The thrust behind the concept of "spiritual bypass" and behind seeing it as something undesirable, is the conviction that in order to make spiritual progress, one first needs to be psychologically (and practically) healthy. On the other hand, various religious and spiritual traditions teach that one can take up a religious/spiritual path no matter one's state. Are those who seek to make people aware of "spiritual bypassing" and warn of its dangers, in fact introducing a false dilemma?
great question.. first i would like to point out that the assumption with those quotes are; god is not a wish giver. that we know what the real issues are. assumes we know what we want. a group/counseling can be in a church setting, not just any church, as i have emphasized the 'you' because most church's do not care about you, they will tell you what to do as opposed to helping 'you' determine what is healthy for you.
remember how i said that god is the one holding up the mirror? that's why he does. the holy spirit is called the counselor among other things. people who try to bypass this introspection, examination, and healing and use spirituality as some kind of magic toy or genie in a bottle aren't doing themselves any favors. what good is the law of attraction if you don't know what you need? it's as dangerous as any other kind of quick fix or escapist behavior, and eventually it will all come crashing down, and they'll be right back where they started, with an even bigger mess, and more regret.
So you seem to be siding with the camp that seeks to make people aware of "spiritual bypassing" and warn of its dangers? My question is, though, whether this camp is posing a false dilemma. From what is described as "spiritual bypass", it is evident that it can occur only in two circumstances: 1. The spiritual path one is pursuing is deficient itself, and cannot provide every practitioner with what they need. 2. The practitioner is aspiring to a sufficient path, but is having a deficient practice (based on inappropriate understanding, inconsistent practice, lack of proper guidance from senior practitioners). Much of the New Age stuff is highly suspicious of the first. Interestingly, it is also in the New Age movement that notions of "spiritual bypass", "religious/spiritual addiction" and "high-level denial" have emerged. If the second, then one would be doing oneself a disservice by introducing psychology/psychotherapy with their notions of basic concepts (such as what is the self, what human action etc.) that are extraneous to the path. Of course, it is often enough difficult to tell which circumstance applies in one's life as it is.
paths and practices vary, but imo the key to success is intent. there's a lot about old and new religious practices that are disingenuous imo. people need to get real.
