Topic #1: Spiritual Materialism

[Ben]

The truth of discontentment is the first noble truth. Briefly stated
it suggests that we all on some level recognize a fundamental level of
discontentment. Then we begin to search for meaning or content outside
of ourselves. Eventually we realize that this is futile, and shift the
focus of our search within. This internal exploration for meaning or
content is called spirituality.
Spiritual Materialism is a term coined by Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche,
which is meant to point out the risk we all run that our internal
search for content maybe hijacked or distorted by the very ideas &
behaviors that gave rise to our discontentment in the first place.
This phenomena manifest itself on three levels, which correspond to
body, speech, and mind:
1) We begin to act out spirituality- Change dress, eating habits, etc.
It is not that there is anything wrong with becoming a vegetarian for
example, but what is in question here is whether or not this change in
behavior is supported by insight or is simply a behavior which has
been observed and is now being mimicked, i.e. it is artificial.
2) We begin to speak spiritually- We begin to repeat slogans or
phrases that once again maybe valid but the question is are they
supported by our own experience or even understaning, or are we merely
parroting?
3) We begin to think of ourselves as spiritual- (This is dangerous as
it is very subtle)- Here the second stage (external dialog) has
developed into an internal conversation with ourselves, where instead
of trying to convince others we are all the time reaffirming to
ourselves that we are incredibly insightful or highly realized
"spiritual seekers." The question is whether or not our experience and
behavior confirms this idea.

Do you have or have you had any experience with spiritual materialism?
Have you noticed yourself participating in spiritual materialism on
any or all of these levels?
What are your thoughts on this idea?
Feel free to elaborate on the subject...

[Ben]

To read more on the topic of "SPIRITUAL MATERIALISM" click the link
below:
http://refugegroupbr.blogspot.com/2008/03/talk-one-feb-28th-art-of-self-deception.html

[Robin]

I hope this ends up in the right spot!
I experienced a good example of this today, shopping with my daughter.
She found a bracelet with the image of Buddha on it. "It's so you,
mom!" she said. It didn't feel like me- I felt no identification with
it. I don't have any Buddha statutes in my home -not that I think
that's wrong it's just that I admire Buddha and I am grateful to the
actual man for his wisdom, but I'm also grateful to Carl Rogers and I
don't have his picture on the wall. hmmm- I do however have a picture
of Spock in my office and a little action figure in my dining room.
Does that mean I have nonspiritual materialism?- hmph- big news there!
When I get into the third level, I get a little flashing light on my
dashboard in the form of 'suffering'. I begin to worry over something
and that tells me that I still have some work to do. Or maybe some
learning to let go of. Anyway, if I am really paying attention to my
emotions, I can get a hint about my spiritual state and stay in
reality.

Thanks for setting this up Ben!

[rhea morales]

funny subject. I've seen this in many of my friends and I wonder if
it is just a part of living in a materialistic society such as
America. When I moved here from Australia, I was amazed at how many
TVs some people had and how many cars they had. Everyone I knew in
Australia only had one TV and one car. Of course, Australia has
picked up a lot of America's habits and a lot has changed since then
but the U.S. is definitely a leader in materialistic thinking and
people often own more than they need.

I've always been attracted to the concepts and ideas of philosophy and
spirituality but I never wanted to fall into the trap of identifying
myself as a spiritual person. I don't do much identifying. Other
people try to identify me but that is their problem. I've never been
materialistic so my clothing always reflected whatever my job asked me
to wear. Pretty boring but I look good no matter what I wear. ;D

If anything, my spiritual materialism manifests itself in the kind of
books I own, what I write and what kind of artwork I make. It comes
from me. Perhaps if I could afford it, I would buy some beautiful
spiritual artifacts to bring aesthetic pleasure to my home but it
isn't a priority. People I have met who are spiritual seekers do seek
terribly, trying to find that magic pill that will make them truly and
spiritually happy. They will try anything and buy anything to feel
fulfilled and when they realize that no item they can buy will bring
them fulfillment, they will start making some real progress.

[Ben]

Thank Everyone for there post. This is good discussion... Also
everyone read the post about Spock and Buddha nature it just
accidentally got put in the wrong spot. Anyway, I have a couple of
questions:
1) Is it possible that characters like Yoda and Spock are more genuine
and sincere representations of spirituality in the West than say the
image of the Buddha?
2) Is it possible that non-identification could be a form of spiritual
materialism?

