MichaelEmeryArt

                                       "Spirituality"_____________________

excerpt from  psychologytoday

You don't have to be like people who equate spirituality with a religion they decide is false, then abandon. It is possible to look at spirituality another way, as something free of institutional structures and hierarchies, not so much about dogma and beliefs as about attitudes, values and practices, about what motivates you (us) at the deepest level, influencing how you think and behave, helping you find a true and useful place in your community, culture and in the world.


                                                                     

Matter of Fact , it really doesn't need religions, true spirituality, as it , isn't a group endeavor in any form,it is only a                         individual experience, like a dream,it's your's alone -me


   I'd recommend studying - Heraclitus and logos,,,Logos as Nature's Way

                                          - empathy,attention…..both forms of deep contemplation

                                          - yet need some form of deep meditation, mine is drawing, yet many,many types.

           A problem I have with religions is they only stress rules, and don't teach ways to meditation,empathy,etc.

                                                                       thus never has taught real spirituality!

Heraclitus and Logos & the Dynamic Unity of Reality -spaceandmotion.com

                                        LOGOS AND THE UNITY OF OPPOSITES - Heraclitus
                                                   

FRAGMENT 1
(quoted in Sextus Empiricus, Against the Mathematicians )
Men have no comprehension of the Logos, as I've described it, just as much after they hear about it as they did before they heard about it. Even though all things occur according to the Logos, men seem to have no experience whatsoever, even when they experience the words and deeds which I use to explain physis, of how the Logos applies to each thing, and what it is. The rest of mankind are just as unconscious of what they do while awake as they are of what they do while they sleep.

FRAGMENT 50
(quoted in Hippolytus, Refutations )
Listening to the Logos rather than to me, it is wise to agree that all things are in reality one thing and one thing only.

FRAGMENT 10
(quoted in Aristotle, On the World )
Things which are put together [1] are both whole and not whole, brought together and taken apart, in harmony and out of harmony; one thing arises from all things, and all things arise from one thing.

FRAGMENT 88
(quoted in pseudo-Plutarch, Consolation to Apollo )
As a single, unified thing there exists in us both life and death, waking and sleeping, youth and old age, because the former things having changed are now the latter, and when those latter things change, they become the former.

FRAGMENT 51
(quoted in Hippolytus, Refutations )
They do not understand that what differs agrees with itself; it is a back-stretched connection such as the bow or the lyre. [2]

FRAGMENT 54
(quoted in Hippolytus, Refutations )
The unapparent connection is more powerful than the apparent one.

FRAGMENT 67
(quoted in Hippolytus, Refutations )
God is day and night, winter and summer, war and peace, fullness and hunger; he changes the way fire does when mixed with spices and is named according to each spice.

   

"Spirituality"


               Profession of Faith by Simone Weil                                                       


There is a reality outside the world, that is to say, outside space and time, outside man's mental universe, outside any sphere whatsoever that is accessible to human faculties.

Corresponding to this reality, at the centre of the human heart, is the longing for an absolute good, a longing which is always there and is never appeased by any object in this world.

Another terrestrial manifestation of this reality lies in the absurd and insoluble contradictions which are always the terminus of human thought when it moves exclusively in this world.

Just as the reality of this world is the sole foundation of facts, so that other reality is the sole foundation of good.

That reality is the unique source of all the good that can exist in this world: that is to say, all beauty, all truth, all justice, all legitimacy, all order, and all human behaviour that is mindful of obligations. 

Those minds whose attention and love are turned towards that reality are the sole intermediary through which good can descend from there and come among men.

Although it is beyond the reach of any human faculties, man has the power of turning his attention and love towards it.

Nothing can ever justify the assumption that any man, whoever he may be, has been deprived of this power.

It is a power which is only real in this world in so far as it is exercised. The sole condition for exercising it is consent.

This act of consent may be expressed, or it may not be, even tacitly; it may not be clearly conscious, although it has really taken place in the soul. Very often it is verbally expressed although it has not in fact taken place. But whether expressed or not, the one condition suffices: that it shall in fact have taken place.

To anyone who does actually consent to directing his attention and love beyond the world, towards the reality that exists outside the reach of all human faculties, it is given to succeed in doing so. In that case, sooner or later, there descends upon him a part of the good, which shines through him upon all that surrounds him.

The combination of these two facts — the longing in the depth of the heart for absolute good, and the power, though only latent, of directing attention and love to a reality beyond the world and of receiving good from it — constitutes a link which attaches every man without exception to that other reality.

Whoever recognizes that reality recognizes also that link. Because of it, he holds every human being without any exception as something sacred to which he is bound to show respect.

This is the only possible motive for universal respect towards all human beings. Whatever formulation of belief or disbelief a man may choose to make, if his heart inclines him to feel this respect, then he in fact also recognizes a reality other than this world's reality. Whoever in fact does not feel this respect is alien to that other reality also.

The reality of the world we live in is composed of variety. Unequal objects unequally solicit our attention. Certain people personally attract our attention, either through the hazard of circumstances or some chance affinity. For the lack of such circumstance or affinity other people remain unidentified. They escape our attention or, at the most, it only sees them as items of a collectivity.

If our attention is entirely confined to this world it is entirely subject to the effect of these inequalities, which it is all the less able to resist because it is unaware of it.

It is impossible to feel equal respect for things that are in fact unequal unless the respect is given to something that is identical in all of them. Men are unequal in all their relations with the things of this world, without exception. The only thing that is identical in all men is the presence of a link with the reality outside the world.

All human beings are absolutely identical in so far as they can be thought of as consisting of a centre, which is an unquenchable desire for good, surrounded by an accretion of psychical and bodily matter.

Only by really directing the attention beyond the world can there be real contact with this central and essential fact of human nature. Only an attention thus directed possesses the faculty, always identical in all cases, of irradiating with light any human being whatsoever.

If anyone possesses this faculty, then his attention is in reality directed beyond the world, whether he is aware of it or not.

The link which attaches the human being to the reality outside the world is, like the reality itself, beyond the reach of human faculties. The respect that it makes us feel as soon as it is recognized cannot be shown to us by evidence or testimony.

