The Discipline of Spiritual Self-Improvement

If we’re being totally honest here, the idea of having a "personal theory" when it comes to spirituality is kind of a myth.
Everything we think we're discovering—whether it's about life, God, matter, the spirit, and all that stuff—has already been laid out by someone else ages ago.
So, really, it just boils down to whether we choose to align ourselves with those existing truths or not, which mostly depends on our own perspective and how much we've actually grown spiritually.

I'll say it again for the people in the back: if you want to find success on a spiritual level, you don't need to go out and add anything new to yourself. You just need to let go of the things that are weighing you down.

They were right there—I think I already shared the links to those people who were basically advocating for living like animals. And now, suddenly, these self-proclaimed wise Stoics have figured out they can actually enjoy all the perks of life, provided they follow one little rule: go ahead and indulge, but just don't get attached. That way, if everything gets stripped away, they won't feel a thing. What a convenient loophole.
It’s like that old American curse we wish on our neighbors: "😳May he have it, lose it, get it back, and lose it again.
"

Material enjoyment isn't some kind of roadblock to spiritual growth, if anything, it’s actually quite the opposite

First things first, you really have to get honest with yourself—like, truly strip away all the delusions.
Are we talking about the spiritual side of things here, or are you more focused on the material stuff?
The real question is, are you actually going to put in the work to change, or what?
Because if you aren't, let's be real—you're just lying to yourself and everyone else around you.

silentwolf192 said:Material enjoyment isn't some kind of roadblock to spiritual growth, if anything, it’s actually quite the opposite

Look, enjoying material stuff and finding spiritual fulfillment are two totally different ballgames, and the same goes for progress in those areas. It’s pretty clear from what's written: you just can't serve both God and money at the same time.

silentwolf192 said:Material enjoyment isn't some kind of roadblock to spiritual growth, if anything, it’s actually quite the opposite

Obviously. I always enjoy uploading that massive video where Ayrton Senna encounters God while driving a pack of cars. Set it to full screen for the truly transcendental experience. 👍

Casey Gomez said:Obviously. I always enjoy uploading that massive video where Ayrton Senna encounters God while driving a pack of cars. Set it to full screen for the truly transcendental experience. 👍

But man, imagine if he was piloting a freaking starship... 😂
Seriously though, folks—stop falling for all this nonsense you pick up from god-knows-where.

There are just a few common misconceptions floating around when it comes to spirituality.

First off, people act like there’s some brand-new way to "discover" things, or like there’s some secret roadmap to success out there.
Newsflash: there isn't. Everything worth saying about spirituality was figured out a long, long time ago.

Then there's the idea that you can somehow level up spiritually by chasing material stuff.
If that actually worked, every single millionaire would be a saint, right? But let's be real—money and luxury don't help your soul one bit. In fact, they usually just end up messing a person up...

You know what? Forget all that pleasantry. Let's just grab some drinks and get this party started together—if you'll let me be the one to lead the charge.

Casey Gomez said:You know what? Forget all that pleasantry. Let's just grab some drinks and get this party started together—if you'll let me be the one to lead the charge.

For sure, and then I still have to break down what "spiritual bliss" actually means... I'll probably start a whole new thread on that soon enough.

Poverty alone doesn't corrupt a person; that isn't necessarily true...
It’s not about how much someone possesses, but rather their relationship to those possessions. Enjoying life doesn't automatically mean you are serving it.

People who actually struggle to build something aren't usually lazy or weak-willed.
They end up being better at distinguishing material wealth from spiritual value, which gives them an edge over those who deny one or the other entirely.
There are people raised in total poverty with strong spiritual foundations, yet when they finally encounter the beauty of material things and physical pleasures, their entire value system can shatter and lead to corruption. To me, that isn't proof that matter itself is inherently corrupting. It just shows that you can't truly care for your soul if you dismiss the physical world as worthless. If you can recognize its value for yourself and your own needs, then you can maintain a healthy relationship with it without letting it compromise your values.
Just because certain comforts have become standard doesn't mean a person has lost their way spiritually by enjoying them. Circumstances change, and the goal is to figure out how to value things in a way that protects your identity and integrity.

Asceticism is limited to specific groups and is often impossible for most people to achieve. If it becomes a requirement, it's only for a tiny minority. For everyone else, it serves more as an inspiration or a guiding image rather than a lifestyle. The ideal of the ascetic rejecting worldly goods is an image found after reaching a certain realization, not a promise of enlightenment gained through forced deprivation. This likely ties back to our instincts—the innate drive to overcome what is fleeting and perishable.

What I mean is, giving something up only makes sense once you understand the connection between your desires and how you satisfy them through material means. That's when it stops being about unhealthy "sacrifice."