[Michael Scott]

I think that what both Yoda and Spock represent could be seen as
genuine and sincere, especially if their behavior and respective
messages encourage someone to pursue their own spirituality. And, in
that regard, I think they can be more genuine to some people - someone
who has grown up watching Spock's adventures aboard the Enterprise may
use that as a frame of reference when approaching a spiritual
practice.

One of Yoda's phrases that I still love is "Try not. Do or do not.
There is no try". Though Yoda is fictitious, someone had to come up
with that. The same goes for Spock.

Now on the flip side, I think both Yoda and Spock, though
representative of an ideal, may be written off as just that. Since
they are fictional characters, someone may say, "well, they're not
real so there's no point in trying to become like that (spiritual)".
Buddha and Christ existed and proved that a spiritual awakening was
and is possible, so they would provide a realistic, grounded basis for
someone venturing out into a spiritual practice.

[Greg VanHoosier-Carey]

I think it is possible for non-identification to be a form of
spiritual materialism. In that case, non-identification becomes part
of the person's spiritual identity. The person sees his or her
supposed
non-identification as a marker of their spiritual progress, thus
identifying with non-identification. This shows how subtle spiritual
materialism can be. Basically anything associated with "I," "me," or
"mine" becomes a part of one's ego identity.

On Sep 8, 1:56 am, Ben <shreveportsan...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Greg VanHoosier-Carey]

I think Spock is a cultural representation of some ideal type, but I
am not sure that it is a representation of spirituality. I think that
Spock represents the extreme, positivist faith in logic and science
that Americans, at least in the Sixties, thought would lead us into
the future. Both logic and science are great things, but they too can
be taken to the extreme.

Let's face it, while Spock as some admirable qualities, he also has
issues. He suppresses his emotions and he denies that he feels
emotions when in fact he often does. It's true that this allows him to
avoid attachment; however, it suggests an aversion to emotion and to
his human side.

Of course Spock is not the only Star Trek character with issues and
not the only one that reveals issues in American thinking of the time.
What was the deal with the prime directive in the original series? Why
did they continually see a mandate not to interfere with other
cultures as an invitation to constantly interfere with other cultures?

On Sep 8, 1:56 am, Ben <shreveportsan...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Greg VanHoosier-Carey]

I think Yoda is a cultural representation of popular notions of
spirituality. I don't think they are more genuine or sincere than
images of the Buddha, but they are more familiar to Americans. I think
the notion of The Force that pervades the Star Wars saga is Lucas's
attempt to address spirituality in a way that did not favor any
particular spiritual tradition. The character of Yoda does draw on
the buddhist monastic tradition as it is popularly seen in the west.
His similarity to the teacher in Kung Fu is no accident.

[Ben]

I really like what Greg said about spiritual materialism and non-
identification. I think it really hits the nail right on the head; The
ego is a institution that can really take anything, even the absence
of something such as identification, and turn it into a cloak. This is
also a dynamic that seems to play out when people overly identify with
atheism. They identify themselves on the basis of something they do
not believe in.
However I find Spock to be an interesting representation of what it
means to be involved in the spiritual journey, having to come to terms
with our other half, so to speak. I would love to see a prequel that
showed Yoda's path to maturity, but perhaps this is turning into an
online "Comicon" festival!

On Sep 8, 3:12 pm, Greg VanHoosier-Carey <gvanh...@centenary.edu>
wrote:

[Ben]

Another question: In the post above by Rhea Morales she said, "I've

seen this in many of my friends and I wonder if
it is just a part of living in a materialistic society such as

America." A statement like this seems to blame the society for
materialism in general, and spiritual materialism in particular. Is
this even possible since society is nothing but a collection of
individuals? Wouldn't the materialistic mind set have to predate its
inception in society? When we speak of materialism we are really just
speaking of effects, appearances... We are talking about a simple
dynamic really: I think spirituality means "this," and now I will try
to express that idea. I just wrote a short blog about this:
http://refugegroupbr.blogspot.com/2010/09/being-perfection.html
Wouldn't the tendency to produce outward appearances or create
desirable effects which match what in this case would be our
definition of spirituality just be a human problem?

[Roy Hofmeister]

This topic makes me think of a story I read.

The story was about a buddhist monk that climbed a tree and wouldn't
come down.
A Brahman came to see him and said " Monk why do you stay in the tree
and not come down"
The monk replied "Do you know the four noble truths and the eight fold
path."
"Of course, even a child knows them' said the Brahman."
Then the monk asked " Yes but do you understand them?'
This is the danger of spiritual materialism it is easy to know these
things but sometimes hard to understand.