This respect cannot, in this world, find any form of direct expression. But unless it is expressed it has no existence. There is a possibility of indirect expression for it.

The respect inspired by the link between man and the reality alien to this world can make itself evident to that part of man which belongs to the reality of this world.

The reality of this world is necessity. The part of man which is in this world is the part which is in bondage to necessity and subject to the misery of need.

The one possibility of indirect expression of respect for the human being is offered by men's needs, the needs of the soul and of the body, in this world.

It is based upon the connection in human nature between the desire for good, which is the essence of man, and his sensibility. There is never any justification for doubting the existence in any man of this connection.

Because of it, when a man's life is destroyed or damaged by some wound or privation of soul or body, which is due to other men's actions or negligence, it is not only his sensibility that suffers but also his aspiration towards the good. Therefore there has been sacrilege towards that which is sacred in him.

On the other hand, there are cases where it is only a man's sensibility that is affected; for example, where his wound or privation is solely the result of the blind working of natural forces, or where he recognizes that the people who seem to be making him suffer are far from bearing him any ill will, but are acting solely in obedience to a necessity which he also acknowledges.

The possibility of indirect expression of respect for the human being is the basis of obligation. Obligation is concerned with the needs in this world of the souls and bodies of human beings, whoever they may be. For each need there is a corresponding obligation; for each obligation a corresponding need. There is no other kind of obligation, so far as human affairs are concerned.

If there seem to be others, they are either false or else it is only by error that they have not been classed among the obligations mentioned.

Anyone whose attention and love are really directed towards the reality outside the world recognizes at the same time that he is bound, both in public and private life, by the single and permanent obligation to remedy, according to his responsibilities and to the extent of his power, all the privations of soul and body which are liable to destroy or damage the earthly life of any human being whatsoever.

This obligation cannot legitimately be held to be limited by the insufficiency of power or the nature of the responsibilities until everything possible has been done to explain the necessity of the limitation to those who will suffer by it; the explanation must be completely truthful and must be such as to make it possible for them to acknowledge the necessity.

No combination of circumstances ever cancels this obligation. If there are circumstances which seem to cancel it as regards a certain man or category of men, they impose it in fact all the more imperatively.

The thought of this obligation is present to all men, but in very different forms and in very varying degrees of clarity. Some men are more and some are less inclined to accept — or to refuse — it as their rule of conduct.

Its acceptance is usually mixed with self-deception, and even when it is quite sincere it is not consistently acted upon. To refuse it is to become criminal.

The proportions of good and evil in any society depend partly upon the proportion of consent to that of refusal and partly upon the distribution of power between those who consent and those who refuse.

If any power of any kind is in the hands of a man who has not given total, sincere, and enlightened consent to this obligation such power is misplaced.

If a man has willfully refused to consent, then it is in itself a criminal activity for him to exercise any function, major or minor, public or private, which gives him control over people's lives. All those who, with knowledge of his mind, have acquiesced in his exercise of the function are accessories to the crime.

Any State whose whole official doctrine constitutes an incitement to this crime is itself wholly criminal. It can retain no trace of legitimacy.

Any State whose official doctrine is not primarily directed against this crime in all its forms is lacking in full legitimacy.

Any legal system which contains no provisions against this crime is without the essence of legality. Any legal system which provides against some forms of this crime but not others is without the full character of legality.

Any government whose members commit this crime, or authorize it in their subordinates, has betrayed its function.

Any collectivity, institution, or form of collective life whatsoever whose normal functioning implies or induces the practice of this crime is convicted ipso facto of illegitimacy and should be reformed or abolished.

Any man who has any degree of influence, however small, upon public opinion becomes an accessory to this crime if he refrains from denouncing it whenever it comes to his knowledge, or if he purposely avoids knowledge of it in order not to have to denounce it.

A country is not innocent of this crime if public opinion, being free to express itself, does not denounce any current examples of it, or if, freedom of expression being forbidden, the crime is not denounced clandestinely.

It is the aim of public life to arrange that all forms of power are entrusted, so far as possible, to men who effectively consent to be bound by the obligation towards all human beings which lies upon everyone, and who understand the obligation.

Law is the quality of the permanent provisions for making this aim effective.

To understand the obligation involves two things: understanding the principle and understanding its application.

Since it is with human needs in this world that the application is concerned, it is for the intelligence to conceive the idea of need and to discern, discriminate, and enumerate, with all the accuracy of which it is capable, the earthly needs of the soul and of the body.

This is a study which is permanently open to revision. 

Statement Of Obligations

A concrete conception of obligation towards human beings and a subdivision of it into a number of obligations is obtained by conceiving the earthly needs of the body and of the human soul. Each need entails a corresponding obligation.

The needs of a human being are sacred. Their satisfaction cannot be subordinated either to reasons of state, or to any consideration of money, nationality, race, or colour, or to the moral or other value attributed to the human being in question, or to any consideration whatsoever.

There is no legitimate limit to the satisfaction of the needs of a human being except as imposed by necessity and by the needs of other human beings. The limit is only legitimate if the needs of all human beings receive an equal degree of attention.

The fundamental obligation towards human beings is subdivided into a number of concrete obligations by the enumeration of the essential needs of the human being. Each need is related to an obligation, and each obligation to a need.

The needs in question are earthly needs, for those are the only ones that man can satisfy. They are needs of the soul as well as of the body; for the soul has needs whose non-satisfaction leaves it in a state analogous to that of a starved or mutilated body.

The principal needs of the human body are food, warmth, sleep, health, rest, exercise, fresh air.

The needs of the soul can for the most part be listed in pairs of opposites which balance and complete one another.

The human soul has need of equality and of hierarchy.

Equality is the public recognition, effectively expressed in institutions and manners, of the principle that an equal degree of attention is due to the needs of all human beings. Hierarchy is the scale of responsibilities. Since attention is inclined to direct itself upwards and remain fixed, special provisions are necessary to ensure the effective compatibility of equality and hierarchy.

The human soul has need of consented obedience and of liberty.

Consented obedience is what one concedes to an authority because one judges it to be legitimate. It is not possible in relation to a political power established by conquest or coup d'etat nor to an economic power based upon money.

