Friends of Amida-shu

The Friends of Amida-shu network is sponsored by Amida Trust.


I read this article below by Clark Strand recently, and loved it. While the context is here is Christian, those who've encountered Clark, here and elsewhere, will know that his understanding of Buddhism and Christianity (or Christianity and Islam, for that matter) rather tears down the walls we might assume to be standing between those traditions. Dharmavydia's recent post "Buddhism is a religion" also reminded me of what Clark writes here, and I thought people who'd read and appreciated that as I did, might enjoy this too.

What Clark says reminds me too of this quote from Dharmavydia's "Love and its Disappointment", which I often come back to, and find myself bringing up in conversations about spirituality. Especially when faced with blank looks when  I confess to preferring, these days, to speak of religion than spiritualty. Naming the beast...? :-) 

“To encounter the infinite mystery that is the ground of love and to bear the suffering occasioned by its inevitable disappointment is spirituality and the return of such spirituality to the collective life in a manner beneficial, if challenging, to oneself and others is religion.”

Hoping this finds all here well,

Namo Amida Bu


(This article comes from here: )

You Can Have Your Communion Wafer…And Eat It, Too!

Can you be spiritual without being religious? We know the opposite is true: that you can be religious without being spiritual. You can be religious and be a pedophile. You can be religious and oppose universal health care. You can be religious and starve the children of your enemies, while championing the rights of the unborn. You can, like the Pharisee from the gospels, cry, “Thank God that I am not like this publican!” and rest content in the knowledge that you attend weekly religious services and tithe from all that you earn. You can have your shabbos bread and your communion wafer…and eat it, too!

We’ve kept coming back to the same question for more than a century now, beginning with Emerson and William James and culminating in the writings of popular Power of Now guru Eckhart Tolle. There it reaches something like its penultimate expression–which is to say, the question still hasn’t been answered, but it’s gone as far as it can go.

The “spiritual but not religious” debate is like a worry stone. The question gets smoother with use. We wear down its grosser defects and rougher edges, polishing its surface to a somewhat higher gloss. But it never stops being what it is–a moral dead weight at the bottom of the modern heart, a troublesome thought we can’t help having, even if we are among those who answer in the affirmative, like Anne Rice has, taking up our beds (should I say coffins, Anne?) and walking as far away from religion as we can go.

For all our worry, it seems we never really get anywhere with the question. Why? Perhaps because, no matter how you ask the question, at bottom it remains fundamentally flawed. Can you have spirituality without religion? religion without spirituality? It’s like asking if you can have a head without a heart–or vice versa. Some of us try to get by with just one or the other, but it never works out very well.

At the risk of offending those who like to look anywhere for truth but Islam, I’d like to suggest that the shahada–the Muslim declaration of faith–presents the world’s most concise statement on the fundamental pointlessness of the spirituality vs. religion debate.

That shahada reads La ilaha Illallah, Muhammadan rasul Allah (“There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is His prophet”). The first half is often misunderstood, even by some Muslims. It does not mean that Allah is the only real god, Yahweh, the Great Spirit, and Vishnu being mere counterfeit deities. It means that the god we make of ourselves is not real. To say “There is no God but Allah” simply means that our human agenda (which is to say, any human agenda) is not the final word. This realization transcends religion (which is always man-made, whatever claims we may make to the contrary in our zeal), and is therefore “spiritual.”

The second part–”and Muhammad is His prophet”–is likewise often misunderstood. It doesn’t mean that Muhammad is the only prophet. It means that, to be real, spirituality has to get grounded in the life of actual human beings. The human agenda may not be the final word, but it our word, and we have to do our best to get it right. Our spiritual impulses have to have a form. And to grow, they have to be rooted in some form of community. This second realization comes down on the side of religion. It favors leadership, organization, and the kind of collective effort that builds stability, sustaining the spiritual life of the many, not just the “personal revelation” of the select spiritual few.

There have long been those who claim that you can have Allah without Muhammad. And it could be argued that there are some in the world today who claim that Muhammad is enough. I’m thinking Taliban in this context, but an equivalent could be found just as easily among our own fundamentalists, who stick like glue to Jesus without ever listening to what he has to say about religious hypocrisy or about God.

The truth about religion and spirituality seems to be that one is pretty useless without the other. A lot of what passes for “spirituality” in America today is self-absorption and nothing more. And a lot of religion is mere politics disguised as God. The problem isn’t with one or the other, but with the persistent delusion that we can get by without having both. If religion divorced from spirituality is hypocrisy, spirituality divorced from religion is hypocrisy, too.

As a final caveat, I will admit to having learned all this the hard way. Sometimes the publican cries foul back at the Pharisee, only to realize later, and with more than a little chagrin, that he was also in the wrong.

Views: 33

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Friends of Amida-shu to add comments!

Join Friends of Amida-shu

Comment by Richard Ollier on April 14, 2014 at 12:00

Great article, Mat. It's got that "what oft was thought, but ne'er so well expressed" feel to it. One doesn't realise that that's how one has worked towards thinking until the ideas are presented so articulately. Thank you so much. Namo Amida Bu.

Comment by Mat Osmond on April 13, 2014 at 18:40

Great - delighted it spoke to you both too. I just re-read it, and like even more than I remembered.

Comment by Howard on April 13, 2014 at 12:29
Matt - thanks for sharing this and highlighting Dharmavidya's quote. Wonderful. Really helpful article too. Hope you're well. Namo Amida Bu
Comment by Kaspalita on April 12, 2014 at 10:53

Thanks for sharing this Mat, I like it a lot and will be pointing others here too. NAB


Click here for up-to-date event details, retreats, workshops and courses:

Study Buddhist Psychology by distance learning

Registration for 2016 has opened for more information contact




  • Add Photos
  • View All

Seach for members in your area

Use the advanced member search to find Friends of Amida members in your area: Advanced search



Amida Trust

Make a donation to support the work of the Amida Trust:


  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2017   Created by Kaspalita.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service