What constitudes a spiritual person for you?

S.A.M. said:
What is the essential difference between a person who is breathing and one who is not? Physiologically?
Click to expand...
The essential difference? Not being a biologist or a doctor, I would say having the attribute of animation vs not being animated. The rest is a million biochemical details. From the individuals point of view, It would be a sense of self awareness vs oblivion.

Simple.
 
Wisdom_Seeker said:
For me, it is a person in compassionate communion with nature and all sentient beings...

"Believing" is a hypocritical quality, not of a spiritual person.

Just want to hear opinions...
Click to expand...

Spiritual is someone who lays as much, if not more, emphasis on the abstract as on the corporeal part of his being.
 
(Q) said:
And that is supposed to mean what? :shrug:
Click to expand...

If I kept you in a golden cage with silken sheets and clinically provided you with food and other neccessities regularly, you'd still not be happy. "You" meaning in a general human sense, of course. Some people recognise the impact of the abstract and focus on developing and exploring it. Other people don't and pursue material pleasures hoping to fill the void. That to me is the difference between a spiritual and nonspiritual person.

You can immediately tell when a person is truly spiritual but thats all mumbo jumbo so I won't go there.
 
S.A.M. said:
If I kept you in a golden cage with silken sheets and clinically provided you with food and other neccessities regularly, you'd still not be happy. "You" meaning in a general human sense, of course. Some people recognise the impact of the abstract and focus on developing and exploring it. Other people don't and pursue material pleasures hoping to fill the void. That to me is the difference between a spiritual and nonspiritual person.

You can immediately tell when a person is truly spiritual but thats all mumbo jumbo so I won't go there.
Click to expand...

Again, I ask, what the heck does that mean, exactly? :shrug:
 
S.A.M. said:
If I kept you in a golden cage with silken sheets and clinically provided you with food and other neccessities regularly, you'd still not be happy. "You" meaning in a general human sense, of course. Some people recognise the impact of the abstract and focus on developing and exploring it. Other people don't and pursue material pleasures hoping to fill the void. That to me is the difference between a spiritual and nonspiritual person.

You can immediately tell when a person is truly spiritual but thats all mumbo jumbo so I won't go there.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I completely agree. Unfortunately "spirituality" has so many religious/superstitious connotations that I avoid the term. What term should I use?
 
(Q) said:
Again, I ask, what the heck does that mean, exactly? :shrug:
Click to expand...
I think it means that those of us who ponder the underlayment of the universe (for me that's physics, astronomy, biology, etc.) and try to come to a better understanding of the nature of things, and maybe even incorporate some of that understanding into our behaviors toward ourselves and others are "spiritual". Or not?
 
superluminal said:
Interesting. I completely agree. Unfortunately "spirituality" has so many religious/superstitious connotations that I avoid the term. What term should I use?
Click to expand...

[woo woo alert]In India, spirituality is tuning into yourself and others as apart from the concrete physical and the subtle mental ties of existence, to move further away from the notions of space, time and causality. The concept of Shunya or Nothingness (literally, Zero). From this we develop Philosophy as the theoretical expression and Religion as the practical expression of this experience. So you have a metaphysical God or the Absolute Reality, the essence of all that Is; and a personal God that is the source of your morals and principles. In India, spirituality is an aspect of the philosophical and religious nature of being.[/woo woo alert]

I'm afraid I have no idea what the non-religious counterpart would be. The atheistic schools in Indian philosophy decry the need for any spiritual development.
 
Last edited:
superluminal said:
I think it means that those of us who ponder the underlayment of the universe (for me that's physics, astronomy, biology, etc.) and try to come to a better understanding of the nature of things, and maybe even incorporate some of that understanding into our behaviors toward ourselves and others are "spiritual". Or not?
Click to expand...

That would explain it, somewhat. But, I get the feeling that's not what sam was getting at.
 
S.A.M. said:
In India, spirituality is tuning into yourself and others as apart from the concrete physical and the subtle mental ties of existence, to move further away from the notions of space, time and causality. The concept of Shunya or Nothingness (literally, Zero). From this we develop Philosophy as the theoretical expression and Religion as the practical expression of this experience. So you have a metaphysical God or the Absolute Reality, the essence of all that Is; and a personal God that is the source of your morals and principles. In India, spirituality is an aspect of the philosophical and religious nature of being.

