This is not a post about spirituality. It is a post about definitions.

My intention recently has been to write more reader-friendly posts.

Talking about spirituality is hard enough; writing about it even harder. I like Emerson because he does not separate spiritual from physical. Indeed, at one point in his essays, he cries out: The definition of spiritual ought to be: that which is its own evidence.

By this he did not mean, "Whatever is, is" or "It is either raining, or it's not"--logician's assertions (although he would happily have admitted the truth of these statements--who would not?)--but was rather focused on the proverbial and aphoristic, the figurative and metaphorical, as "The early bird gets the worm".

Emerson is full of such proverbial wisdom. The above is such.

"Whatever he stuffs in his box, nature takes out of his soul."

'Nature' of course is a stand-in and could as well be God/god or--for all I care--your mother. Who keeps the balance in the universe, we do not know, nor never shall, and I am happy to hear that being or force (the 'Great Accountant') called by whatever name. To call it a 'being' or 'force' already is to name the unnamable, which is why I think 'God/god' is the best name, the unnamable and therefore many nameable one. The 'one' also is a good name.