[Opinion] Certainty in spiritual world

[Morell]

When it comes to conviction in physical world, we can be convinced about something and it can be true, but it also happens that we are convinced of something that is not true. In physical realm however we can use comparing with other people, exact sciences and other tools to find out if we are right or not.

However beyond physical world this certainty is far less sure thing. True, we can still compare the notes with other people, but there it ends. As I see it, once we get to spiritual reality, the potential of crystal clear certainty of physical disappears and we have to rely more and more on our own internal integrity.

What do you think? Am I right?

 

[deci belle]

Spiritual in my book is nonpsychological, which is not relative to the person, so such knowledge is immediate, non-discursive.

Integral; the realm of inconceivability: such constitutes complete reality. Seeing just this, what doubt would one entertain?

 

[Robert Ramsay]

Pretty much. In non-physical reality, a feeling of certainty does not necessarily correspond to a thing being true for anyone else other than you. As long as it doesn't contradict physical reality, you are, as you say, on your own.

 

[ashlesha]

I agree when it comes to super-sense perceptions and individual visions, but I think there is an underlying consistency to certain forms within the astral/spiritual world. Spirits can serve as the best example of this, and since planetary spirits usually have the most familiarity & consistency to them in terms of basic influence, we can use them as an even more specific example. If you and another person were to invoke a spirit of Saturn, your sense perceptions may vary widely, but the overall influence of Saturn as an influence would be consistent. Depression, introspection, introversion, etc would all follow. If we wanted more confirmation, we would need to take someone who wasn't familiar with the archetypical themes, and someone who was, and then have them both invoke Saturn and see if they witness the same effect.

This only works when we're trying to root the spiritual influence into our material world. If we're using solely spiritual cause & effect, we run into another issue of bias. We can claim that a very spiritually attained person would be able to witness the effects of spiritual engagement and translate it for us, and this loops back into your point on personal integrity and the individual clarity of that person

 

[Keldan]

I agree. The issue is that even if you and I evoke the same spirit, our experiences can be completely different. Their influence can also be very different from person to person, something a lot of people don’t notice. So even when we’re working with the exact same spirit, our notes can look like night and day. That doesn’t mean either of us is wrong. Still, people may doubt either account because the differences are so dramatic.

I’ve also realized there are more theorists than actual practitioners with lived experience. So it’s important to use discernment with spiritual experiences people share, to separate lived experience from theories. Once I filter that, I can take note of what’s intriguing.

 

[BMicic]

Many books have been written by people who have no actual experience. Then they repeat the same mistake, add something of their own, and create an even bigger misinformation.

 

[Morell]

Many books have been written by people who have no actual experience. Then they repeat the same mistake, add something of their own, and create an even bigger misinformation.

That is ture. Unfortunate, but true, because where there is interest, there is money, so seekers are falling for it and buy a lot of books that do not really deserve it.

 

[FireBorn]

Cool topic!

We live in a shared physical reality. Step off a cliff and gravity applies regardless of belief, culture, psyche, or framework. That part isn't negotiable. But why we stepped off the cliff, what we believe about it, and what story we tell ourselves during the fall, that's where it gets messy. Spirituality is no different.

Here's what I find interesting. We know human memory is deeply flawed. Reconstructed, filtered through emotions, shaped by every experience that came before it. Yet we make life altering decisions based on memories without a second thought. We build entire identities on "what happened to us" knowing full well the memory isn't clean. Nobody calls that too intangible or too strange to act on.

But report a spiritual experience and suddenly shit changes. Now it needs to be verifiable, comparable, defensible in a safe way. The same person who'll organize their entire life around a childhood memory they can't verify, or recall with much accuracy compared to the actual event(s), will dismiss a spiritual encounter as too uncertain to take seriously. Like wtf?

That double standard is worth sitting with, especially since it can be uncomfortable as hell.

I'm not arguing we should treat every subtle spiritual encounter as gospel. But the inconsistencies in how we apply skepticism, are generous with memory, and brutal with spiritual experience, says more about our conditioning than it does about the validity of either.

It's a good mirror of how damn messy we actually are. I will be here all night