One day in March, I was telling my girlfriend (at the time) about the previous night's episode of Politically Incorrect, where Deepak Chopra was a guest. I was telling her that, although in general I consider Chopra to be a git (New Age gets on my nerves so much!), he had a point when he said that all religions are political, and that they had little, if anything, to do with spirituality.
"Doesn't that go for your religion, too?" she asked.
"Yes," I said, not one to contradict myself (at least in the same breath).
"Well," she said, "what does spirituality mean to you, anyway?"
It was one of those moments where, later and in retrospect, I should have realised that we simply weren't in the same neighborhood. But it got me thinking. What is spirituality, anyway?
There are many ways the word "spirituality" is used; some of them I like, some of them I don't. For some people (and from what I understand, most of the most popular writers, including Dr. Chopra), "spirituality" means "stuff having to do with that which is beyond the physical;" whether that means God, Brahma, Buddha-nature, the psychical, or what-have-you.
There is a subtle connotation to the word "spiritual" that means that something which is spiritual is better than something that isn't. So if "spiritual" means "beyond the physical," the implied opinion (all-to-common today as at almost every time in history in every nation) is that the body and its functions and appetites are bad, like a prison that we must escape. The "truth" about humanity is the "spiritual," which is supposed to be psychical or metaphysical. This view, which is called dualism, pits "higher" needs against "lower" ones. It encourages sublimation, self-denial, and endless quests for nirvana, the kingdom of God, or whatever, so long as it is not "limited" or "gross" like the body is supposed to be; no self-respecting dualist would settle for anything less! "Spirituality," in this view, is the opposite of "carnality," which is the dualist's curse-word.
All of this, I think, is a shame. I'll have none of it. This kind of dualism is far too prevalent in our society, and despite the best intentions of everyone who writes a book about spirituality, it is only serving to harm. Man uses dualism to understand the world; to use dualism to understand ourselves is misguided. Souls do not exist to turn upon themselves; a soul is something about the body, and bodies do not exist to escape. I'm a holist. Artistic and ethical needs, to me, are no more nor less important than food or shelter. All can be fulfilled without being self-contradictory or "succumbing" to the "profane" desires of the body. In fact, these "lower" desires — even things like human companionship — define our humanity as much as those so-called "higher" ones. "Spirituality" is not different from carnality; it is contiguous with it, an extension of it.
Because of all this dualist baggage, I tend to avoid the word "spirituality." It's too loaded. But I was blabbing my mouth off, and I used it first, so now I have to define it; so here goes.
This is what spirituality is not:
1: Discovering God. It's a non-issue for me.
2: Achieving Nirvana. "Nirvana" means "extinction." Life is not suffering; it's the great indulgence. It's the only life I'll ever have, so I'm not going to waste it!
3: Achieving enlightenment about the true nature of the universe. Face it. The universe isn't that profound. It's almost kinda boring.
4: Capitalizing stuff because it makes you spooge, like Truth or Goodness or Harmony or Love or Holy or Sacred Ground or Smelly Socks or whatever. Introducing capitalization is vanity.
As you can probably imagine, this list excludes pretty much everything ever written in the genre of pop-spirituality. Okay, so what is spirituality? Real spirituality?
Spirituality is the process of finding meaning for one's own life. In all fairness, most pop-spirituality and pop-psychology is meant to help with this work, but in the end it is just full of quick-fix recipes that go nowhere. The real work is personal, and cannot be learned from manuals. They may be full of meditations and mantras and blah blah blah, but these don't mean a whiff of Jiff unless you're already receptive to your own instincts. Instinct is the source of the meaning of life. And everyone's instinct is different; you'll not learn it from the testimony of others, and you'll not learn it if you're so wrapped up in esoteric mumbo-jumbo that you've divorced yourself from yourself. Motivational speakers like Deepak Chopra tell you what works for them, in their language; trying to buy it from them is like trying to buy their favourite flavour of ice cream. It's just not for sale.
Obviously, you can be religious and spiritual at the same time. I'm very religious. And yes, religions are networks of people who
share the same general ethic and aesthetic. But a religion is about dogma and ritual, it is about myth and magic. It is a way to frame the question, but it is never the answer. It is a movement of like-minded folk, but you can't look to them to get the meaning of life. You're the only one you can look to. A religion is there to protect you from people who try to prevent you from looking — or, it is there to prevent you while making you think it's there to help. Every religion is either a profit-machine or a political conspiracy, my own included.
And of course, with instinct you can see my link back to the carnal. To be spiritual is to be instinctive, visceral or more accurate, completely spontaneous. Do only what you love, and love everything that you do, whether you're a doctor, a cousellor, a journalist, a scientist, an artist, a philosopher, a lawyer, a police officer, a plumber, a pizza delivery boy, a jazz musician, or a shoe salesman. Any of these people can be "spiritual," as I understand the term, if and only if they find meaning in what they do, if they have found their niche, if they live their fetish.
All of this is the same thing, anyway.