We have, at our core, a “feeling” level of awareness. We can own and direct our feelings instead of being owned by them and directed by anyone who manipulates our feelings.
Emotion and feeling are not the same experience. Emotions are patterns of response, learned reactive behaviours that were based on a conclusion about our experience.
To tie it into spirituality, in order to truly live our practice, we must first grasp what lead us to feel we needed a spiritual practice, and come to terms with what is inevitably the case, that our shortcomings and our strengths are inextricably linked. Turn a vice into a virtue. To my experience, this is what is available to the average person by way of transcendence.
To examine the topic in a philosophical sense if you prefer, the rational over the subjective, the concepts of spirit and spirituality are metaphysical in nature. Spirituality is about “why”. Otherwise, understanding comes as biology and science, or perhaps an abstract journalistic observation. Experience is always observation to the modern “thinking” mind, but every evidence points to humanity previously having been driven by an instinctive feeling, an intuitive grasp of relationships, and the world that at the time included little in the way of what we would recognize as analytical thought. There is a huge schizophrenia like schism between these two states.
Do we need a study in love? Love has been studied, and some people firmly believe the findings. They have found their attitudes very bleak and to be highly exclusionary of other factors. An incomplete model is insufficient even by scientific standards. Life operates holographically in my experience. All elements of life contained equally in all of life’s parts, and “spirit” is a synergistic dynamic interplay between all elements of reality.
Their attitudes excluding “other” factors means the model is incomplete? Yes. Any model of human experience that cannot explain human experience as a whole is incomplete. Accepted as an art rather than a science though, it can be an adequate starting point.
Would that bring us back to the nature of spirit? Spirit is the prime mover, the first observer, and to return to the nature of spirit is to return to the deepest parts of ones awareness.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.
Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive
~science,mysticism,spirituality~