", and so the soul shares the aspect of supernaturality with the self. Spirituality is the general disposition of the self, the "state of the soul". And thus, it also shares the aspect of supernaturality.
But I said that spirituality is not supernatural. This is true. It is not, but at the same time it is. What does this mean? It means that there is no supernatural, only aspects of the natural which we, as individuals, cannot understand rationally. In other words, the difference between the supernatural and the natural is a fundamentally arbitrary semantic distinction.
And what is Sanctity? Something which is sacred has irreducible value. This forces us to define where value comes from. Value comes from the self. It is assigned by the self upon other things. Therefore, sanctity also shares an aspect of supernaturality. The supernatural and the natural are one and the same.
