I want to begin by saying how deeply I resonate with much of what is expressed here. The way language, particularly the word spiritual, becomes a projection screen... yes. The way it accumulates meanings until it confuses rather than clarifies... yes. The way it implies a split between sacred and profane, higher and lower, matter and spirit... yes again.
Like you, I have grown cautious around the word spiritual. I’ve seen how it inflates egos, cloaks avoidance, or becomes a brand. I’ve also seen how it can subtly reinforce the very division we’re trying to dissolve: the idea that this world, this body, this moment... this - is not enough.
But here’s where I diverge.
I don’t reject the word spirit entirely. I recognize that its misuse has done damage, but I also see that, beneath layers of projection, there’s a root meaning that does not require dualism. When I speak of spirit, I speak not of an elsewhere, not of something above or beyond, but of the aliveness that flows through all things without needing to be named.
I experience spirit as the intelligence of life as it is... immanent, not transcendent. It is not something separate from form, but the unfolding of form itself. Not something that lifts us away from pain or confusion, but something that includes it, transforms it, breathes with it. It is not ascent. It is depth within immediacy... that shimmering you speak of before the mind rushes to divide or define.
Yes, the word has been hijacked. But perhaps the work is not only to discard it, but to rescue it from the scaffolding of hierarchy and return it to the mystery of thisness.
I agree: I don’t need the ladder. I don’t believe in escape. I don’t seek a throne in some enlightened elsewhere. But I do witness, over and over, that something moves in us when we are still and open and undefended. A clarity that does not seek to rise, but to dissolve... all pretense, all control, all story. Sometimes this is called spiritual. Sometimes it is simply called love.
I honor your decision to refrain from the word. And I respect your clarity about how language shapes perception. But in my own work, where I guide people through the dissolution of the frozen identity into what I call the flow identity, I sometimes use the word spirit not to invoke something above but to reveal the interconnection within.
In Synergistic Intelligence, we see the human survival instinct creating a false split between life and death, self and other, matter and meaning. When that instinct quiets, when protection falls away, what’s revealed is a shimmering wholeness... not a revelation from beyond, but from within the very fabric of this moment. You might not call that spiritual. I might not need to either. But I’ve found some do, and if that opens the door to deeper presence, then I’ll walk through it carefully, with awareness.
What matters is not the word. What matters is presence without pretense. That’s the real invitation.
No. If I mean aliveness, I say aliveness. As I tried to make clear, "spirit" is used so promiscuously as a catchall that it is useless for conveying anything I want to say.
of course. my question was directed at Stan Cross. he had a lot of words in response to your post and i was trying to distill down what he was getting at.
I experience spirit not as a thing, but as aliveness itself... open, undefinable, and rooted in mystery. It’s not something I try to grasp or define. In fact, it’s in not knowing that I feel most aligned with it.
I’ve surrendered the impulse to control life, to impose meaning, or to protect some fixed identity. And with that surrender... the constant need to survive, psychologically, emotionally, even existentially... has softened.
What remains is presence. A steady flow. A kind of quiet attunement to life as it unfolds... moment by moment, breath by breath. So yes, if the word spirit means anything to me, it’s this: the living mystery that becomes visible when nothing stands in its way.
I read it twice. The first time i felt love in my heart. The second time i read it out loud and it touched me deeply and i got tears in my eyes. Beautiful ♡ Thank you, Robert.
You have a remarkable capacity with language to make clear what needs to be clear and obvious. The words spirit and spiritual HAVE been overused and abused and have meant too much to too many. The examples you gave are so helpful, the many different ways you teased this apart. Thanks as always Robert. Again, I want to share something from my current book just finished reading, the very final two sentences “Other animals do not need a purpose in life. A contradiction to itself, the human animal cannot do without one. Can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?” This is what I hear in your writing, that you simply see what's going on, as all natural creatures do, when the over lay of story is seen through.
The word "spirit" has become like the word "God" (interestingly, auto correct capitilised the word god here) in that if any two given people say it they probably mean very different things.
I know you've taken the time on multiple occasions to explain this before. I have also called you "the most spiritual person on social media". I've never meant it as a harm or disrespect. Couple things that came to me since this subject was last broached.
First is I've realized that words can't, beliefs may and actions can. Again as with words this can be taken several ways.
Second one is interesting...It came as a consideration.
Have you found eternity in this moment? You know what we say about words so this consideration has different meanings for different folks...For myself I feel as if I've stumbled onto a current definition of spirituality (some things go beyond labels)...
I never saw that most spiritual person on social media remark, John, but I would not have taken it badly. I would have understood that you meant "depth," as I said in the essay. I avoid the word, just like I avoid the word "God," because I like precision and neither of those words carries any.
I want to begin by saying how deeply I resonate with much of what is expressed here. The way language, particularly the word spiritual, becomes a projection screen... yes. The way it accumulates meanings until it confuses rather than clarifies... yes. The way it implies a split between sacred and profane, higher and lower, matter and spirit... yes again.
Like you, I have grown cautious around the word spiritual. I’ve seen how it inflates egos, cloaks avoidance, or becomes a brand. I’ve also seen how it can subtly reinforce the very division we’re trying to dissolve: the idea that this world, this body, this moment... this - is not enough.
But here’s where I diverge.