Liberty is the power of choice within the latitude left between the direct constraint of natural forces and the authority accepted as legitimate. The latitude should be sufficiently wide for liberty to be more than a fiction, but it should include only what is innocent and should never be wide enough to permit certain kinds of crime.

The human soul has need of truth and of freedom of expression.

The need for truth requires that intellectual culture should be universally accessible, and that it should be able to be acquired in an environment neither physically remote nor psychologically alien. It requires that in the domain of thought there should never be any physical or moral pressure exerted for any purpose other than an exclusive concern for truth; which implies an absolute ban on all propaganda without exception. It calls for protection against error and lies; which means that every avoidable material falsehood publicly asserted becomes a punishable offence. It calls for public health measures against poisons in the domain of thought.

But, in order to be exercised, the intelligence requires to be free to express itself without control by any authority. There must therefore be a domain of pure intellectual research, separate but accessible to all, where no authority intervenes.

The human soul has need of some solitude and privacy and also of some social life.

The human soul has need of both personal property and collective property.

Personal property never consists in the possession of a sum of money, but in the ownership of concrete objects like a house, a field, furniture, tools, which seem to the soul to be an extension of itself and of the body. Justice requires that personal property, in this sense, should be, like liberty, inalienable.

Collective property is not defined by a legal title but by the feeling among members of a human milieu that certain objects are like an extension or development of the milieu. This feeling is only possible in certain objective conditions.

The existence of a social class defined by the lack of personal and collective property is as shameful as slavery.

The human soul has need of punishment and of honour.

Whenever a human being, through the commission of a crime, has become exiled from good, he needs to be reintegrated with it through suffering. The suffering should be inflicted with the aim of bringing the soul to recognize freely some day that its infliction was just. This reintegration with the good is what punishment is. Every man who is innocent, or who has finally expiated guilt, needs to be recognized as honourable to the same extent as anyone else.

The human soul has need of disciplined participation in a common task of public value, and it has need of personal initiative within this participation.

The human soul has need of security and also of risk. The fear of violence or of hunger or of any other extreme evil is a sickness of the soul. The boredom produced by a complete absence of risk is also a sickness of the soul. - Simone Weil



         Simone Weil was very much ,at least from my research ,influenced by " Plato's teachings "
                

The One  Neoplatonism is a term[note 1] used to designate a strand of Platonic philosophy that emerged in the third century AD

For Plotinus, the first principle of reality is "the One", an utterly simple, ineffable, unknowable subsistence which is both the creative source and the teleological end of all existing things. Although, properly speaking, there is no name appropriate for the first principle, the most adequate names are "the One" or "the Good". The One is so simple that it cannot even be said to exist or to be a being. Rather, the creative principle of all things is beyond being, a notion which is derived from Book VI of the Republic,[20] when, in the course of his famous analogy of the sun, Plato says that the Good is beyond being (ἐπέκεινα τῆς οὐσίας) in power and dignity.[21] In Plotinus' model of reality, the One is the cause of the rest of reality, which takes the form of two subsequent "hypostases", Nous and Soul. Although neoplatonists after Plotinus adhered to his cosmological scheme in its most general outline, later developments in the tradition also departed substantively from Plotinus' teachings in regards to significant philosophical issues, such as the nature of evil.


Teleological argumentThe earliest recorded versions of this argument are associated with Socrates in ancient Greece, although it has been argued that he was taking up an older argument.[4][5] Plato, his student, and Aristotle, Plato's student, developed complex approaches to the proposal that the cosmos has an intelligent cause, but it was the Stoics who, under their influence, "developed the battery of creationist arguments broadly known under the label 'The Argument from Design'".[6] 
Abrahamic religions have used the teleological argument in many ways, and has a long association with them. In the Middle Ages, Islamic theologians such as Al-Ghazali used the argument, although it was rejected as unnecessary by Quranic literalists, and as unconvincing by many Islamic philosophers. Later, the teleological argument was accepted by Saint Thomas Aquinas and included as the fifth of his "Five Ways" of proving the existence of God. In early modern England clergymen such as William Turner and John Ray were well-known proponents. In the early 18th century, William Derham published his Physico-Theology, which gave his "demonstration of the being and attributes of God from his works of creation".[7] Later, William Paley, in his 1802 Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity published a prominent presentation of the design argument with his version of the watchmaker analogy and the first use of the phrase "argument from design".[8]


Neoplatonism also had a strong influence on the Perennial philosophy of the Italian Renaissance thinkers Marsilio Ficino and Pico della Mirandola, and continues through nineteenth-century Universalism and modern-day spirituality and nondualism


In spirituality, nondualism, also called non-duality, means "not two" or "one undivided without a second".[1][2] Nondualism primarily refers to a mature state of consciousness, in which the dichotomy of I-other is "transcended", and awareness is described as "centerless" and "without dichotomies".[web 1] Although this state of consciousness may seem to appear spontaneous,[note 1] it usually follows prolonged preparation through ascetic or meditative/contemplative practice, which may include ethical injunctions. While the term "nondualism" is derived from Advaita Vedanta, descriptions of nondual consciousness can be found within Hinduism (Turiya, sahaja), Buddhism (Buddha-nature, rigpa, shentong), and western Christian and neo-Platonic traditions (henosis, mystical union). 

Mysticism is the practice of religious ecstasies (religious experiences during alternate states of consciousness), together with whatever ideologies, ethics, rites, myths, legends, and magic may be related to them.[web 1] It may also refer to the attainment of insight in ultimate or hidden truths, and to human transformation supported by various practices and experiences.

Broadly defined, mysticism can be found in all religious traditions, from indigenous religions and folk religions like shamanism, to organised religions like the Abrahamic faiths and Indian religions, and modern spirituality, New Age and New Religious Movements.








“The true use of art is, first, to cultivate the artist’s own spiritual nature.” – George Inness



I want to touch people with my art. I want them to say 'he feels deeply, he feels tenderly.'Vincent Van Gogh



In all reality , Spirituality is Self-Actualizing,liberation from Self are all in One, One begets the other, the more one grows,the other equally grows, and so the road becomes more guided,clearer, - it is One's own/ no religion can be attached to it,no title etc.


