This does not deny however, that actions/behaviour taken in saving or losing one's life have much to do with the consequences of those actions/behaviour.
And everything to do with the cause of those actions.
To me it's the other way round. If you know how to act appropriately in this world, that is the same as acting appropriately in the next.
That's rather putting the cart before the horse, isn't it?
'Appropriate action' is determined by the end in view. If your view is purely worldly, then your actions are appropriate to the world ... but that does not mean you enter the spirit world, even if your actions appear to tick all the right boxes.
There is often too much fantasy in the idea of "love."
I know. There's a fantastic amount of fantasy out there about 'spirituality', 'cosmology, 'quantum theory' and 'neuroscience' ... but that does not invalidate the idea.
When I say love, I do not mean the sentimentalism that usually springs to mind.
I think it is much better to find something more practical and mundane. Love sounds too dreamy and fantastic to be true.
That's the sentimental version, then.
The trouble with what people call "spirituality" is that too often it is about theology and philosophy and not about practice.
Well, as a famous theologian observed, 'we need more saints, not more theologians' ... you're right, it's a problem that came about as soon as education was made available to those outside religious institutions ... eventually you'll end up not needing God, because the idea of God is, really, an abstract one and not really 'lived'.
But that's not the trouble with spirituality per se, that's the trouble with people, who read something in a book, and then believe they are equivalent to what they have read ... consumerism again ...
Theology and philosophy makes religion dreamy and fantasy-like.
Well on the one hand you've obviously never argued with a Doctor of Moral Theology, or a Doctor of Dogmatics, or ... then again, on the other hand, you've never experienced what the theologian or philosopher might well experience, which you assume to be 'dreamy' and 'fantasy-like'.
If Christianity was that easy, we'd all be saints, but it ain't, and we ain't saints. The only 'dreamy' and 'fantasy-like' I see is the posturing of modern politics, which is the art of keeping the populace in the dark because the populace do not want to face up to the responsibility and repercussions of rampant consumerism ... so politicians come up with schemes they know will not succeed, and voters will keep rotating them through the mill for as long as they can, to keep reality of their situation at arm's length.
As someone said, 0there is no 'fix', quick or otherwise, for a lifestyle that has exhausted its resources. Change is the only viable solution, and that is change to a lifestyle that uses less ... yet computers are a massive waste of resources on so many levels, so i don't see a change of heart any time soon.
The new model of thinking and being was, of course, enshrined in the great religious traditions long, long ago ... it's man who, in the so-called 'Enlightenment', believed that nature was a wanton women and science was the means by which man would become her master (read Bacon) ... so you will excuse me if I believe, according to the evidence, that secularism, or at best lip-service spirituality, is the cause of our current problems.
In fact, if society as we know it collapses under the strain of environmental exhaustion/ecological deprivation, then it is the spiritual traditions who have the cure. Not the secular structures.
That is what is self-serving because it then serves only as a kind of hormonal stimulation of the brain. You feel good, but you are not doing good. Religion is about doing, not dreaming and having fantasies.
Quite. That's why I draw a distinction between the reality of religion, and the fantasy of a non-religious spirituality.
Detachment and humility require that you be strong, so how then is that not about power?
Not really ... It depends what you want ... and not living in a culture that reduces human worth to a value according to its economic production, and which renders the spirit weak.
The power to resist, the power to ignore, the power to deny, etc. That takes inner strength.
Again, if you want something, then the power to resist other things comes naturally.
The inability to detach and be humble is due to a person's inner weakness. Modern culture tolerates weakness but does not compel us to be strong.
The inability stems first in that man is prey to his sensible apetites, and then second modern culture discreetly enforces and endorses
that.
Western culture depends on weakness, it absolutely depends on creating aspirations that are ultimately empty, and insists that all values are ephemeral, all virtues are negotiable, depending on the novelty of the moment.
Modern culture is so successful and so pervasive, because it appeals to the shallowest aspect of man. The East, for example, find its encroachment inexorable and unstoppable.
What comes back the other way? Yoga is reduced to a keep fit regime, meditation is reduced to a technique to attaining material goals, the Kabbalah to a little piece of red strong round your wrist ... the west desecrates everything it touches, by reducing it to the lowest common denominator, its material trading value.
Remember what Kyle said to Sarah in the movie, "The Terminator?"
The last place I would look for insight or enlightenment on the human condition is Hollywood.
To be spiritual, we must be stronger than we imagine we can be. We must recognise the power within. The weak person says, "I cannot be humble. I must be arrogant! I cannot ignore, I must be obsessed!"
As I thought ...
God bless
Thomas
