For social interaction, not for knowledge gaining, spiritual insight
or to develop my philosophy. And you?

On Aug 19, 9:56 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote:
> "You are suggesting that it is good to read the words of others to
> develop ones own philosophy, and that one finds spirituality through
> religion. I am stating that I have not, and will not, do this."
>
> I would ask, if you are so resolute within yourself, why are you in
> this group?
>
> On Aug 19, 9:25 am, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > You are suggesting that it is good to read the words of others to
> > develop ones own philosophy, and that one finds spirituality through
> > religion. I am stating that I have not, and will not, do this. You are
> > welcome to say that religion and spirituality are not separate. I do
> > not share this view whatsoever. But to each their own ;-]
>
> > I am not seeking knowledge. In my world, a perfect existance is
> > emotional serenity bolstered by a bright spiritual core. If you wish
> > to search for knowledge by asking the advice of others, I wish you
> > well. There is no problem, I just do like to follow a "path" created
> > by others. In fact, I am not much into paths at all. Many paths have
> > tributaries, and if one stays on the straight and narrow, they may
> > miss a lot on their way to "nirvana", or whatever it is they are
> > looking for.
>
> > From my experience, the path to spiritual awareness is internal. One
> > may read about on how to initiate meditation, but once in that state,
> > the words of others have no relevance. The development of ones own
> > ethics, or philosophy, is also a personal thing to me, so to answer
> > your question, yes, I would much prefer to cut my own weeds than slide
> > down the nicely groomed path that others have forged.
>
> > On Aug 19, 9:01 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Bah you wally!
>
> > > No man I did not say this at all.
>
> > > The word spirit what do you mean by it?
>
> > > Where did I even suggest that 'your path' is wrong? I tell you that
> > > religoin and spirtuality are not seperate, that is what I have said.
> > > I tell you that religion can be seen as a guide for the spirt, and
> > > from this you take what?  That somehow I am unhappy with my lot and
> > > begrudge your yours?
>
> > > I tell you this also I read all sorts about all sorts not to shape
> > > anything but to learn.  I can like anybody else read an idea and
> > > disagree with it, as I have done here.  You read these words of mine
> > > 'religion and spirt are NOT seperate' are you then guilty of 'reaching
> > > my destination' merely because you have read them?
>
> > > Let me make myself clearer, in case that is the problem here.
> > > Whatever path you walk, whatever realm of knowledge you are seeking,
> > > is it better to seek advise from those who have walked the same path
> > > before, or does it make more sense to try out things for yourself,
> > > make the same mistakes that others have already made, and eventualy
> > > (and not at all garrenteed) arrive at the same answers to these
> > > problems that others have arrived at long before you where a gleam in
> > > the eyes of your father?
>
> > > I tell you if you answer the latter here, I will grill you about what
> > > you think therefore of education and schools.
>
> > > I compared nowt my friend, I made metophores, I created anology.  Or
> > > do you tell me that one can not learn about spirtulaity, that is just
> > > somehow comes to one?
>
> > > On 19 Aug, 13:44, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Spirit is not an idea. It is a joyful experience that gives one
> > > > goosebumps. You don't dream up spirit. You bathe in it. Yes, I MUCH
> > > > prefer to "blunder around" on my own spiritual path, as I did not
> > > > experience anything spiritual from my religious "guidance". The path
> > > > you choose to take is right for you. Calling my path wrong seems to
> > > > indicate that you have not had much success in the path that you have
> > > > chosen. Why? Because if you had reached your perfect place, you would
> > > > be happy that I am happy with the "path" I have forged (not taken), no
> > > > matter how I got there.
>
> > > > If you read the books of others to shape your philosophy, you may
> > > > think you are taking the short cut to your intended destination, but
> > > > you have reached someone elses destination, not your own. That is the
> > > > problem with many people, they want things with the least amount of
> > > > work. They want to eat the meal, but not grow the ingredients used to
> > > > prepare it.
>
> > > > To compare gaining knowledge in engineering with learning spirit is
> > > > the same as comparing religion with spirit. One has everything to do
> > > > with human physical life, the other, nothing.
>
> > > > On Aug 19, 8:29 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > No no no no my freind I disagree.  I can see why you say this, yes
> > > > > indeed you have already confessed to that part of your upbringing, but
> > > > > it is not really true.
>
> > > > > If religoin is man made then so is spirit.  Both of them being labels
> > > > > we attach to certian ideas, now the idea of spirt cannot exist without
> > > > > somebody to dream it up, nor can the idea of religoin, so in that
> > > > > sense all ideas than mankind has are man-made.