Spiritual fulfillment is inherently paradoxical. True "enjoyment" stems from a total resignation to the unyielding rigidity of reality, yet resignation itself is an indifferent emotion. It is through this very apathy that one achieves a "transcendent spirit"—a state of stillness amidst the encroaching storm. That is spiritual sublimity in a nutshell. Anyway, I don't care if you've all had your drinks yet or not. For heaven's sake, I’m already heading out on foot to walk all the way down to downtown, so feel free to sit there and ponder your little lives. Perhaps our paths will cross in a moment of profound convergence, driven by the penetrating reflectivity of self-actualization. And so on. 😲

Dana Brooks3 said:Poverty alone doesn't corrupt a person; that isn't necessarily true...
It’s not about how much someone possesses, but rather their relationship to those possessions. Enjoying life doesn't automatically mean you are serving it.

People who actually struggle to build something aren't usually lazy or weak-willed.
They end up being better at distinguishing material wealth from spiritual value, which gives them an edge over those who deny one or the other entirely.
There are people raised in total poverty with strong spiritual foundations, yet when they finally encounter the beauty of material things and physical pleasures, their entire value system can shatter and lead to corruption. To me, that isn't proof that matter itself is inherently corrupting. It just shows that you can't truly care for your soul if you dismiss the physical world as worthless. If you can recognize its value for yourself and your own needs, then you can maintain a healthy relationship with it without letting it compromise your values.
Just because certain comforts have become standard doesn't mean a person has lost their way spiritually by enjoying them. Circumstances change, and the goal is to figure out how to value things in a way that protects your identity and integrity.

Asceticism is limited to specific groups and is often impossible for most people to achieve. If it becomes a requirement, it's only for a tiny minority. For everyone else, it serves more as an inspiration or a guiding image rather than a lifestyle. The ideal of the ascetic rejecting worldly goods is an image found after reaching a certain realization, not a promise of enlightenment gained through forced deprivation. This likely ties back to our instincts—the innate drive to overcome what is fleeting and perishable.

What I mean is, giving something up only makes sense once you understand the connection between your desires and how you satisfy them through material means. That's when it stops being about unhealthy "sacrifice."

You’re just rationalizing. Go ahead, explain how asceticism could possibly be a luxury in a world driven by pure greed and gluttony. 🙂 Asceticism is strictly a state of mind. It’s nothing more than how your brain perceives what is desirable versus undesirable, or the visible versus the invisible. Tell me, can you even detect the infrared spectrum of a rattlesnake? Comfort is simply a mental state.

Casey Gomez said:You’re just rationalizing. Go ahead, explain how asceticism could possibly be a luxury in a world driven by pure greed and gluttony. 🙂 Asceticism is strictly a state of mind. It’s nothing more than how your brain perceives what is desirable versus undesirable, or the visible versus the invisible. Tell me, can you even detect the infrared spectrum of a rattlesnake? Comfort is simply a mental state.

🤔 WTF? 😬
My point is that material things aren't an inherent constraint.
You're trying to solve this conflict through logic and theory—but you can't, because you can't reconcile an ideal with objective reality (which seems to be the root of all your questions and premises).
I am talking about the subjective interpretation and valuation of the idea of asceticism. The context where the ideal exists is different from the context in which most people actually live.
I'm discussing the prerequisites for even starting a conversation about achieving spiritual asceticism—the quenching of desire.
To rationalize here means we can't discuss who is willing to go how far (the start of our topic) until we understand why or how it would even be possible for a regular person to do so...
And I'm not saying asceticism is about material deprivation itself—quite the opposite. So your question about privilege doesn't really make sense to me.

I don't follow what you mean by the bolded part.

Dana Brooks3 said:Poverty alone doesn't corrupt a person; that isn't necessarily true...
It’s not about how much someone possesses, but rather their relationship to those possessions. Enjoying life doesn't automatically mean you are serving it.

People who actually struggle to build something aren't usually lazy or weak-willed.
They end up being better at distinguishing material wealth from spiritual value, which gives them an edge over those who deny one or the other entirely.
There are people raised in total poverty with strong spiritual foundations, yet when they finally encounter the beauty of material things and physical pleasures, their entire value system can shatter and lead to corruption. To me, that isn't proof that matter itself is inherently corrupting. It just shows that you can't truly care for your soul if you dismiss the physical world as worthless. If you can recognize its value for yourself and your own needs, then you can maintain a healthy relationship with it without letting it compromise your values.
Just because certain comforts have become standard doesn't mean a person has lost their way spiritually by enjoying them. Circumstances change, and the goal is to figure out how to value things in a way that protects your identity and integrity.