I'm afraid I have no idea what the non-religious counterpart would be.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I have no idea either.
 
S.A.M. said:
In India, spirituality is tuning into yourself and others as apart from the concrete physical and the subtle mental ties of existence, to move further away from the notions of space, time and causality.
Click to expand...

In other words, to fantasize?

The concept of Shunya or Nothingness. From this we develop Philosophy as the theoretical expression and Religion as the practical expression of this experience.
Click to expand...

In other words, fantasies?

So you have a metaphysical God or the Absolute Reality, the essence of all that Is; and a personal God that is the source of your morals and principles. In India, spirituality is an aspect of the philosophical and religious nature of being.
Click to expand...

The difference between reality and fantasy?

I'm afraid I have no idea what the non-religious counterpart would be.
Click to expand...

Fantasies.
 
superluminal said:
Interesting. I have no idea either.
Click to expand...

The disadvantages of going too far with this kind of spiritual investment, was that the person lost complete interest in material/corporeal existence and became fascinated with the concept of delving into himself as an objective aspect of nature only; something similar to what Gautama did when he realised his princely existence was not for him. In India such people are called yogis, because they use the extensive techniques of yoga to control all aspects of their physical, from breathing at undetectable rates, slowing down pulse rates to reach a sort of metabolic inertness to other less marvelous things like going without food or drink for prolonged periods. This is called sadhna or self realisation, (hence the term sadhu, also used for these ascetics), and these people were able to cut down their energy requirements to very low levels, so they could remain in a state of meditation for very prolonged periods. It would be fascinating to study one of them, I think, and assess the effects of such rigorous mental exercise on their faculties.
 
S.A.M. said:
The disadvantages of going too far with this kind of spiritual investment, was that the person lost complete interest in material/corporeal existence and became fascinated with the concept of delving into himself as an objective aspect of nature only; something similar to what Gautama did when he realised his princely existence was not for him. In India such people are called yogis, because they use the extensive techniques of yoga to control all aspects of their physical, from breathing at undetectable rates, slowing down pulse rates to reach a sort of metabolic inertness to other less marvelous things like going without food or drink for prolonged periods. This is called sadhna or self realisation, (hence the term sadhu, also used for these ascetics), and these people were able to cut down their energy requirements to very low levels, so they could remain in a state of meditation for very prolonged periods. It would be fascinating to study one of them, I think, and assess the effects of such rigorous mental exercise on their faculties.
Click to expand...
Without researching it right now, I do remember reading about buddhist (I think) monks who go out into the freezing mountains for some period of time, one that would certainly kill you or me, and appear to not even notice the cold. What humans can do with their bodies under extreme rigor is amazing.
 
Yeah the mind body connection is a tremendous unknown asset.

I recently came across info on the GAIT study (glucosamine and chondroitin sulfates for osteoarthritis), where they measured the placebo effect was upto 60%. Thats amazing! And it's interesting to consider the role that placebos play in maintaining our health. We are, quite naturally, what we think we are.
 
S.A.M. said:
Yeah the mind body connection is a tremendous unknown asset.

I recently came across info on the GAIT study (glucosamine and chondroitin sulfates for osteoarthritis), where they measured the placebo effect was upto 60%. Thats amazing! And it's interesting to consider the role that placebos play in maintaining our health. We are, quite naturally, what we think we are.
Click to expand...

So then I really am the

!!! UNDISPUTED OVERLORD OF THE KNOWN UNIVERSE !!!

cool. :cool:
 
Sarkus said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, LG - but these are qualities of what you consider "saintly" persons.
What was asked for were your views of what constitutes SPIRITUAL people.

Unless you are saying that "spiritual" = "saintly"?
If so - please indicate where one is defined as the other.
Click to expand...
its a translation of sanskrit

māḿ bhajeta sa tu sattamaḥ
the important word being sat - tamah, which basically breaks down to "the best amongst persons associated with the foundations of spirituality"
And can you also please not writing your comments as though they are fact.
If they are YOUR opinions, please state them as that.
Click to expand...
it is a fact
what I submitted was what a spiritual person constitutes for me

(of course you are welcome to refute that - but it would only be your opinion)

what a spiritual person means for me aside, do you have any specific issues with what was offered in the list?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top