One might call it the process of Un-locking the door and entering the World where Truth Prevails

'In every human being there is the artist, and whatever his activity, he has an equal chance with any to express the result of his growth and his contact with life. ... all change that is real is due to the Brotherhood.” ― Robert Henri, The Art Spirit:


Know what the old masters did. Know how they composed their pictures, but do not fall into the conventions they established. These conventions were right for them, and they are wonderful. They made their language. You make yours. All the past can help you.-Robert Henri


                There are mighty few people who think what they think they think.-Robert Henri

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. Viktor Frankl ;  excerpt from  The Question of God / PBS

                                                         Like Freud a citizen of Vienna and a practicing psychotherapist, Dr. Viktor Frankl also became a university professor and prolific author. His most widely read work is Man's Search For Meaning, a keenly observed account of his experiences in the Nazi death camps during Word War II. Originally intended for limited private circulation, the slim book has since been translated into 24 languages. In the two excerpts included here, Frankl first ponders the mystery of transcendent experience amid extreme suffering, then explores the true nature of human moral freedom. Frankl's concentration camp experiences profoundly influenced his life's work after the war, leading to his development of logotherapy, a new clinical approach to helping patients rediscover meaning in their lives. 


    

From From Man's Search for Meaning, Part 1

Experiences in a Concentration Camp

... In spite of all the enforced physical and mental primitiveness of the life in a concentration camp, it was possible for spiritual life to deepen. Sensitive people who were used to a rich intellectual life may have suffered much pain (they were often of a delicate constitution), but the damage to their inner selves was less. They were able to retreat from their terrible surroundings to a life of inner riches and spiritual freedom. Only in this way can one explain the apparent paradox that some prisoners of a less hardy makeup often seemed to survive camp life better than did those of a robust nature. In order to make myself clear, I am forced to fall back on personal experience. Let me tell what happened on those early mornings when we had to march to our work site.

There were shouted commands: "Detachment, forward march! Left-2-3-4! Left-2-3-4! Left-2-3-4! Left-2-3-4! First man about, left and left and left and left! Caps off!" These words sound in my ears even now. At the order "Caps off!" we passed the gate of the camp, and searchlights were trained upon us. Whoever did not march smartly got a kick. And worse off was the man who, because of the cold, had pulled his cap back over his ears before permission was given.

We stumbled on in the darkness, over big stones and through large puddles, along the one road leading from the camp. The accompanying guards kept shouting at us and driving us with the butts of their rifles. Anyone with very sore feet supported himself on his neighbor's arm. Hardly a word was spoken; the icy wind did not encourage talk. Hiding his mouth behind his upturned collar, the man marching next to me whispered suddenly: "If our wives could see us now! I do hope they are better off in their camps and don't know what is happening to us."

That brought thoughts of my own wife to mind. And as we stumbled on for miles, slipping on icy spots, supporting each other time and again, dragging one another up and onward, nothing was said, but we both knew: each of us was thinking of his wife. Occasionally I looked at the sky, where the stars were fading and the pink light of the morning was beginning to spread behind a dark bank of clouds. But my mind clung to my wife's image, imagining it with an uncanny acuteness. I heard her answering me, saw her smile, her frank and encouraging look. Real or not, her look was then more luminous than the sun which was beginning to rise.

A thought transfixed me: for the first time in my life I saw the truth as it is set into song by so many poets, proclaimed as the final wisdom by so many thinkers. The truth — that love is the ultimate and the highest goal to which man can aspire. Then I grasped the meaning of the greatest secret that human poetry and human thought and belief have to impart: The salvation of man is through love and in love. I understood how a man who has nothing left in this world still may know bliss, be it only for a brief moment, in the contemplation of his beloved. In a position of utter desolation, when man cannot express himself in positive action, when his only achievement may consist in enduring his sufferings in the right way — an honorable way — in such a position man can, through loving contemplation of the image he carries of his beloved, achieve fulfillment. For the first time in my life I was able to understand the meaning of the words, "The angels are lost in perpetual contemplation of an infinite glory."

In front of me a man stumbled and those following him fell on top of him. The guard rushed over and used his whip on them all. Thus my thoughts were interrupted for a few minutes. But soon my soul found its way back from the prisoner's existence to another world, and I resumed talk with my loved one: I asked her questions, and she answered; she questioned me in return, and I answered.

"Stop!" We had arrived at our work site. Everybody rushed into the dark hut in the hope of getting a fairly decent tool. Each prisoner got a spade or a pickaxe.

"Can't you hurry up, you pigs?" Soon we had resumed the previous day's positions in the ditch. The frozen ground cracked under the point of the pickaxes, and sparks flew. The men were silent, their brains numb.

My mind still clung to the image of my wife. A thought crossed my mind: I didn't even know if she were still alive. I knew only one thing — which I have learned well by now: Love goes very far beyond the physical person of the beloved. It finds its deepest meaning in his spiritual being, his inner self. Whether or not he is actually present, whether or not he is still alive at all, ceases somehow to be of importance.


9/22/2018


How can a great number of Human beings do this?

" Transcend beyond Ego,
           thus Transcend to our highest level of Pure Consciousness;  
                                                thus ; transcending to the Highest Level of Spirituality"  ?

Let's assume most can if wish, desire to try;


What must we over-come as far as Ego?


              Here from this website " I will paste a few excerpts;

An Enlightened Awareness in Consciousness
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     

Transcending the ego is a number one priority for a person to attain the ultimate goal.


The Buddha’s words in The Dhammapada, teach the same concept about transcending the ego—taught by attaining “Nirvana” which is the state of Pure Consciousness. Very few humans have attained this state of Pure Consciousness. Within the Hebrew Scriptures, the context of the ego is taught, although it is taught in the way of humility through stories, an example such as King Saul, ego driven arrogance comparing with King David’s of humility and a circumcised heart.