Asceticism is limited to specific groups and is often impossible for most people to achieve. If it becomes a requirement, it's only for a tiny minority. For everyone else, it serves more as an inspiration or a guiding image rather than a lifestyle. The ideal of the ascetic rejecting worldly goods is an image found after reaching a certain realization, not a promise of enlightenment gained through forced deprivation. This likely ties back to our instincts—the innate drive to overcome what is fleeting and perishable.

What I mean is, giving something up only makes sense once you understand the connection between your desires and how you satisfy them through material means. That's when it stops being about unhealthy "sacrifice."

Sure, it can, but let's be real—it’s not the same thing.
A sin is still a sin, right? But there's a massive difference between doing something because you're desperate and doing it just because you're greedy.

Dana Brooks3 said:🤔 WTF? 😬
My point is that material things aren't an inherent constraint.
You're trying to solve this conflict through logic and theory—but you can't, because you can't reconcile an ideal with objective reality (which seems to be the root of all your questions and premises).
I am talking about the subjective interpretation and valuation of the idea of asceticism. The context where the ideal exists is different from the context in which most people actually live.
I'm discussing the prerequisites for even starting a conversation about achieving spiritual asceticism—the quenching of desire.
To rationalize here means we can't discuss who is willing to go how far (the start of our topic) until we understand why or how it would even be possible for a regular person to do so...
And I'm not saying asceticism is about material deprivation itself—quite the opposite. So your question about privilege doesn't really make sense to me.

I don't follow what you mean by the bolded part.

I misread the situation slightly. My apologies for the tone. 😬
Quincy:

I am stating quite clearly that material constraints are not some inherent limitation that dictates one's destiny.

It’s clear that this is the medium we live in.
Quincy:

You’re attempting to resolve a conflict using nothing but intellect and theory—an exercise in futility, quite frankly. It is impossible because you are fundamentally incapable of reconciling your lofty ideals with objective reality. I suppose that explains the endless stream of questions and premises cluttering up your opening post. I am discussing the subjective interpretation here—specifically, how we value the concept of asceticism. The context in which this ideal exists is fundamentally at odds with the reality in which most people actually live their lives.

The ideal isn't some subjective whim. It is an intrinsic part of our very being. At its core, the ideal functions as an archetypal entity—a psychological constant woven into our nature that manifests in the physical world through images like the "wise man." Religious figures serve as prime examples of this paradigm. Before he renounced material wealth, Buddha was a man of immense fortune; similarly, Christ was confronted in the desert with the temptation of all the world's riches if he would only bow down. Therefore, this ideal—and I am referring to the totality of it, not just the ascetic aspects—is almost always unattainable. It may be reached by a rare few, but it remains a fundamental imperative.

Quincy:

Rationalization, in this particular context, implies that we cannot even begin to discuss who is willing to go how far before we truly grasp why—and indeed, how—such a thing would ever be possible for a human being; which, for most people, is exactly what I took to be the core question in the introduction.

I don't put any stock in the masses. I only believe in the individual. It’s rare enough to find someone who actually asks a question, even rarer to find those who attempt to live, and an even smaller fraction of people who truly exist.
Quincy:

Look, I am not suggesting that asceticism is about material deprivation in the traditional sense—in fact, it is quite the exact opposite—so your question regarding whether I receive some sort of special treatment is entirely nonsensical.

The definition of asceticism remains somewhat murky given its various connotations, so you simply cannot alter the core meaning of the term.
Quincy:

I fail to grasp the point you’re trying to make in the bolded section.

Well, my brain has officially checked out again. 😲

Ryan Wilson2 said:The ascetic imperative... yeah, right... anyone can claim they want that. But just imagine if that imperative were brutally material—if you actually needed a million dollars just to begin your journey toward spiritual enlightenment.

Well, that wouldn't work, would it? Such a religion wouldn't be accessible to everyone.

There’s no safety net there. What's going to keep you warm during a blizzard? Are you allowed to kill to eat? Can you gut a deer to prep the meat, or cold-bloodedly slaughter a rabbit that wandered into your trap? And so on, and so forth.

It’s all very easy to type away from the comfort of a heated room. It's easy when, instead of trekking through the wilderness while starving, you just walk over to a 7-Eleven. When you're thirsty, you turn on a faucet instead of hiking to a spring in the middle of the night. And when nature calls, you have a bathroom rather than a hole in the dirt.

I am genuinely fascinated by these "spiritualists" who preach about returning to nature, yet seem to have absolutely no grasp of everything modern civilization has provided for us.

Take the Aghoris, for instance. They’ve got to drink booze endlessly, smoke weed, eat corpses and waste... hanging out with dead bodies and all that...





