Spirituality is breaking the link between the mortal and the immortal consciousness.
The mortal consciousness is the awareness of time and space through a body and a perceptual sensorial field. The immortal consciousness is nothing that can be described in words.
Divinity does not require humanity's understanding. It exists because it exists because it exists. Humanity is terribly limited in its understanding of anything and everything. As long as humanity chooses to avoid divinity, it suffers. But divinity does not. Since it is immortal, pure and perfect, it is beyond suffering. Its self-luminescent light propels itself through infinity without any abrasion.
It is not the part of divinity to go to humanity and to modify itself in any shape, manner or form; rather it is up to humanity to make itself available, accessible, if you will, to divinity. Anything else is a misconception. If you feel it is the responsibility of God to come to you and to work it out, you're mistaken. Rather, it is your responsibility to go to God and work it out.
You must win freedom through your self-effort. Otherwise nothing will occur.
You can use extra-logical arguments to say, "Well, we're all God," or "There is no God," or anything you want to, but it doesn't change how things are. Those are just ideations. As long as you wish to separate yourself from the immortal consciousness, you will suffer. You will experience the pain of the separation, the lack of luminosity, the abridgement of infinite mind in finite form. Divinity, enlightenment, if you will, sits on top of its mountain and is somewhat bemused by what it sees. It sees itself in another form trying to approach itself or being afraid of itself and running away, or completely unaware. But it is not moved by that at all. What makes enlightenment enlightenment is its dispassion.
In the West they use a term - compassion - to try and bring across a feeling I think that they would like to think enlightenment has. In other words, I think there's a great amount of plagiarism, if you will, in the scriptures, in the discussions of enlightenment. Because it's suggested that enlightenment has some tremendous compassion, some driving necessity to help humanity. I don't think that's the case at all. I think humanity wishes it were the case, and since it's humanity that writes the various scriptures, I think it's a self-reflection, but it has nothing to do with enlightenment. From the point of view of enlightenment, none of this has ever even been. All time and space, all the conditions that are apparent in the absence of enlightenment are unreal. It doesn't matter.
You can sit in your room and think someone should bring you food. And you can sit in your room in your house alone day after day and no one will arrive. No matter how strongly you think that should be the case, unless you go out and find food it's not going to come to you. That's up to you. To think that in some way - as people think both in the East and West but more so in the West - that the knowledge that brings freedom from all limitations is in some way supposed to come to you and be at your service is ridiculous.
It is up to you to avail yourself of that knowledge. That knowledge doesn't need you. It doesn't care. Since it's not in this world, it is completely oblivious to your suffering. The idea of a compassionate God was formulated, obviously, by someone who didn't want to do any work. If you look around you, you'll see that that's not how life is. Creatures are born and die. They go through terrible suffering and no one intervenes. Some people get angry - I guess those who don't want to do anything - and they say, "Well, there is no God because if there was a God, God would stop all the suffering." Nonsense. God is oblivious to suffering. God is beyond suffering. That's what makes God God, by definition.