On Sep 4, 1:20 pm, Ben <shreveportsan...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Robin]

ok so we reply to the last person that posted? or do we reply to the
first initial prompt post?

I agree with Greg and Ben about the non-identification being another
form of identification at times! Arrrgh! Very cunning. Right now I am
working on seeing reality as clearly as I can. Amazing how hard that
is. Maybe it would be better if I didn't work so hard and just let
reality be whatever it's going to be.
I am working on a model of attitude formation for work. How do we form
attitudes about others? Well, I'm thinking that it is based on our
perception of reality. So I have been trying to not fool myself and
accept reality as it comes in through my senses. This may seem off
topic but it really isn't - I think spiritual materialism may be a
form of fooling myself- and because I am human, I can never really
stop fooling myself- Well, I haven't read the book or Ben's blog about
it yet so I don't know.

What's a comicon?

[Ben]

Roy:
I like that story. There is a huge difference between knowledge and as
you say understanding...
Robin:
Yes you just reply to the last post... Comicon is a huge comic book/
sci-fi conference. Yes you are right about fooling yourself- that is
the essence of spiritual materialism, convincing yourself that
materialistic motives are actually spiritual. Interestingly enough
from one point of view your statement- human beings can never stop
fooling themselves- is absolutely true, and of course there is the
possibility of transcending delusion. But I am curious as to what you
meant when you said since I am human I can never stop fooling myself,
and why others might agree or disagree with this statement?

[Ben]

Oh hit reply and not reply author unless you want a private
conversation with the author...
I would really like to dive deeper into this question (for more
context see robins previous post):

I am curious as to what you meant when you said since I am human I can
never stop fooling myself, and why others might agree or disagree with
this statement?

[Ben]

(*The following is a post by Robin that has been re-directed to this
section by the moderator*)
_________________________________________________________________________
I am responding to the post by email and I will check to see if it
gets
in the right spot. To respond to Ben's question, "I am curious as to

what you meant when you said since I am human I can never stop fooling
myself, and why others might agree or disagree with this statement?"

Since my mind is sensing reality through my visual perceptual
processes,
I can never see outward reality as it really is. I think there is a
name
for that particular philosophical stance, isn't there? We condense
visual information 1:100 ratio for processing in the visual cortex. On
top of that there are tricks our brain plays on us in order to make
sense of the visual information. If the lines of an object correspond
to
my mental image of a chair, it gets labeled as a chair. All of this
is
automatic and 'unconscious'. So, I am fairly certain that my formed
mind
can never really see reality as it is. Now, that is not to say that my
unformed, original mind cannot see reality. I have never experienced
unformed mind to be quite truthful, not that I am aware of anyway, so
I
don't know.
I rather doubt that my formed mind or ego can see my inner reality
very
accurately either. There are too many cognitive errors or assumptions
that my brain makes for me to counteract. I do believe that my
original
mind can see my inner reality- that is what I think of as an
enlightened
state.

[rhea morales]

It is always hard to bring society into things as I might appear to be
stereotyping but growing up in another country to be moved here and
beset with the unbelievably amount of stuff and commercialism was a
shock for me as an outsider and I thought it would bring perspective.
Many people are so conditioned by their society that they do not
realize how affected they are by it. So even though this country is
ruled by the idea of individualization, the economy uses stuff and
ownership as a ploy to help people establish and embellish their
individualism. Communist countries where people have less individual
freedoms has far less stuff. But social commentary aside, let us go a
bit deeper into this:

Truly, spirituality should not be affected by our ethics as a
community. The yogi's in India were set apart from the rest of
society. Their society believed in the caste system but the yogis
believed that you can better yourself without having to wait to be
reincarnated into a new caste.

The Shoa Lin monks strengthened their temple and used their skill to
defend neighboring villages from corrupt dynasties and rulers. They
went directly against their society in order to uphold what they felt
was true spiritual ethics, something that comes from a cause deeper
than the corruption of the government. This is true individualism,
one that sets the very spiritual apart from the ones who just go along
with what society says.

You are right about it being a human problem (if it is a problem at
all). one of the things that sets us apart from the animals is our
opposable thumb. This gives us the ability to handle tools. This
makes us very materialistic. So materials are at the core of our
nature. Even though the first commandment says not to worship idols
or graven images, people spend money on crucifixes and rosaries.
Statues of Buddha, Jesus, Mary and other Gods and Goddess abound. Is
this a bad thing? I don't think so. People look to images and
symbols to help them focus their minds on meditation and prayer.
Whatever works, I always say.

