What is spirituality

Spirituality is, as concerns the improvement of the fate of others, the confusion between the "acts of dreaming" (compassion, good intentions) and the real changes, leading to the promotion of the former as a substitute for the latter.
Spirituality is the stupidity or intellectual laziness raised into dogma. In other words, it is the inability or refusal, denial, of any life and development of the mind worthy of this name.

Spirituality drives man back to an animal-like behaviour, by letting him lose his specifically human characters: it encourages people to live in their dreams confused with reality, i.e. to unstructure their thoughts; to live on the basis of emotions rather than reason, to scorn the contributions of science and technology, to tackle problems from a purely individual angle of each one for his own troubles rather than a organizational and collective angle, and thus accept to be led by the flow of so-called natural events in resignation as livestock, rather than to change them ("changing your desires rather than the world order", "changing your view of things", "changing man's heart to change society"), and to present this selfishly poetical individual approach as the ultimate solution to any problem. This practice leads to unfairly devalue those who, whatever one might say, would concretely be victims of the world order and would dare to complain about it, as well as those who would dare to recognize the structural defects of society and try to resolve them, as if they were guilty of inventing the very sufferings and injustices they dare reporting.


Or: possibly I can admit that in average, spirituality would not actually be worsening human animality, but only expressing it, with the main effect of uniformizing it, reducing its standard deviation. (Sorry, it's a little too hard for me to see the foolish ways in which humans usually "think" as "normal"). Also, there are of course also fortunately here and there among spiritualities, some chapters of good lessons such as love of nature in Buddhism, or some individuals labeled of a usually spiritual category that stand apart from all these through... but these are nowhere the main part of a spirituality.

Generally, spirituality attracts the intellectually lazy people, or anyway those unable to carry out thorough discussions, that may only feel comfortable in their preformated ideas, their naivety and their intellectual lethargy.

A main expression of spirituality is the lack of any serious deep research for ways to truly serve the interests of others, insofar as, to bear effective fruit, this research would require the investment in a sort of extensive study that its followers can not bear. But, as long as they still have an ounce of thought, they might still feel uncomfortable at the idea of missing this way their responsibilities. That is why they choose to dedicate the little mental energy that they sometimes have, to persuade each other that this mental lethargy, this irresponsible silliness that they practice, namely this spirituality, is a knowledge beyond all knowledge, a grace and commandment of God, the epitome of goodness, love and morality. They also persuade each other that this very claim is a very high spiritual truth, either that it is self-evident, or that it was revealed by sacred texts, so it needs no more justification. Thus, neither themselves nor this doctrine can not be suspected nor liable for any misjudgment or misfortune that may result from their adherence to it.
Indeed, spirituality is a doctrine that leads its members to self-persuade that spirituality is not a doctrine and that those who join it are the only ones in the world to be free from any doctrine and to not be self-persuading.

Spiritual people self-persuade this way that they hold the key to universal happiness; their belief in the universal effectiveness of their methods of happiness is actually based on the much greater effectiveness of the procedures by which they manage to persuade themselves that those to whom their methods of happiness do not work, or who had the intelligence to immediately see that it could not work, bear the responsibility for not having enough persistently or stupidly tried. Anyway, this is not the problem of the spiritual people if their spiritual happiness methods do not work on others, but it is the problem of those on whom it does not. And, spirituality teaches that everyone is free and responsible for himself and the failures of his own life.
Thus they are persuaded that all the misfortunes of the world, insofar as they depend on the actions of man, are mainly due to the fact that men are not spiritual enough. This applies especially at the individual level: if someone is suffering and dares to complain, it is necessarily his responsibility because he is not spiritual enough. But also sometimes at the collective level: if the world goes wrong, it is because the Masters of the World are not spiritual enough, or because there are not enough spiritual people in the population.
And anyway you should not worry of misfortune since it is willed by God for our edification. And by definition it is clear that who is spiritual is necessarily happy, so that who is not happy is not spiritual. Especially, don't bother to check whether this claim is true or false, spirituality suffices to ensure it. Besides, the misfortune of others is ultimately a good thing, since it lets you exercise your own virtue in urging those unhappy to raise their own level of spirituality. And if someone dares to question the relevance of these lessons and not thank you flatly for these insults (accusing him of having a lack of spirituality, although in my opinion it should finally be seen rather as a compliment), this shows how non-spiritual he is, and thus, how urgently he needs these lessons...

So I had initiated a conversation in some Very Spiritual online forum in French (no more online now) to see if in front of the exposition of subtle and paradoxical real issues closely affecting the reality of human condition, Very Spiritual people were able to express something else than the absolute pride of their immeasurable silliness, their blind dogmatism and their flat electroencephalogram. As I suspected, the result was negative.

The empire of spirituality over the world

Among spiritualities more or less characterised as above, are for example Christianity, Buddhism (I indeed read and heard some excerpts from its teachings, and it sufficed to see that this was actually borrowing ideological errors that I denounce), generally religious movements (for example, I visited the Hare Krishna ...); Marxism, socialism, World Social Forum and other utopias (although their defects are somehow differently structured), The spirit of Local Trade Systems and other "Time Money" who reject the principle of a real interest rate without caring to understand the reasons for its necessity, and post-modernism and other currents of philosophy.

But there are plenty of other spiritual people, even among those who do not follow any sacred text, any philosophy or any organized or defined religious movement, including among atheists. In fact, spiritual people are an overwhelming majority in every sense of the expression.

Divisions of spirituality

To maintain their explanation of the woes of the world by the lack of spirituality there, spiritual people can always manage to deny their dominance, through their divisions into many labels or trends by which they have great fun excommunicating each other: each form of spirituality rejects every other form of spirituality and explains out its failures by accusing it of being a mere theory, while itself would be the pure expression of the naked reality. But in fact it's all the contrary: the failures of all spiritualities come from the fact they are not even worthy of the great qualification of being called a « theory ». Indeed, the complexity of reality forms a big unavoidable gap between the direct observation of facts on the one hand, their meanings and explanation on the other hand. So, anyone who claims that in general (systematically rather than just sometimes in particular circumstances) facts speak by themselves, are only playing ventriloquist with them, while a thorough theoretical interpretation of facts is necessary to extract the core of their meanings. So, remember this: the facts love betraying those who love them.

Spirituality as a form of capitalism

Spiritual Capitalism, is a global conspiracy organized by the unconsciousness of Masters of Spirituality unbeknownst to their full will, offering their own spiritually dominant class of the rich of love and serenity (in short: rich in spirituality), to further enrich themselves of love and serenity by stealing them, by an act of the purest love and serenity (by the virtue of the proud unconsciousness of their actions) from those who are poor of them, through practical lessons in spirituality that the rich provide to the poor. Namely, by the way in which the rich in serenity, come for crushing under the weight of their testimony of serenity, those who are poor of it, stating that it is just up to the poor of serenity to take lesson from the rich in serenity for becoming themselves serein, thereby making them feel stupid or in any way guilty with themselves for not having already done that, and/or for still not succeeding to do that yet (no matter how the true obstacles, whatever they may be, are out of the control of the people concerned, at least as concerns the attempts that are made through these "lessons of spirituality").

"Authentic spirituality" as an oxymoron


Then, why refuse to shorten the term "false spirituality" into just "spirituality" while this term turned out to be a tautology, as no such a thing as a "true spirituality" could ever exist yet ? In the name of what should we be bound to reserve the qualification of "true meaning" of a word like "spirituality" to something that does not exist?

But then, if spirituality is necessarily a sham, what can be found in life to be authentic?
Back