The ego plays three themes in life. The “Me” number one, the feeling “special” concept. Control and power, the ego thrives on having control and power over others. The Victim, the ego loves to play the victim, drawing attention to the victimization of the person that draws attention to the person. The ego is related with pure self-centeredness, which drives a person’s selfishness, greed, and arrogance. Considering that the ego is the source of darkness, for a person to advance spiritually and attain a deep meaningful friendship with the Almighty Divine Source; that person has to use action to humble oneself and understand about transcending the ego.

The person that identifies themselves with the body is living the delusion of the ego. The ego survives within the delusion that the individual is the doer of their own action, the person is the body, and takes credit. Thus, when the body dies, the person must die, which is the common belief, except for members of religion because the ego has them deluded to the point that they’re special and they are saved. Every religion thrives on being the “special group” and they’re saved because of their belief, which is false. Consequently, the person can justify their life through their religion, because they believe they are saved. As a result, justification is an ego driven characteristic that allows the ego to enjoy its survival, along with living a selfish and greedy lifestyle because of feeling special. The comment, “everyone makes mistakes, you will be forgiven” is ego driven thinking. Karmic bonds will be attached.


   If the statement above "Every religion thrives on being the “special group” and they’re saved because of their belief, which is false."

           is true , the question is then "how to nicely,safely convince one it is"

                                                                                                                                 And what are the "Alternatives"



  For myself , my religion is simply    Nature is God, God is Nature,,was easy for myself to understand this some how, though ,

  that just me.

Another excerpt; 

          "The problem with people that teach publicly is that the ego attaches onto the person who is receiving public attention. The ego is crafty to the point of deluding the person that is in the public eye; that they themselves have transcended the ego and others have not. It is impossible to transcend the ego being in the public eye. The ego will take advantage of any open door of opportunity for attention: feeling special, being number one within a group, having people follow yourself, having control over others, playing the victim."

            Action required for Transcending the Ego;

             "The people that teach enlightenment have had a lot of influence within the subject of Transcending the Ego. The concepts of the ego are easy to teach once comprehended. The problem is that many teachers have fashioned a dogmatic position. If the guru declares a person is enlightened then that person is convinced that they attained enlightenment. Enlightenment is related to a higher level of consciousness not an emotional episode. The ego is trampling all over these public teachers because they declare in public that they are a special person; the crafty ego gets just what it wants attention. Consequently, the ultimate goal is out of reach because of the sly behaviors of the ego. The public eye totally opposes transcending the ego. The teacher sets himself up by being special because people are looking up to him and idolizing him. Thus, very few spiritual teaches that receives attention on a public level can transcend the ego properly."


                 Jesus, Buddha, and Krishna were living in the state of Pure Consciousness; that state of consciousness is ego-less. Moses was at very high level of consciousness and he still brought attention to himself – the ego trapped him – at the rock that they got water from. This is a lesson of the ego referring to Moses and the rock, Numbers 20:1-13, keep in mind that the context is doer-ship – Moses took credit and spoke with the tongue – “look what I did”. There is not a word in biblical Hebrew that could be translated into ego; the closest would be the word they translate into “sin”. Since the ego is the source of darkness, therefore – the source of sin. The new earth will be ego-less which is the same as sinless. Jesus was without sin because he was ego-less. Ego is sin, the authentic source of darkness.


                  Transcending the ego resides within:


                     "

Seeking and claiming the power within is the only way to transcend such things as: the ego, the senses, emotion, attachment, results of our action, other peoples perceptions, this world, sense objects.

Continually being in touch with our inner Self (spirit) and understanding this is where our reality is situated – comprehending the formless spirit that resides within is eternal is a way to transcend the ego. This fact of reality boggles the personality of the ego. Realizing that what we do, is not the I-ego, but giving the Glory and doer-ship to the Almighty Divine Creator, the ego loses its power. The source of doer-ship is the Creator that resides within.

Humility – the action of lowering oneself is vital and pivotal to Transcending the Ego. Once a person is able to see a small aspect on how the ego operates, at that time, the person can work at transcending the ego.

 

        For myself ; I simply had to replace " Almighty Divine Creator,,,with Nature/God, due to fact that mankind,knowingly has manipulated,changed all religions over the years due to their "Ego's"

One if really interest in this topic, I would urge to read;

                                          "EINSTEIN ON SCIENCE & RELIGION"- a on site pdf

excerpt from;  -Above-


                     "The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this".


                      "The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another. 


                      " -How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.
We thus arrive at a conception of the relation of science to religion very different from the usual one. When one views the matter historically, one is inclined to look upon science and religion as irreconcilable
antagonists, and for a very obvious reason. The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events - provided, of course, that he takes the hypothesis of causality really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple reason that a man's actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in God's eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an inanimate object is responsible for the motions it undergoes. Science has therefore been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."


                       " There are pessimists who hold that such a state of affairs is necessarily inherent in human nature; it is those
who propound such views that are the enemies of true religion, for they imply thereby that religious teachings are utopian ideals and unsuited to afford guidance in human affairs. The study of the social patterns in certain so-called primitive cultures, however, seems to have made it sufficiently evident that such a defeatist view is wholly unwarranted. Whoever is concerned with this problem, a crucial one in the study of religion as such, is advised to read the description of the Pueblo Indians in Ruth Benedict's book, Patterns of Culture. Under the hardest living conditions, this tribe has apparently accomplished the difficult task of delivering its people from the scourge of competitive spirit and of fostering in it a temperate, cooperative conduct of life, free of external pressure and without any curtailment of happiness.
-Albert Einstein

I personally do Know,  What the " Ego" , Loves;


             Power,  thus can manipulate others to have same "point of view",,,good example creation of idea of "Devil/evil"                                                             (I have lived in Nature out-side the presents of Mankind, learning Nature has no Evil)


              Only wishs self to see from "one point of view" - " the Left brain"


              Comfort -  thus lazy,thus no chance of finding  "Know thy-self ",,one is to busy striving for wealth/comfort

           

               Judging - self and every other, person,place or thing based on worth to "ego self"


               Competitive spirit amongst the "Tribe"-   The ego knows once it has man against man, this causes chaos, by way of ;                                                                          "jealousy"

               My guest is once Humanity moved beyond ,the small Clan,tribe group,pack ,which they lived socially much like the -Wolf,;                                                                                       Alpha male and Alpha female

