Yearning and Longing

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 08 Sep 2005, 09:11

I think "jedi" has more to do with "the force", which is the idea of a "fifth dimension" or "all living beings are connected".

I personally believe in telepathy, which is similar to the idea of a 5th dimension. There was an article about it in New Scientist recently.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 08 Sep 2005, 12:05

isenhand wrote:Hmm ? interesting discussion but it still seams to me that spirituality = emotions.

A longing for home and an awe at the Universe and other such irrationalities are all the sort of things I feel too (does that mean we are all human?) but I would describe them in emotional terms and never uses words like ?spirituality? nor ?sacred?.

I have a friend, we both have the same interest in visiting ancient sites such as stone circles, stone age burial mounds and rune stones, that sort of thing. She describes her experiences in spiritual terms and I in emotional terms. I think we talk about the same things but I think we just use different words.

You can call it 'emotion' if you like - it's allowed! We are clearly referring to the same experience, so it matters little what we call it.

But your point does raise an interesting question for me - since there are experiences that I wouldn't hesitate to refer to as 'spiritual' as opposed to purely 'emotional', what then is the criteria by which I judge the difference?

When I think of my response to a stone circle or a barrow like west kennet in Avebury, I'd have to say that while my response is in the realm of feelings, the cause is an intellectual awareness of the amount of effort required by neolithic people to construct such a monument and a consequent deep respect and sense of awe.

Perhaps I consider such things as spiritual because they diverge from a purely utilitarian approach to life. Or perhaps something is spiritual when it makes us experience a connectedness or unity with life outside our own bodies.

In any case I would suggest that spiritual experience is a subset of emotional experience, and though I can't easily define the boundaries, I feel confident that they are there.

What do you think? Do you experience this 'oneness' but simply see no reason to call it spirituality and therefore don't distinguish it from other emotional experience? I might refer to such an experience as perceiving the sacred in something... but I recognise that this is a term loaded with unpleasant religious connotation for some people.

I confess I don't really understand why you would want to remove the word spirituality by equating it with emotion. Intellectually and experientially for me the one is a subset of the other, and you've already said that you're having spiritual experiences of awe and wonder which you can differentiate from non-spiritual ones. So why not use the word that expresses the difference? Is it just because for you 'spiritual' has taken on implications of belief and god and religion? The word has none of that quality for me.

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 08 Sep 2005, 12:18

<<You can call it 'emotion' if you like - it's allowed!>>

Thanks

<<What do you think? Do you experience this 'oneness' but simply see no reason to call it spirituality and therefore don't distinguish it from other emotional experience?>>

Yes, I think it has to do with my understanding of the word ?spiritual? as it has associations with non-corporeal entities (?sprit? being the same as ?ghost?) which I don?t believe in so I would not call any feelings I have ?spiritual?. It makes it sounds like to me that people who refer to a spiritual experience think they have had contact with a non-corporeal entity. Where as to me it?s an emotional response bounded by the universe we live in.

<< So why not use the word that expresses the difference? Is it just because for you 'spiritual' has taken on implications of belief and god and religion? The word has none of that quality for me.>>

Or derived from it? That I think is part of it, I like to be sure of what I?m talking about with out recourse to things that I believe don?t exist. But I do think this is a important part of being human.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 08 Sep 2005, 13:55

isenhand wrote:Yes, I think it has to do with my understanding of the word ?spiritual? as it has associations with non-corporeal entities (?sprit? being the same as ?ghost?) which I don?t believe in so I would not call any feelings I have ?spiritual?. It makes it sounds like to me that people who refer to a spiritual experience think they have had contact with a non-corporeal entity. Where as to me it?s an emotional response bounded by the universe we live in.

Well I'm totally with you on that one. I only use 'spiritual' to talk about that particular flavour of emotional response which is to do with a sense of 'connectedness'. It doesnt imply anything 'supernatural', which to me is an oxymoron.

Fine then, we know what we're talking about, we just need a wordlabel that doesn't leave a nasty taste in your mouth

isenhand · Post by **isenhand** » 08 Sep 2005, 13:58

well, I'm happy

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 09 Sep 2005, 11:54

Some would answer this by learning to be comfortable in the circumstances in which they find themselves... this is not me, at least not for now.

So yeah, it's all quite irrational. I don't believe in any universal 'meaning' and 'purpose', but I do know that my sense of fulfillment depends on pursuing a purpose that has meaning for me.

Personally, I feel that we all have an essential and unique part to play in the singular drama unfolding for the human race at the moment. Once we had to hunt and gather for food - then we discovered farming and civilisation. The Industrial Revolution made us hunter-gatherers once more, and the fruits and berries became fossil fuel resources. In order to achieve a new level of spiritual (if you will) and physical evolution as a species, we must now become farmers of energy, tapping into the infinitely renewable resources which Nature, our parent, has bequeathed to us.

