Alan, the substance of beliefs, I agree, is not the problem. Access to the common wisdom is free and the appearance that is staged by the 'oh so holy' and/or 'devious' for personal gain or glorification is a product of the way of mankind that needs to be changed.
I would think to "choose a path" would be subscribing to a dogma, where the 'free' connection that we would like to establish leaves dogma behind. peace & Love On Apr 29, 4:16 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > ""The problem that I think we need to solve is how to make that 'thing', > known as 'common', amongst mankind."Tink" > > Well Tink I do not think that the substance of beliefs is really the > problem but rather is the lacking of desire, as it appear there is a price > to pay for this common wisdom and that requires effort. To many people want > to pass the responsibility for there spiritual well being to some one else. > "Tell me what I need to do and I will do it.." or some one else telling > another person to do for there salvation or enlightenment" Unfortunately for > these people there are those that would take advantage of them for gain "Äh! > I have seen the Light!" and of they go into psycho babble. I do not blame > those who walk away completely for their stennch is overwelming. > > It is said that the path to salvation is narrow and difficult and few ever > chose to follow it.. > > That I think is true if you desire to enter the collective wisdom,, you > must first choose the path you want to follow, then you have to walk the > walk. Some seem to be shorter than others and some never get there at all. > Allan > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 3:38 AM, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I just responded on the discussion of 'opinion or bias', "definition > > and/or point of view fuel all arguments". > > I think the personal religion defines and is one's point of view of > > 'spiritual'. > > Spiritual is ones developed or accepted interpretation of the contact > > with the collective intelligence. > > I know what you are talking about when you say spiritual joy. I call > > it connecting to the collective intelligence, and it is exactly the > > same 'thing'. > > Christians, Buddhist, Muslims and free thinking spiritualist such as > > yourself all have the same 'thing' as the substance of their beliefs. > > > The problem that I think we need to solve is how to make that 'thing', > > known as 'common', amongst mankind. > > > peace & Love > > > On Apr 28, 8:47 pm, e_space <[email protected]> wrote: > > > as you have mentioned, the nuances of individual spiritual experiences > > > are as varied as the number of people who have experienced them. some > > > may exclude anothers 'personal religion' if they want, but i dont > > > believe most spirit-humans do so. my experiences have little to do > > > with human life, so sharing them is not only difficult to do, but most > > > people you try to describe them to think you are from another planet. > > > i dont think many people who have experienced spiritual joy will > > > disregard similar experiences of others, but will gladly share in the > > > others joy. this may not be described exactly as 'unity', but it is a > > > nice community experience. > > > > On Apr 28, 7:22 pm, Tinker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > My take on the Dali Lama crying when he was asked if there was an easy > > > > way to enlightenment sets the stage. > > > > > Dali cried because he knows that the way to enlightenment is too > > > > difficult, for enough of mankind to learn, and would never be able to > > > > bring about the transcendence that Buddhism seeks as its flavor of > > > > Unity. > > > > > Why is it that all the great minds of our time and those of history > > > > all converge on the fact that the power for solving all of the > > > > problems of the world is within the mind of mankind, but none have > > > > been able to affect the ways of mankind to bring about any significant > > > > change? > > > > The power connection in the mind has many different descriptions of it > > > > and directions on how to access it. It can be simply a magnificent > > > > light and it can be Jesus in all his glory. And it is exactly what it > > > > is according to whoever is describing it. It is a real thing and > > > > that’s the description that is available from previous information > > > > that has been incorporated into the belief structure of the > > > > individual. > > > > It is energy. It is indescribable. But it is such a wonderful thing > > > > that we have to describe it so we can claim it as ours. The method of > > > > description is metaphor, using that which is familiar to us. > > > > It is a resource for the individual to connect with the collective > > > > intelligence. > > > > When we connect with it we get a personal charge, it is a personal > > > > thing, the opposite of a Unity thing. > > > > We have gone to it (possibly only subconsciously), identified it and > > > > made it our personal knowing and understanding justifier, establishing > > > > our personal religion. And we exclude anything that is not in line > > > > with our personal religion. > > > > This is not the way to Unity. > > -- > ( > ) > I_D Allan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
