Carl-Richard

Vague? Maybe in some places. Simple? Sure. But we still see those kinds of violations happening. History tells us that. We're simple creatures, and people who adopt teacher positions are certainly very often not saints. The fact that the codes are "obvious" and that the violations are taboo creates very nefarious dynamics for when the violations do happen: the social stigma and the reputation risk around speaking up, real victims not speaking up or not being believed, etc.

Point out which of the 24 codes you find problematic.

They're experts on religion, and it makes sense to me. You didn't derive your ideas on spirituality and religion completely by yourself either. Hyper-individualism has a limit ? The scientific literature on secularization points to concepts like "religious complexity", which describes among other things a shift away from traditional and collective types of religion towards new individualistic types ("New Age"). So at least in countries with increasing secularization, this is a trend. You can keep telling people that, but they'll still log on Actualized.org every day.

The problem with old religion is mainly the mismatch with the current culture. Other than that, the rigidity could be attributed to the traditionalist and authoritarian worldview. If we replace it with liberal values, it'll probably be less stagnant, kinda like our democratic institutions.

You're talking about the mystical experience of pure oneness. Spirituality has beliefs and practices just like religion. I subscribe to the understanding of Kenneth Pargament and Brian Zinnbauer. They both agree on their definition of spirituality: "an individual or collective search for the sacred". They disagree on the definition of religion. Pargament defines it as "a search for significance in ways related to the sacred", while Zinnbauer defines it as "a search for the sacred within a traditional context". In any case, spirituality is treated as a central sub-component of religion. My and others' wish to revitalize religion is just to replace the collective/traditional components with something that is more relevant to current society, and attempts at establishing universalized ethics that is grounded in some of society's values is a step in this direction. The growing popularity of a hyper-individualistic spirituality is a byproduct of our culture evolving past the rigidity of old institutions, and it's only a transitory period. The end result is necessary and inevitable. The mental and social isolation that modern spiritual people are subjected to is hugely detrimental, and that is why we flock to this forum. The insistance that individualism will keep the teachings pure or unridden from dogma is short-sighted, because it's really only a question about scale. Dogma is inevitable when people have an innate need to seek guidance and grounding from outside sources. There are only two choices — culture or cults, roughly speaking.

Says the libertarian ?

Why?

I'm 100% describing religion. We just need an updated version, not the 2000 year old stale versions.

This is exactly why spirituality and cults go hand in hand. Once you separate spirituality from all notions of social responsibility, you need to reconstruct the needs that society fulfills outside of society. Instead of doing that, see the needs for spirituality and the needs for safety and integrate them.

Damaging the ego does not benefit spiritual growth. Transcending the ego does.

"To awaken, just must guzzle buckets of my cum. What — are you attached to the idea of right and wrong?"

Spirituality is not special. It doesn't need special treatment.

Yes it is.

In fact, what is society? Safety. You can decide to not participate, but don't pretend it's not dangerous.

Is truth being outlawed if somebody tells me I probably shouldn't fuck my students? Stop being so dramatic lol. It's ethics, not law.

Tell me, in what other facet of life is seeking guidance looked upon with suspicion? Especially when it comes to something dangerous like spirituality, where you're deconstructing your sense of reality. It's quite ridiculous.

The lack of up to date institutions is causing a lot of unnecessary suffering. The idea that spirituality has to be this hyper-individualistic "every man for himself" is a New Age fantasy and reminds me of libertarian brain rot.

There is no me. It's manipulation to state otherwise.

Yep. It's the most serious students who get taken advantage of. They're willing to sacrifice their wordly integrity for that spiritual juice. "It's just my body, it's just my money, it's just my family, it's just my friends".

@roopepa You're posting cringe right now.

"Direct experience" as in perception (sights, sounds, feelings) I think requires a biological organism, and perception lays the basis for conceptualizations. "Direct experience" as in formless consciousness does not require anything, but it doesn't have anything to do with insights.

There are people who talk and people who listen. Do you agree?

I think an insight is a perceptual and conceptual thing, which I think requires a biological organism. The knowing of oneness is not an insight. When it "occurs" from the perspective of a human, it's a divertion of attention away from perceptual and conceptual experiences and towards that which is pre-human.

I think these are human things.

Aren't you known to be critical of the conduct of some spiritual teachers? Are you not aware of the history of the conduct of some spiritual teachers? "Hehe just be a real spiritual teacher, then you won't need a code". That would be a naive understanding about the reality of spiritual teaching.