It's a Grand Master Plan in which we are all indispensible - it can't happen without us. We must return to nature - either as a successful technological species, or as dust. The choice is ours!

And this is why technophiles who are also in touch with nature and their own cosmic destiny, such as yourself Tess, are the leading lights in the new (r)evolution . . . don't underestimate your own importance in the grand scheme of things! And don't think that you have to renounce your technological skills in favour of compost and wellies!

Some of the best people are deeply troubled by a sense that they do not entirely belong in this world, that they belong in another time and another way of living. Maybe that time is coming soon, and we can feel the tides of destiny sweeping us closer. Maybe the star children of planet Earth have begun to stir, and to wake up.

Maybe the age of Aquarius really does bring a new global enlightenment . . .

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 09 Sep 2005, 12:00

Andy Hunt wrote:And don't think that you have to renounce your technological skills in favour of compost and wellies!

It's not rejection of my technological skills for the sake of rejection, but because I cannot see how these skills can be used in a sustainable society. I'd be like a wood carver on Easter Island!

Andy Hunt · Post by **Andy Hunt** » 09 Sep 2005, 12:24

Well, personally I think that the Internet should be maintained at all costs. It is a free, global communications system which has given humanity a global consciousness.

Developments in renewable energy technology need to be communicated across the planet through the internet, as well as the living collective wisdom and experience in survival techniques that the coming decades will bring.

I think that if there is a single technology which needs to be maintained, the Internet is it. If that means that there is someone in a community who has responsibility for running servers and hooking them up to PV cells and batteries, or a wind turbine, or whatever, then that person is just as important to the community as someone who plants cabbages (although there's no reason why we can't all chip in in one way or another).

Maybe Powerswitch should be thinking about running their servers with renewable energy! What do we think, Webmaster?

What do you think, Tess? Is it important that humanity remains a technological species, united by a global communications system? If not, then what progress have we really made as a species? What lessons have we learned?

It's certainly a challenge, but I think that we are up to it. It won't be easy . . . but then, no-one said it would be . . .

Maybe your destiny lies in setting up and maintaining the village communications hub for some self-supporting community somewhere, whilst growing your crops and chopping your firewood!

Just my own feelings on the matter, mind you . . . only you yourself know deep down what your natural destiny is, what your place in the new (r)evolution is to be!

With love, and peace,

beev · Post by **beev** » 09 Sep 2005, 12:27

Two very inspiring posts, Mr Hunt. Thankyou!

fishertrop · Post by **fishertrop** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:11

Personally I always thought I was a bit too practical, technical, pragmatic for things as discussed in this thread, but I found that when I saw things like the following I couldn't help feeling that it meant something....

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:17

Andy Hunt wrote:What do you think, Tess? Is it important that humanity remains a technological species, united by a global communications system? If not, then what progress have we really made as a species? What lessons have we learned?

I actually don't mind either way. I'm not any kind of technopagan.

I do not like the way you have identified 'progress' with technology. This leaves me cold. I do not accept that we need technology to make 'progress' as a species. Progress for me is the ability to live with mercy and compassion, and without war or criminality. I would gladly give up all technology for that.

It will be interesting to examine the roots of my abhorrence at the idea of being the 'tech guru' in a sustainable community, but that's the way I feel. This is not my calling. Let those who want it, do it. My vocation is elsewhere. It is merely the misfortune of the moment that my vocation and skillsets are completely mismatched and making the leap is likely to be a decade's work.

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:18

fishertrop wrote:Personally I always thought I was a bit too practical, technical, pragmatic for things as discussed in this thread, but I found that when I saw things like the following I couldn't help feeling that it meant something....

Good god... where on earth is that?!

Bandidoz · Post by **Bandidoz** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:18

Andy Hunt wrote:I think that the Internet should be maintained at all costs.

I would expect that it could be possible, but it may eventually be a 14.4k-modem type of experience. Less energy = less bandwidth.

beev · Post by **beev** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:22

The development of agriculture was progress; a form of technology, if you like. Without it we would still be hunter-gatherers. A brutal way of life, but perhaps preferable to the insanity we have now.

Though personally, I'm a fan of insanity

RevdTess · Post by **RevdTess** » 09 Sep 2005, 13:24

beev wrote:The development of agriculture was progress; a form of technology, if you like. Without it we would still be hunter-gatherers. A brutal way of life, but perhaps preferable to the insanity we have now.

Though personally, I'm a fan of insanity

Agriculture leads to wealth. Wealth leads to war. War leads to the dark side....

I think I'm joking. I hope. I'm not hoping for the end of agriculture... am I? Forest Gardens for all!