                  There being other packs - where younger male and females could mate with, join.

                    note; my self being Androgynous/berdache type, it is easy for me to see this "role" ;appearing to prevent jealous feelings                                between competing mating males for limited females. The Androgynous (feminine roled) was available for which                                  to relieving the sexual desire to mate- a alternative accepted by all members of tribe.


   note- "Wolf packs generally consist of a breeding pair and their maturing of&pring that help provision and protect pack young. Because the reproductive tenure in wolves is often short, reproductively mature offspring might replace their parents, resulting in sibling or parent-offspring matings. To determine the extent of incestuous pairings, we measured relatedness based on variability in 20 microsatellite loci of mated pain, parent-offspring pairs, and siblings in two populations of gray wolves. Our 16 sampled mated pairs had values of relatedness not overlapping those of known parent-of&pring or sibling dyads, which is consistent with their being unrelated or distantly related. These results suggest that full siblings or a parent and its off spring rarely mate and that incest avoidance is an important constraint on gray wolf behavioral ecology. Kty words: Caw hipus, gray wolves, inbreeding, incest, microsatellites. [Behav Ecol 8:384-391 (1997)

                 Humans being more evolved, must of been always seeking other tribes/clans for mating as by Natures design,incest is needed to be avoided, yet if no mates out side the tribe could be found, - the Androgyny (fem-male) was available until another female could be found.


              Thus the Ego loves to keep us Busy,multi-tasking,keep us busy seeking something material -like Gold-                                                        " I don't think by intent, it just easier then the Complex task of discovering- true self- which contains the taboo,the                                                           Anicent past, all things that Humanity has ever done!

                                                          Simply our History which is vast, yet being part of Nature as One, One has a realization this                                                                                                                  "Library/ Memory" is there

                                                                  remember we are part of One Body

--------------------------------What the Ego don't Like-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


               To be put; Night,Night as in the bed,sleep through such ways as Drawing in form of meditation, -Any Right brain activity;        

                                                                             where it is put to sleep


                Iain McGilchrist's new book ;  The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western               World., takes a long hard look at the two hemispheres of our brains, and what they do, a must read if ones               desires to fully understand the Human condition.   The Master is the Right ,or only way to Spirituality


         

               Ego doesn't like Abstract thinking- for example;

                          To see as the Wolf sees-   The wolf see the pack as a Whole, yes individuals,separate parts yet as a Whole
                          
                                                                     Human being at one time did, yet due to more complex brain,developing technologies,                                                                            aqiuring things they could call their "Own", also started to drift away from "the Whole idea"                                                                                      creating more complex individual identities such as Michael has created a nice                                                                         rock for hunting, or Bob there, created a nice thing for putting on our heads,  etc. etc.                                                                                Thus the human individual, created value for themselves, thus the individual ego began                                                                                                     - To Form-
                                                                      The Wolf never has had the ability to create a "Thing" in which to carry,thus separating      
                                                                                                  it's self as a individual with a completely New Value

The Jewish scriptures admirably illustrate the development from the religion of fear to moral religion, a development continued in the New Testament. The religions of all civilized peoples, especially the peoples of the Orient, are primarily moral religions. The development from a religion of fear to moral religion is a great step in peoples' lives. And yet, that primitive religions are based entirely on fear and the religions of civilized peoples purely on morality is a prejudice against which we must be on our guard. The truth is that all religions are a varying blend of both types, with this differentiation: that on the higher levels of social life the religion of morality predominates.


Common to all these types is the anthropomorphic(some type of form,similar to human) character of their conception of God. 


 In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it cosmic religious feeling. It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.- this would much more my belief/spirituality.

    I simply refer to as all of Nature


The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this.


The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

characteristics of highly spiritual people

------------------------------------------------Signs of Highly Spiritual peoples------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



♥   You recognize yourself in all beings- "You know that you are ONE with all things, all beings, and all creatures. And because your heart is filled with love and compassion, you don’t feel the need to judge, blame, condemn or criticize anyone.  You recognize yourself in the world around you. You see yourself in those who are good, but also in those who are bad; in those who are kind, but also in those who are cruel, and this humbles you a great deal. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

note-  I think or it makes me think; the reason to share my site here publicly, is from the stand point of not being perfect,yet flawed, yet by -Desire- constantly trying to become Aware, thus correct the Flaws.

        I wrote this ,this morning after reading ; - thought on Socrates's "midwife"

Deep Empathy-
  An example of; 
creating the "Void" of nothing (simply not knowing) and Idea that the "Desire" is equally a part of Spirituality, as creating the Void, in which not to know is fully accepted, yet only by the "Desire to Know", even though one may not Know to the Full extent- "The Essense of Anything", One still created the Desire,thus a Void for Spirituality to enter",..Through Attention(meditation),,and there are many forms of meditation. One first creates "Desire"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




  You are comfortable with not-knowing. ;

            You know that life’s plans for you are much grander and more complex than the plans you yourself have for yourself. Because of that, you have given up the need to control how your whole life unfolds, and instead, you have learned to instead, put your trust in life

note- Nature would be my term,instead of life


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  

The things you know, you know them from your soul; your wisdom is your own. It does not come from what others have written or spoken, but rather from deep within yourself.                          “I have been a seeker and I still am. But I stopped asking the books and the stars. I started listening to the teachings of my soul.” ~ Rumi


  Forgive easily

  You purified your soul of attachments;

               Because you now know that trying to cling to the very transitory nature of life is a cause of great suffering, you don’t cling on to anything or anyone. You live in the world, but you are not OF the world. You love people, you love the world around you and all that it holds, but you don’t create attachments.

   You no longer look outside yourself for fulfillment;


           You have reached a point in your life where you no longer base your purpose, meaning or fulfillment on anything external to you. The outside world can no longer fulfill you, and your only true fulfillment now comes from deep within yourself.

   You see yourself as a spiritual being having a human experience;


             You know that the body is only the vehicle transporting the soul in this physical world and that even though you have a physical body, you are not the body. You are the Soul within the body.