I don’t reject the word spirit entirely. I recognize that its misuse has done damage, but I also see that, beneath layers of projection, there’s a root meaning that does not require dualism. When I speak of spirit, I speak not of an elsewhere, not of something above or beyond, but of the aliveness that flows through all things without needing to be named.
I experience spirit as the intelligence of life as it is... immanent, not transcendent. It is not something separate from form, but the unfolding of form itself. Not something that lifts us away from pain or confusion, but something that includes it, transforms it, breathes with it. It is not ascent. It is depth within immediacy... that shimmering you speak of before the mind rushes to divide or define.
Yes, the word has been hijacked. But perhaps the work is not only to discard it, but to rescue it from the scaffolding of hierarchy and return it to the mystery of thisness.
I agree: I don’t need the ladder. I don’t believe in escape. I don’t seek a throne in some enlightened elsewhere. But I do witness, over and over, that something moves in us when we are still and open and undefended. A clarity that does not seek to rise, but to dissolve... all pretense, all control, all story. Sometimes this is called spiritual. Sometimes it is simply called love.
I honor your decision to refrain from the word. And I respect your clarity about how language shapes perception. But in my own work, where I guide people through the dissolution of the frozen identity into what I call the flow identity, I sometimes use the word spirit not to invoke something above but to reveal the interconnection within.
In Synergistic Intelligence, we see the human survival instinct creating a false split between life and death, self and other, matter and meaning. When that instinct quiets, when protection falls away, what’s revealed is a shimmering wholeness... not a revelation from beyond, but from within the very fabric of this moment. You might not call that spiritual. I might not need to either. But I’ve found some do, and if that opens the door to deeper presence, then I’ll walk through it carefully, with awareness.
What matters is not the word. What matters is presence without pretense. That’s the real invitation.
Open mind
what i’m getting is you see the word spirit to be synonymous with aliveness. is that right?
No. If I mean aliveness, I say aliveness. As I tried to make clear, "spirit" is used so promiscuously as a catchall that it is useless for conveying anything I want to say.
of course. my question was directed at Stan Cross. he had a lot of words in response to your post and i was trying to distill down what he was getting at.
I'm with you there.
Hi Patricia.... in a way, yes.
I experience spirit not as a thing, but as aliveness itself... open, undefinable, and rooted in mystery. It’s not something I try to grasp or define. In fact, it’s in not knowing that I feel most aligned with it.
I’ve surrendered the impulse to control life, to impose meaning, or to protect some fixed identity. And with that surrender... the constant need to survive, psychologically, emotionally, even existentially... has softened.
What remains is presence. A steady flow. A kind of quiet attunement to life as it unfolds... moment by moment, breath by breath. So yes, if the word spirit means anything to me, it’s this: the living mystery that becomes visible when nothing stands in its way.
i understand. thank you for your reply 🙏🏻
I read it twice. The first time i felt love in my heart. The second time i read it out loud and it touched me deeply and i got tears in my eyes. Beautiful ♡ Thank you, Robert.
You have a remarkable capacity with language to make clear what needs to be clear and obvious. The words spirit and spiritual HAVE been overused and abused and have meant too much to too many. The examples you gave are so helpful, the many different ways you teased this apart. Thanks as always Robert. Again, I want to share something from my current book just finished reading, the very final two sentences “Other animals do not need a purpose in life. A contradiction to itself, the human animal cannot do without one. Can we not think of the aim of life as being simply to see?” This is what I hear in your writing, that you simply see what's going on, as all natural creatures do, when the over lay of story is seen through.
The word "spirit" has become like the word "God" (interestingly, auto correct capitilised the word god here) in that if any two given people say it they probably mean very different things.
Thanks for your clarity as usual Robert.
I might go see how Claude defines spirit. :-)
Magnífico, Robert. Estoy totalmente de acuerdo con lo que dices aqui
“ And I’m not somewhere else. I’m here.”
Thank you, dear Robert
💗
Robert, thank you. Ring the Bell!!!
Well put. Bien dicho.
"Just a quiet noticing"...just so, yes.
This is where we are rooted.
This is the real that we experience.
We will then try to describe, to explain, to assimilate "this", and the word "spirit" may resonate for us as a way of doing that.
Or not.🈚️
thank you, Robert. this is immensely clarifying for me 🙏🏻💙
You always keep me challenged, thinking deeply and questioning the status quo. Thank you Robert.
Arthritis.
Huh?
.
I love this. I often struggle with describing the ineffable and you’ve done it beautifully. Thank you.🙏🏼
Once you see unity it can't be unseen.
I know you've taken the time on multiple occasions to explain this before. I have also called you "the most spiritual person on social media". I've never meant it as a harm or disrespect. Couple things that came to me since this subject was last broached.
First is I've realized that words can't, beliefs may and actions can. Again as with words this can be taken several ways.
Second one is interesting...It came as a consideration.
Have you found eternity in this moment? You know what we say about words so this consideration has different meanings for different folks...For myself I feel as if I've stumbled onto a current definition of spirituality (some things go beyond labels)...
Be well...
I never saw that most spiritual person on social media remark, John, but I would not have taken it badly. I would have understood that you meant "depth," as I said in the essay. I avoid the word, just like I avoid the word "God," because I like precision and neither of those words carries any.