(don't watch this one unless you're tough enough)



https://www.google.com/search?q=aghor...w=1920&bih=955

mistygull16 said:Take the Aghoris, for instance. They’ve got to drink booze endlessly, smoke weed, eat corpses and waste... hanging out with dead bodies and all that...

(don't watch this one unless you're tough enough)

https://www.google.com/search?q=aghor...w=1920&bih=955

And does it really have to follow that specific order? 🤔 You’d think they would go for the sex first and then feast. 😲 Though, granted, weed definitely works up an appetite, and when you've got a fresh corpse sitting right next to you... 😲 There is something fundamentally broken about that sequence of events. 🤔

Casey Gomez said:And does it really have to follow that specific order? 🤔 You’d think they would go for the sex first and then feast. 😲 Though, granted, weed definitely works up an appetite, and when you've got a fresh corpse sitting right next to you... 😲 There is something fundamentally broken about that sequence of events. 🤔

Honestly, I haven't a clue if that specific order is even necessary. 🤷 You're probably right though. ☕

Ryan Rogers5 said:Look, enjoying material stuff and finding spiritual fulfillment are two totally different ballgames, and the same goes for progress in those areas. It’s pretty clear from what's written: you just can't serve both God and money at the same time.

But wait a second—doesn't God permeate the entire physical world? I mean, if the spiritual realm is enough on its own, why even bother creating a material universe in the first place?

From what I’ve been gathering from the various threads here, it seems we are essentially weighing the merits of pure hedonism and materialism against the pursuit of spiritual growth.

Now, I feel like many of us tend to get a little muddled when we talk about seeking spiritual development, because before we can even begin, we really ought to pause and ask ourselves: what does "spiritual growth" actually signify to me personally?
In other words, what specific aspect of my spirit am I aiming to cultivate, given that the term "spirituality" doesn't carry any inherent weight on its own, much like how "materialism" doesn't define what one owns.

If I may attempt to clarify this comparison between materialism and spirituality through a bit of a mental exercise—some might argue that their version of materialism is satisfied just having a decent place to sleep, perhaps even a modest apartment in a quiet suburb, while others would insist they won't be content unless they are living in a sprawling mansion in Beverly Hills.
To my mind, both parties are absolutely correct in their own way, simply because their respective material desires have been met.

But moving back to the realm of the soul, what is it that you all are actually trying to develop when you speak of spirituality?
One person might say that a simple, steadfast faith in God, Allah, or Yahweh is sufficient—meaning they just kneel down in a quiet moment and offer a prayer, nothing more complex than that. Meanwhile, another might claim that spirituality involves traversing astral planes, a third might focus on deep meditation to find inner peace, and then a fourth, fifth, or sixth person will go on to list an entirely different set of practices... please, feel free to continue that list yourselves.

I find myself thinking once again that every single one of those perspectives is valid. And why is that?
It is quite simply because nowhere in the heavens is there a celestial manual, written in bold letters or illustrated in vivid detail, dictating which specific path is the one true and correct way for every individual to live. Even if we look to sacred texts, we must remember that those books were penned by humans who claimed to be speaking for God, but does that truth remain static for all eternity, or has something shifted in the grand design since those days?

Has God, Allah, Yahweh, or some other higher power ever reached out to you directly to whisper exactly what you must do, or to define your specific purpose and mission here on Earth?
I suspect that for at least 99.99% of the people hanging out on this forum, the answer is a resounding no.

Then there is hedonism, which I see as a synonym for indulgence or pleasure-seeking.
Here again, we are forced to confront the question: what does hedonism actually mean to you?
Some will point toward physical intimacy, others toward gourmet food, and some might even include spiritual exploration itself.
And once again, I shall say that everyone is right!
Why?
Because there is no universal definition provided for what constitutes hedonism, as the meaning shifts for every single soul here on this forum, and as we experience satiation, our very definition of pleasure can evolve and transform.
For instance, someone might find their ultimate hedonistic joy in physical intimacy today, only to find that tomorrow, their sense of indulgence has shifted toward the tranquility of meditation or the solace of prayer.

Is pursuing pleasure through physical intimacy inherently a bad thing?
I wouldn't go so far as to say it is. I see it primarily as a way to satisfy the needs of our bodies, which, after all, possess a fundamental biological drive to ensure the continuation of the species. If we deliberately deny ourselves those needs, we only end up feeling unfulfilled.

We truly must tend to both the body and the spirit, for it is widely understood that a healthy mind resides within a healthy body.

If we are struggling with physical ailments, it becomes nearly impossible to focus on spiritual growth, because our entire consciousness becomes consumed by the singular goal of healing, only to eventually return to our pursuit of hedonism—whether that be through material comforts or spiritual delights.

Tapatalk 2 using mobile - Apple Watch