Perhaps the following quotes will help to clarify whether the same thing is being talked about with different words, or different things with the same word:
RESPONDENT: In what way differs the ‘living in the world as-it-is with people as-they-are’ from the spiritual notion of acceptance?
RICHARD: Here is an example of what the word ‘acceptance’ can mean:
• acceptance: favourable reception (of persons, things, or ideas); approval; assent; (gen.) the act or fact of accepting [taking or receiving with consenting mind; receiving with favour or approval], whether as a pleasure, a satisfaction of claim, or a duty. (Oxford Dictionary).
As spirituality is all about not living in the world as-it-is with people as-they-are, but living in a spiritual dimension (a non-material world) as a spirit being (a bodiless presence), so as to perpetuate the existence of identity forever and a day, spiritual acceptance of physicality can hardly be called a favourable reception, an approval, an assent, with consenting mind, of material existence but rather a tolerance, an allowance, a permittance … or even, in some situations at least, a resignation.
RESPONDENT: If one embraces death, I mean accepts it totally, not on a superficial level, but realizes the impermanence of ‘me’ and ‘mine’, then one is free to live totally in the present.
RICHARD: Yes … if I may explore this word ‘accept’ (and ‘accepting’ and ‘acceptance’) as I see that you qualified it with ‘totally, not on a superficial level’? It has a lot of currency these days and popular usage has given it somewhat the same meaning as ‘allow’ or ‘permit’ or ‘tolerate’ … which is why I say ‘embrace’ (as in unreservedly saying !YES! to being alive as this flesh and blood body) as a full-blooded approval and endorsement. Those peoples who say that they ‘accept’ … um … a rapist, for just one example, never for one moment are approving and endorsing … let alone unreservedly saying !YES! to the rapist.
The content of this last quote is more complete here:
RESPONDENT: Also how does one ‘accept the world as it is, with people as they are’, even though one sees them all as unacceptably nursing malice and sorrow, bringing forth wars etc., etc.
RICHARD: I do not advise anyone to ‘accept the world as it is, with people as they are’ … I always put the question this way: ‘How can I live happily and harmlessly in the world as-it-is with people as-they-are?’ Which means: how is it possible to enjoy and appreciate being here, each moment again, as this flesh and blood body? Or: in what way can one live in complete fulfilment and total contentment for the remainder of one’s life? With the purity and perfection of a pure consciousness experience (PCE) firmly in mind as one’s guiding light one asks, each moment again: ‘How am I experiencing this moment of being alive?’
Incidentally, the word ‘acceptance’ has a lot of currency these days and popular usage has given it somewhat the same meaning as ‘allow’ or ‘permit’ or ‘tolerate’ … nineteen years ago ‘I’, the persona that I was, looked at the physical world and just knew that this enormous construct called the universe was not ‘set up’ for us humans to be forever forlorn in with only scant moments of reprieve. ‘I’ the persona realised there and then that it was not and could not ever be some ‘sick cosmic joke’ that humans all had to endure and ‘make the best of’. ‘I’ the persona felt foolish that ‘I’ had believed for thirty two years that the wisdom of the ‘real-world’ that ‘I’ had inherited – the world that ‘I’ was born into – was set in stone. I ceased accepting, allowing, permitting or tolerating or being resigned to suffering there and then. Which is why I say to people to embrace death (as in unreservedly saying !YES! to being alive as this flesh and blood body) as a full-blooded approval and endorsement. Those peoples who say that they ‘accept’ … um … a rapist, for just one example, never for one moment are approving and endorsing … let alone unreservedly saying !YES! to the rapist.
So much for ‘acceptance’ as a viable modus operandi.