>
> > > > > From your words below I can see that you have done exaclty as I have
> > > > > said you have, you see the word religon,and think only dogma and
> > > > > attach negativity to that word.  It's this simple, religoin is a road
> > > > > map for spirtual people.  Yes of course you can claim to be religous,
> > > > > but if you are not then you are hypocritical, just like you can claim
> > > > > to be spirtual but the same applys.
>
> > > > > You can of course choose not to read books on any subject you like,
> > > > > but that is really taking the long way around.
>
> > > > > Would you decide to become an engineer without any study except the
> > > > > formulation of your own way of doing things?  Yes of course it is
> > > > > possible, you may well eventualy come up with the idea of pi and how
> > > > > to use it all on your own, but how much better if you picked up a book
> > > > > entitled 'The principles of engineering'.
>
> > > > > The same then is true for what you call spirtuality.  You can choose
> > > > > to blunder around on your own and you may well hit upon the truth, in
> > > > > the end, how much better though that you have some guidance, relgion
> > > > > is such guidance.
>
> > > > > On 19 Aug, 13:16, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Religion is man made, spirit is not. The two are an eternity apart
> > > > > > imo. Religion is based around words in a book, written by humans. 
> > > > > > One
> > > > > > can read about love in a book, but never experience the emotion of
> > > > > > such. Similarly, one can read every book on religion ever written, 
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > not feel the bliss of spiritual joy. I am not saying that NO 
> > > > > > religious
> > > > > > people are spiritual. What I am saying, is that they do not go 
> > > > > > hand-in-
> > > > > > hand. There are/have been many men in religious positions, or who
> > > > > > claimed to be religious, who were in fact, very evil. Are pedeophile
> > > > > > priests spiritual? I think not.
>
> > > > > > In regards to your statement about philosophy. Should we presume 
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > the first book of philosophy is irrelevant because the author did 
> > > > > > not
> > > > > > read any other books on the subject. You may take any path you want 
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > develop your philosophical stance, I preferred to let my conscious 
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > my guide and I have not read one book on philosophy and never intend
> > > > > > to. Does that mean that I cannot be philosophical? Philosophy means
> > > > > > "love of wisdom". Can one teach wisdom? Maybe. I preferred to 
> > > > > > develop
> > > > > > my own philosophy and, if this is not cool with some, hey, they can
> > > > > > always sue me ;-]
>
> > > > > > On Aug 19, 7:42 am, "[email protected]" 
> > > > > > <[email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > I really don't get this.  I mean this insitance that religoin and
> > > > > > > spirtuality are somehow differant?
>
> > > > > > > The religious man is a spirtual man, religion is nowt more than
> > > > > > > clarifyied spirtuality, it means there is no need to blunder 
> > > > > > > around on
> > > > > > > your own, it means that the questions you have have already been
> > > > > > > answerd.  Claiming to be spiritual but not religious is akin to 
> > > > > > > trying
> > > > > > > to learn philosphy by your self without reading what past 
> > > > > > > philospohers
> > > > > > > have wrote.
>
> > > > > > > What exactly is the differance between a religous scientist and a
> > > > > > > spirtual scientist then?  Can you show me a religous man that is 
> > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > spirtual?
>
> > > > > > > Bah sementic gameplay because some hear or read the word religion 
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > think only of dogmatism and negativity, if you ask me.
>
> > > > > > > On 18 Aug, 12:02, deripsni <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > IMO, science and religion can never get along because religion 
> > > > > > > > is a
> > > > > > > > man-made belief system that is not based on anything other than 
> > > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > bunch of stories that have been translated a hundred times 
> > > > > > > > over. Many
> > > > > > > > of the "miracles" in the Bible have already been debunked, and
> > > > > > > > religions are really just preachings about a code of ethics 
> > > > > > > > combined
> > > > > > > > with some trivial "historical" events.
>
> > > > > > > > Proving religion is impossible because it is a fictional story 
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > some factual stuff thrown in for good measure. "God" and 
> > > > > > > > religion
> > > > > > > > should not be talked about in the same sentence as they separate
> > > > > > > > issues. A religious scientist seems like an oxymoron. Now a 
> > > > > > > > spiritual
> > > > > > > > scientist, thats another story!
>
> > > > > > > > On Aug 17, 9:49 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Will it ever be possible to meld science and religion?  
> > > > > > > > > Religion is so
> > > > > > > > > unscientific
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to