Why do so many "spiritual" people limit their caring to those they can see face-to-face, or are at most one step removed from that?
The greatest suffering, and the greatest need, may well be away from your circle.
Yes, charity starts at home, but it DOES NOT STOP THERE !
I've also been listening to a psychic/spiritual teacher whose work I quite enjoy - it is pleasant, sound, and reasonably challenging (genuine, or authentic, or "good") - except that it does not allow for possibilities such as children not having had a pleasant life (not only in developing nations), for the racist connotations of "white light" (which actually should be clear light, not white), and the need to engage with and change the world.
Frustratingly, people will attend to such teachings, maybe because it is more comfortable than being challenged over white privilege or risking failure by trying to change the world, but it means their spiritual development is going to be limited. Until you know how to make the world a better place, and not just know a way for you to cope with an imperfect (read: badly flawed) world, you are not a spiritual person.
(And in the business world, people are still happily subservient to others. As a society, we need to teach courage, independence, and have staff-owned enterprises. I saw a slightly distempered question online recently asking who, if not the rich/big conglomerates, should own media companies: the answer is, staff.)
PS - the statement that we create our own reality is true, but more so at the level of our Higher Self than our conscious self. Extending such views to argue that we need never suffer ignores the issues of (a) compassion, which sometimes involves people volunteering to take on suffering as a test of others, and (b) the issue of spiritual justice.