     You delight yourself in quietness and solitude;

              You delight yourself in quietness and solitude, and the sound of silence helps you connect with the deep side of you where all life’s wisdom rests, and where all the secrets of the world are hidden.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Being Cognition Compared to Deficiency Cognition

we need to strive for B-Cognitions


B-COGNITION

1. Seen as whole, as complete, self-sufficient, as unitary. Either Cosmic Consciousness (Bucks), in which whole cosmos is perceived as single thing with oneself belonging in it; or else the person, object, or portion of the world seen is seen as if it were the whole world, i.e., rest of world is forgotten. Integrative perceiving of unities. Unity of the world or object perceived.

                                                                            verse


 D-COGNITION

 1. Seen as part, as incomplete, not self-sufficient, as dependent upon other things.

 

B-COGNITION

2. Exclusively, fully narrowly attended to; absorption, fascination, focal attention; total attention. Tends to de-differentiate figure and ground. Richness of detail; seen from many sides. Seen with "care," totally, intensely, with complete investment. Totally cathected. Relative importance becomes unimportant; all aspects equally important.

                                                                          verse

 D-COGNITION

2. Attended to with simultaneous attention to all cause that is relevant. Sharp figure ground differentiation. Seen imbedded in relationships to all else in world,as part of the world. Rubricized; seen from some aspects only; selective attention and selective inattention to some aspects; seen casually, seen only from some point of view.


B-COGNITION

3. No comparing (in Dorothy Lee's sense). Seen per se, in itself, by itself. Not in competition with anything Else. Sole member of the class (in Hartman's sense).

                                                                           verse


D-COGNITION

3. Placing on a continuum or within a series; comparing, judging, evaluating. Seen as a member of a class, as an instance, a sample.

B-COGNITION

4. Human-irrelevant.


                                                                            verse

 D-COGNITION

4. Relevant to human concerns; e.g., what good is it, what can it be used for, is it good for or dangerous to people, etc.


B-COGNITION

5. Made richer by repeated experiencing. More and more perceived. "Intra-object richness."


                                                                            verse

 D-COGNITION

5. Repeated experiencing impoverishes, reduces richness, makes it less interesting and attractive, takes away its demand-character. Familiarization leads to boredom.


B-COGNITION

6. Seen as unneeded, as purposeless, as not desired, as unmotivated perceiving. Perceived as if it had no reference to the needs of the perceiver. Can therefore be seen as independent, in its own right.

                                                                          verse

 D-COGNITION

 6. Motivated perceiving. Object seen as need-gratifier, as useful or not useful.

B-COGNITION

7. Object-centering. Self-forgetful, ego-transcending, unselfish, disinterested. Therefore, it-centered. Identification and fusion of perceiver and perceived. So absorbed and poured into the experience that self disappears, so that whole experience can be organized around the object itself as a centering point or organizing point. Object uncontaminated and unconfused with self.

Abnegation of the perceiver.

                                                                            verse

 D-COGNITION

7. Organized around ego as a centering point, which means projection of the ego into the per- ception. Perception not of the object alone but of the object mixed-with-self-of-the-perceiver. 

 

B-COGNITION

8. The object is permitted to be itself. Humble, receptive, passive, choiceness, undemanding. Taoistic, noninterference with the object or percept. “Let be” acceptance.

                                                                  verse

 D-COGNITION

 8. Active shaping, organizing, and selecting by the perceiver. He shifts it, rearranges it. He works at it. This must be more fatiguing than B-cognizing, which probably is fatigue-curing.

Trying, striving, effort. Will, control.

                                                   

B-COGNITION

9. Seen as end in itself, self-validating. Self-justifying. Intrinsically interesting for its own sake. Has intrinsic value.

                                                                    verse

D-COGNITION

9. A means, an instrument, not having self-contained worth but having only exchange value, or standing for something else, or a ticket to some other place.


B-COGNITION

10. Outside of time and space. Seen as eternal, universal. "A minute is a day; a day is a minute." Disorientation of perceiver in time and space, not conscious of surroundings. Percept not related to surroundings. Ahistorical.

                                                                  verse

 D-COGNITION

 10. In time and space. Temporal. Local. Seen in history, and in the physical world.


B-COGNITION 

11. The characteristics of Being are perceived as Values of Being.

                                                                    verse

D-COGNITION

11. D-Values are means-values, i.e., usefulness, desirability-undesirability, suitability for a purpose. Evaluations, comparisons, condemnations, approvals, or disapprovals, judgments upon.


B-COGNITION

12. Absolute (because timeless and spaceless, because detached from the ground, because taken per se, because rest of world and history all forgotten). This is compatible with the perception of process and shifting, alive organizations within the perception-but it is strictly within the perception.

                                                                       verse

D-COGNITION

12. Relative to history, to culture, to characterology, to local values, to the interests and needs of man. It is-felt to be passing. Depends on man for its reality; if man were to disappear, it would disappear. Shifting from one syndrome to another as a whole, i.e., it is now a bit in this syndrome, now a bit in that syndrome.

                                                                 verse

B-COGNITION

13. Resolution of dichotomies, polarities, conflicts. Inconsistencies seen to exist simultaneously and to be sensible and necessary, i.e., to be seen as a higher unity or integration, or under a superordinate whole


D-COGNITION

13. Aristotelian logic, i.e. separate things seen as dissected and cut off and quite different from each other, mutually exclusive, often with antagonistic interests.


B-COGNITION

14. Concretely (and abstractly) perceived. All aspects at once. Therefore ineffable (to ordinary language); describable if at all, by poetry, art, etc., but even this will make sense only to bee who has already had same experience. Essentially aesthetic experience (in Northrop's sense). Nonchoosing preferring or selecting. Seen in its muchness (different from the concrete perception of young children, of primitive adults, or of brain-injured people because it coexists with abstract ability).

                                                                 verse

D-COGNITION

 14. Only abstract, categorized diagrammatic, rubricized, schematized. Classifying. Reduction to the abstract."


B-COGNITION

15. The idiographic object; the concrete, unique instance. Classification impossible (except for abstracted aspects) because sole member of its class.

                                                                 verse

 D-COGNITION 15. Nomothetic, general, statistical lawfulness.


