What is spirituality?

I highly enjoy talking about Spirituality and I have talked about it, either explicitly or implicitly, with dozens and dozens of people. Possibly hundreds of them.

One thing that I observed through these conversations is that no two persons have the same definition of what spirituality is. And I believe that is beautiful and enriching.

Whenever trying to define a word or term, most of us will resort to the dictionary and its Wikipedia page. Normally I appreciate this approach and, as part of my homework, I had to do that as well.

I was very glad to find out that the pluralism of definitions is also acknowledged there as well.

This flexibility and inclusiveness of the term might give off the impression that “anything goes” and, to some extent, that is true. Spirituality is one of the most private aspects of our life and our definition truly only matters to us. At least I believe this is how it should be… though some people will definitely try and force their definition onto others.

Etymology as a starting point

A “new agey” representation of the Bible: “Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature”

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, “spirituality” originally meant “concerning the spirit, immaterial” and “spirit” as word has its roots in “life” and “the animating or vital principle” – also later connected to breathing and breath.

A “new agey” representation of the Bible: “Then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature”

As simple as this definition can be, it already implies at least two aspects:

• A pair of opposites: material and immaterial
• A relationship between the opposites: subject and object

Within this definition, spirit animates matter, “spirit” is the subject – grammatically the one performing an action, and “matter” is the object.

This definition begs the question: who am I in this dichotomy? Am I spirit or am I matter? Am I the subject or the object? What if I am both?

Most of us start a conscious journey once we start to question our reality, our priorities and the practical consequences of this question in our day to day life.. And that’s one of the possible definitions of Spirituality: the topics, mindset, tools, techniques, knowledge and wisdom concerning who we are.

Why so controversial?

My personal definition of Spirituality includes the one previously mentioned but it also includes many other angles and perspectives. As much as I consider myself to be “open minded”, I am still amused by how controversial such a simple definition can be.

Controversy #1: A materialistic world view

There is a significant amount of people that considers that the world is purely composed of matter. They have a materialistic world view. To be fair, technology has come a long way and now this concept actually includes matter and energy. Energy in used in this context in the sense that most of us know from physics – and not in an esoteric sense.

I’m fairly sure I am not telling you anything new here, we all know people that have an exclusively materialistic perception of the world that is clearly defined by the boundaries of what we can label as traditional sciences or physical sciences.

For those with this perspective, the duality presented earlier doesn’t exist: there’s no “animating principle” or “spirit”. It’s all just matter and unconscious energy.

I would like to highlight the consequences of this conclusion and frame it from a different angle: the latest achievements in physical sciences have shown to us that “matter” is just the way we perceive a certain vibration of energy. And we have strong indications that all this matter and all this energy comes from the same originating event and same originating source which pop culture calls “the big bang”.

In short: both those that have an exclusively materialistic perspective and those that have a spiritual perspective can easily agree that the whole world is made of energy. The difference is that those with a spiritual view:

• Consider that there’s more to the world than the current technology and physics knowledge can prove, infer, or deduct
• Consider that there’s an aspect beyond energy that we can label, for the lack of a better word, consciousness

Personally I find the first difference rather amusing considering that 3000 years ago, humanity didn’t know about the existence of electricity. Yet, electricity has always existed and manifested right in front of our eyes during a thunderstorm. The whole history of physical science is, from a certain angle, new observations, new hypothesis, and discoveries that expand our previous understanding of reality.

Is it really too much to ask, to consider that we still have so much more to discover and understand?

The second difference, the question about counsciousness is much more elaborate and complex. And because it requires much more time and context to be discussed, I will set it aside for a later moment. For now, just consider that believing or not that energy is permeated with consciousness is one of the key differences between a materialistic or a spiritual approach to the world.

Controversy #2: Religions and sectarism

Another common usage of the word “spirit” is connected to Christianity and the third person of the Trinity called “The Holy Spirit”. As someone born in America (yes – Brazil is in the American continent) I was profusely exposed to the influence of the Roman Catholic Church – and I know a significant amount of people that restricts the definition of “spirit” to “the Holy Spirit”.

I would like to take this chance to remind myself that the world is large. There are countless religious, innumerable philosophies, and a host of traditions with different angles and different perspectives. From Candomblé in Brazil to Krishnaism in India , from the Kardecist Spiritism in the U.S. to Esoteric Buddhism in Tibet – it’s a lot of options.

The interplay between spirit and matter is, for instance, richly expressed through the Yin/Yang simbology that comes from Chinese philosophy.

The word “spirit” is not “owned” by any country or religion. Even though “spirit” comes very likely from Old French or Latin… most sources quote the word being used as a translation from the bible to pneuma (πνεῦμα) in Greek and ruach (רוּחַ) in Hebrew. The point here being: this concept and other similar ones already existed in several other traditions.

If we consider spirituality as previously defined: as the topics, knowledge, and wisdom around who we are – we are fully able to have a discussion around it and develop our spirituality in a way that is completely independent from religion.

For some people, their religion supports their spirituality, and for others… they don’t even belong to any religion at all but still have their own spiritual practices.

Once again, I sincerely believe that “to each their own” –  we should respect each other’s perspectives and experiences. Learning from each other is much healthier and more interesting than forcing our will against someone.

Other definitions of Spirituality

Even when thinking of Spirituality from my own individual angle – I still consider a few other approaches to it:

• Spirituality as a way of integrating my personality – a path that resonates for those interested in Psychology
• Spirituality as guiding principles for using my resources (like time, money, and energy)
• Spirituality as the long journey of learning spread multiple incarnations
• Many others

These definitions are not necessarily conflicting with each other… they are just different sides of the same truth.

Depending on which challenge I am facing or what I want to accomplish in any given moment,
I might look at life from a different angle.

I believe most of us do that in a rather natural and spontaneous way.