Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Philosophical Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FrozenZ who wrote (159)	8/5/2005 10:13:44 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26251

I believe the whole thing actually IS 'semantics' as far as the 'soul' goes. As far as I'm concerned it [soul] simply implies continuation in some form after what is seen as 'death' of the body. Exactly what goes on, what is implied to go on by using the term 'soul' or 'spirit' or 'mind' or another name doesn't necessary differ between the traditions IMO. I'm not labeling one right and the other wrong... I simply think they're saying the same thing. In "Mathiew" Jesus states that "'so and so' came back as John the Baptist"... implying Karma like the Eastern traditions. At the time of the Buddha such mystical knowlege and traditions were well established, Jesus may have avoided such talk as unnecessary to his message or so as to avoid being seen as totally wacko [hmmm, didn't seem to keep him alive much longer]. The Buddha reportedly avoided using the term 'god' supposedly due to the nature of what he was trying to convey. As you say also, IMO 'soul' couldn't possibly imply you are two things or beings, and any talk to the contrary would be misinterpretation. When one speaks of the 'body' or 'ego' dying implying the spirit or soul would be separate from it, it's just for lingual convenience. All these teachings are re-interpreted through the centuries and get institutionalized... in the West "God" is widely believed to be something separate from self that will "come back" someday and 'judge you' {simple Karma}... despite one of Jesus most famous teachings "The kingdom of heaven is within". Even the Catholic Church {all Christian churches?} has the cornerstone belief that god IS everying, omnipresent, omniscient, etc etc {same as "the ONE" from the East} and yet somehow it is taught that god is 'out there' and separate and coming later to judge??? Viewed in this way, Buddhism, other Eastern religions and Christianity become much more similar than currently believed. DAK

To: FrozenZ who wrote (159)	8/5/2005 10:20:23 PM
From: LLCF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 26251

<Non-being cannot exist by its very definition.> Right... just like some Buddhist translations into English that speak of "the Void" is a mistranslation and should read 'unmanifest', also a term used. So the unmanifest is a prerequisite to the manifest... or Bohm's {?} enfolded and unfolded universe. I find it also VERY interesting that all traditions imply that 'thoughts are things' {Mulford}. In Chinese Qi-Gong thoughts carry energy or are energy packets, in the other Eastern traditions thoughts are part of the 'manifest'... in Christianity Jesus taught that even 'thinking of sin' is also sin. DAK