B-COGNITION

16. Increase of dynamic isomorphism between inner and outer worlds. As the essential Being of the world is perceived by the person, so also does he concurrently come closer to his own Being; and vice versa.

                                                              verse
 D-COGNITION 16. Decreased isomorphism.


B-COGNITION

17. Object often perceived as sacred, holy, every special." It demands" or Calls for" awe, reverence, piety, wonder.

                                                             verse

 D-COGNITION

 17. Object Normal," everyday, ordinary, familiar, nothing special, Familiarized away."


B-COGNITION

18. World and self often (not always) seen as amusing, playful, comic, funny, absurd, laughable; but also as poignant. Laughter (which is close to tears). Philosophical humor, humors. World, person, child, etc., seen as cute, absurd, charming, lovable. May produce mixed laughing-crying. Fusion of comic-tragic dichotomy.

                                                           verse

 D-COGNITION

18. Lesser forms of humor, if seen at all. Serious things quite different from amusing things. Hostile humor, humorlessness. Solemnity.


B-COGNITION 

19. Noninterchangeable. Not replaceable. No one else will do.

                                                        verse

 D-COGNITION

19. Interchangeable. Replaceable. Characteristics of Being-Cognition and Deficiency-Cognition of the World'



















Quantum mechanics suggests that we perceive at most a tiny sliver of reality. Of course we already knew that! We knew that the visible spectrum is only a small part of the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. We knew that the universe is much, much larger than our ancestors believed.(do we?-me)  And we already knew that we are made of things that are too small for our eyes to see. So how is it news that we only perceive a tiny sliver of reality?

It’s news because quantum mechanics says that the part of reality that we do not perceive is radically different than the part of the world that we do perceive. The difference is so profound that we still don’t fully understand how to talk about quantum reality. There doesn’t seem to be any direct analogy between quantum reality and the reality we perceive with our senses.

Before I explain the gap between our perceptions and reality, I want to state that I completely disagree with the idea that quantum mechanics forces us to accept an idealist view of reality. Idealism says that the physical universe is made out of our perceptions – in other words, out of spiritual reality.  Several early interpreters of quantum mechanics thought that it supported this idealistic understanding of reality. Why would they have thought this? The reason, quite simply, is that they didn’t know how to cope with the issue of quantum indeterminacy.

Quantum indeterminacy is the unavoidable fact that not all quantities can simultaneously have determinate values.  For example, if an electron has a location, then it simply has no speed – it is neither at rest, nor is it moving slowly, nor is it moving quickly.  There simply is no fact of the matter about its state of motion.  Similarly, if an electron is in a definite state of motion, then it’s not in any particular place – not here, nor there, nor anywhere.

Let’s be completely clear about what we’re saying here.  We are not just saying that if you know the position of the electron, then you don’t know whether or not it’s moving.  We’re saying that if the electron has some position, then it does not have any state of motion.  What could this possibly mean?  Nobody is quite sure.

But the story gets more interesting.  Whenever a conscious observer tries to determine the position of the electron, she will always finds that it does indeed have a position.  Similarly, whenever a conscious observer tries to determine the state of motion of an electron, she will always find that it does indeed have some particular state of motion.  If these facts weren’t true, then we wouldn’t be able to test the predictions of quantum mechanics! So how are we to reconcile the fact that sometimes the electron doesn’t have a position with the fact that, whenever we look, it does have a position?

Some quantum pioneers, such as Heisenberg and Wigner, thought that the act of “looking” caused the electron to take on a definite state of motion, or a definite position.  And then it wasn’t much of a further leap for them to suggest that, before anybody looks, there wasn’t any electron.  If that were the case, then physical reality is brought into existence by our acts of perception.

But the path from quantum indeterminacy to subjective idealism involves several illogical leaps. First of all, why think that before a measurement occurs, no quantities possess values?  While some quantities must lack values, it was proven by Jeff Bub and Rob Clifton that many quantities can possess values even when nobody is looking.

Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University.

bigquestionsonline.com




-

Quantum entanglement-Wikipedia


Meaning of entanglement

An entangled system is defined to be one whose quantum state cannot be factored as a product of states of its local constituents; that is to say, they are not individual particles but are an inseparable whole. In entanglement, one constituent cannot be fully described without considering the other(s). Note that the state of a composite system is always expressible as a sum, or superposition, of products of states of local constituents; it is entangled if this sum necessarily has more than one term.


The special property of entanglement can be better observed if we separate the said two particles. Let's put one of them in the White House in Washington and the other in Buckingham Palace (think about this as a thought experiment, not an actual one) . Now, if we measure a particular characteristic of one of these particles (say, for example, spin), get a result, and then measure the other particle using the same criterion (spin along the same axis), we find that the result of the measurement of the second particle will match (in a complementary sense) the result of the measurement of the first particle, in that they will be opposite in their values. 

The above result may or may not be perceived as surprising. A classical system would display the same property, and a hidden variable theory (see below) would certainly be required to do so, based on conservation of angular momentum in classical and quantum mechanics alike. The difference is that a classical system has definite values for all the observables all along, while the quantum system does not. In a sense to be discussed below, the quantum system considered here seems to acquire a probability distribution for the outcome of a measurement of the spin along any axis of the other particle upon measurement of the first particle. This probability distribution is in general different from what it would be without measurement of the first particle. This may certainly be perceived as surprising in the case of spatially separated entangled particles


"Fearlessness is the first requirement of spirituality. Cowards can never be moral." -- Mahatma Gandhi

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------  9/22/2019

                             I also believe " To give up one Belief, One needs to enter into Another " -me

   


              " My personal opinion in regards to " Religions " is  God and Nature are One, and All is a part" -me


                                                         Pantheism is close in way I think

Pantheism derives from the Greek πᾶν pan (meaning "all, of everything") and θεός theos (meaning "god, divine"). The first known combination of these roots appears in Latin, in Joseph Raphson's 1697 book De Spatio Reali seu Ente Infinito,[6] where he refers to the "pantheismus" of Spinoza and others.[5] It was subsequently translated into English as "pantheism" in 1702.