jeeprs wrote:I think a valid distinction can be made between spirituality as a search for inner truth which can be validated in experience, as distinct from religion as an allegiance to a formal creed and institutional structure. Sure there is overlap and ambiguity and many shades of grey, but the distinction is still valid.
A distinction can also be made between religion and dharma. Dharma too is religious in some respects, but, like spirituality, places emphasis on validation through personal experience. Where religions tend to be conclusive and exclusive, dharma (and spirituality) tends towards being inclusive and experiential. Again the differences are not clear cut, but I think they are sufficient to enable the distinction to be made.
Huifeng wrote:Hmmm, while many of the posts above about "religion" and "spirituality" are interesting, I am wondering why "versus"?
dharmagoat wrote:Based on the various people I have met over the years, I find that those that are happy to be classed as "religious" have an air of stability and authority, whereas those that are "spiritual" have a tendency toward naïvety and self-centeredness.
Astus wrote:those who think about themselves as spiritual people only want to use whatever they find acceptable in Buddhism but disregard the rest without much worry about it.
jeeprs wrote:That assumes, however, that to be spiritual is to be someone who only wants to use whatever they find acceptable. It might not mean that at all, however. I recall the last words of the Buddha as saying 'be a light unto yourselves'. This doesn't mean 'pleasing yourself' but 'finding your own way'. In any case, this 'light' is what I regard as 'spirit', which can be distinguished from rules, methods and external forms.
Huifeng wrote:Chinese terms such as 修行, 靈修 (靈性修練) etc. all have very similar meanings / connotations to "spirituality".
Users browsing this forum: Kim O'Hara, Yahoo [Bot] and 21 guests