The spirit is pure whole body consciousness. There is a white light spirit and a black light spirit. The black light spirit is sexual consciousness. The white light spirit is intellect. Anyone have any insights into this topic?
The spirit
- Thread starter donnann
- Start date
Um, no, just questions as usual. Are the spirit and the soul different things?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
The better question is 'whether there is any evidence of one or the other?'
I would say there is if you believe in data compiled to prove ghosts exist. Also data complied from people who have had neardeath experiences and afterdeath experiences.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru.
I am sure you will have a nice time with your family. No, I do not believe in 'ghost data'. And the people in NDE have only parts of their brain working. Not surprising if they have dream-like experiences, and dreams are not true.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
It is the opposite with this thread or "Auras". One can only "see" the soul if they see the same "correct" way you do? I have read about and met too many others who have seen souls to put any faith in this claim. The opposite of Jane-Q, this just smacks of solipsism.
Well that rather depends on the theological/metaphysical model you're working to.
I'm not sure what 'whole body consciousness' means, but it seems a particularly anthropomorphic limitation of the idea of 'spirit' as I understand it.
I don't know what you infer by 'black' and 'white': Good and Evil? Visible and Invisible?
Personally, I don't accept dualism as a metaphysical absolute. I tend to see spirit as presence and absence, rather than this and that.
That sounds a bit convoluted? Consciousness belongs to the intellect, for a start? I've met some pretty 'dark' intellects (of both the good and bad kind). Sex is a whole other kettle ...
My own, for what it's worth, distinguishes between 'spirit' and 'Spirit', for a start.
Spirit is God, and the Spirit of God brings forth life, so life as such is spirit, brought into being by Spirit (that is, because I live, that does not mean I am God).
Big-s Spirit is God, and is in a class of its own.
Small-s spirit is a universal category, which when manifests in particular instances — this life, that life — I call soul. So we can talk of my spirit and my soul almost as synonyms, but we cannot say soul is the same as spirit, any more than a single person is the same as the whole of humanity, if that makes sense?
But then my thinking is shaped by Christian doctrine. Someone from a different background will undoubtedly see things differently.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
HI JACK (125)!
Pretty much all of the posts here agree with that. The issue Aurmanyev, Elimin8, Thomas and I (I know I, and hazard a guess with the other three) was not spririt or spirituality. Rather, it is what is the substance, the stuff of it. What did the originator intend to say (or mean).
While each of us have broadly different background and conseptions of the issue, for me at least, I have problems with someone saying "this way and this way only".
Pretty much all of the posts here agree with that. The issue Aurmanyev, Elimin8, Thomas and I (I know I, and hazard a guess with the other three) was not spririt or spirituality. Rather, it is what is the substance, the stuff of it. What did the originator intend to say (or mean).
While each of us have broadly different background and conseptions of the issue, for me at least, I have problems with someone saying "this way and this way only".
When someone says I am the way and the light and you can only get there thru me....
You gotta define "I am" and "me"
You gotta define "I am" and "me"
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Yep, that is precisely the problem. Is "I am" only one way and "me" only one definition of Sp!rit?
Paladin
Purchased Bewilderment
Radar, I've always liked to believe that Christ meant something a little more expansive than one person, one way kind of thing. I find it difficult to articulate but I think there is a way in which the human species transcends, a continuation of Maslow's hierarchy if you will in which the human can transcend the self. Now, you are familiar with this idea so I won't belabor the point, but I think Christ may have been speaking from that place of not just pointing the way, but showing how all of us are also capable, have the potential to be the light and the way, because the light and the way are in flow with how the universe(s) work. Kind of like in the Hua Hu Ching, when we are exhorted to become "integral beings". Thus, though there are many ways to transcend the self or simply the idea of self, with its inherent limitations, once beyond, one is integral, one is the light and the way or even the Tathagata.
radarmark
Quaker-in-the-Making
Yes, paladin, I agree. Chr!st Jesus (in my opinion) REALLY SAID we can all get there. I am not really as die-hard christian as you think.
You like Maslow (I understand). I like the Kazantzakis notion of a series of personal explorations (more like Wilber). Just a matter of choice, I feel they are very, very similar.
You like Maslow (I understand). I like the Kazantzakis notion of a series of personal explorations (more like Wilber). Just a matter of choice, I feel they are very, very similar.
yuppers...paul told us to put the mind of christ in our mind....
Jesus the man, grocked a higher consciousness, a state of oneness...
and told us to follow that path...aint an easy path....forgiveness, turning the other cheek, not worrying about food or clothes or money...believing in providence....caring for the poor....what you have done to thee you've done to me..(collective and personal me) so every act either takes us closer, or moves us further away.... and yup....there is an accounting, a permanent record of naughty and nice....we aren't punished for our sins but by them....
Jesus the man, grocked a higher consciousness, a state of oneness...
and told us to follow that path...aint an easy path....forgiveness, turning the other cheek, not worrying about food or clothes or money...believing in providence....caring for the poor....what you have done to thee you've done to me..(collective and personal me) so every act either takes us closer, or moves us further away.... and yup....there is an accounting, a permanent record of naughty and nice....we aren't punished for our sins but by them....
Paladin
Purchased Bewilderment
I understand the sentiment, though I have no data that validates it. It has been my experience that most people eschew honest introspection and balk at having to do the deep inner work necessary for spiritual and psychological well-being. Having said that however, I can also understand why the religious mandate to do so is often ignored as American Christianity relies on shame and blame resulting in a condition of self-loathing that astounded people like the Dalai Lama who had never heard of such a thing before. Growing up in a household where I was constantly reminded of what a nothing I am, and how shameful I was left scars that took a lifetime to heal. What was once a practice to help move a person toward a life of virtue has become just another tool to project the shame onto others, a tool used by authoritarian personality types to punish others, it is no wonder this condition exists.
I am rather cautious about 'deep inner work' — what's the point?
I think the Delphic maxim "Know thyself" was always intended to highlight a paradox — you can't — and too often, it seems to me, the result is just more self-focused and more self-absorbed.
And it's certainly a no-no if not done under supervision, so you have to pick your tradition, and find out what 'deep inner work' means in context.
Christianity? Kenosis again: prayer and humility — a little more love of God, a little more love of neighbour, a little less love of self — it should be the lightest and easiest thing in the world, but, you're right, we've managed to turn it into an onerous and often psychologically damaging burden.
Paladin
Purchased Bewilderment
Inner work here means facing the shadow side of our selves, the part of us that we often tend to disconnect from. I am talking specifically about facing the things about ourselves we would rather disown, or worse, place upon others. It really is a given that to do this kind of work without a teacher or therapist is a sketchy proposition at best. As a graduate student in counseling psychology I tend to lean on the work of people like Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Martin Seligman, the founder of positive psychology to guide my path. But I really didn't want to delve too deeply into my own theoretical foundation, because it isn't well known here on the board.
I still have serious qualms with the damage that religious zealots place upon the shoulders of people. The fallout from this kind of stuff is what nightmares are made of.
I think that you are quite correct that self-absorption or narcissism is rampant in western culture, but you must understand that narcissism is really just unrequited self-love. I have yet to see examples of how popular Christianity has any impact on removing the self-absorption and narcissism in our culture without being twisted into a way to judge and blame others. Few religious leaders in our country have been able to set the example, and have instead, become icons of projecting blame and shame on others rather than take the time to teach all of us to look within and deal with our own problems first. It is this condition that renders people sensitive to criticism and unable to utilize the good that religion is capable of providing.