Still, we can't be so focused on the symbols and the images that we
forget that they are just that, symbols and images. We need to
remember that they are only tools to help us find true clarity and
compassion. So, if they help, great. I dont' really see that as a
problem. If we get so obsessed with using stuff to fulfill our
purpose we need to be careful not to waste our resources as materials
do require resources and we have to make sure that the stuff doesn't
disillusion us. Only then does this little thing become a problem.

[Ben]

(*The following is a post by Daniel Fisher that has been re-directed

to this
section by the moderator*)
_________________________________________________________________________

All this discussion makes me uncomfortable! Who is to say what is in
another's heart. One person's spiritual materialism may be another's
heartfelt view. The third poison, remember. is delusion.

Daniel

Quoting rhea morales <rhea.mora...@gmail.com>:

> ...
>
> read more »

[Ben]

The third poison, as Daniel says, is delusion... I do not think the
nature of this discussion however is about other people... I have
tried to provide some rough outlines of what is meant by spiritual
materialism, and maybe even a few examples, but even this is limited
because not everyone will relate to the examples I am capable of
providing, since most of them come from my own experience! Or perhaps
in talking about society we project upon others characteristics we
recognize within ourselves, but perhaps not... This is also a healthy
discussion in my opinion, though it can easily deteriorate to a
chicken or the egg conversation- did the individual condition society
or society condition the individual? A better question to me is what
is the difference between the individual and society? Are they in fact
one and the same, from a certain point of view?
Remember the first question was do you relate to spiritual
materialism? In what ways have you seen spiritual materialism manifest
in your life? "You can find a 1000 faults in someone else, but to find
one in yourself is infinitely more valuable." In a earlier post by
Robin we also talked about how delusion is the essence of spiritual
materialism. So this discussion is ultimately concerned with self
delusion, which was the title of the post I offered a link in the 2nd
discussion board entry. Ultimately I feel that to the exact extent we
spend our time talking about others, either individually or
collectively, we squander a wonderful opportunity to look at ourselves
and learn a great deal about who we are not, which is the surest way
of being discovered by what we actually are! THIS WEEKEND I WILL BE
POSTING A NEW DISCUSSION TOPIC SO PLEASE ENTER ANY FINAL REMARKS YOU
MAY HAVE ON THIS SUBJECT SOON....

> ...
>
> read more »

[rhea morales]

I made Daniel uncomfortable? Sorry. Although, have you noticed that
most Zen masters teach precisely by making other people
uncomfortable. We can't learn unless we get out of our comfort zone.
I've told myself not to be anal about the definition of words but
instead, to take in other people's interpretations of them and learn
from it. I think a lot of time is wasted debating on the true meaning
of words. So one person's interpretation might be different from
another's but it is enlightening to gain perspective this way if we
don 't take it too personally. Taking things personally is the fault
of the ego and this can lead to delusion

I think Spock is a much better character than Yoda. Yoda is the way
most people see an enlightened master, old talks funny and has
unbelievable martial arts skill. he is an ideal. Spock is more human
(though he is half vulcan). We can relate to his journey and his
vulnerability.

> ...
>
> read more »

[Candice]

I think that trying to think that there is a Reality (capital R) out
there, outside of one's one mind is dangerous. It promotes dualistic
thinking, a separation of Truth and the mind. It makes one think that
there is something to search for exterior to the mind that is either
correct or incorrect. Recognizing that we create our worlds and
recognizing that things are empty are the only way we can get over the
idea of seeing "reality as it is", because each person's reality is
their reality. I can see a chair as a chair, but a dog doesn't see the
chair as I do. A person who may never have seen a chair would not
perceive it or label it as I do.

The human mind uses the majority of its perception of the outside
world through visual stimuli, right? But does visual stimuli appear
the same for every individual? And believing that there is the
possibility of achieving an enlightened mind is key. Believing that
you possess that capacity within you, constantly striving for it, will
help dispel the mistaken idea that there is a reality outside of you.

I think that letting go of the idea of there being a correct/accurate/
right outer or inner reality is a good idea, because how can you
directly perceive a reality that is not your own? (I am not talking
about empathetically relating to another or imagining another's
situation, but directly experiencing the exact same thing as another
person would experience it. I only think that would be possible for an
omniscient being!)

> > > > What's a comicon?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -