I am not sure how aggressive it is , the concept has been floating around for eons.. christianity does not want to deal with the concept of a soul and its origin.. the preexistence of soul is an idea they hide from.
the reality spirituality is a subject tip toe around and trying to use many words and say little..
As I view it, (it has been a struggle for me to arrive at this view point.) this reality is only a way station in a spiritual existence. This is not the end stage. when we are born into this world our should give up their knowledge and are in effect are saying that we know how to live in a physical plain and raise ourselves to a higher spiritual level.. the highest being a level of complete harmony with the Entirety. (or God if you insist but actually that is an incorrect concept.)
I believe the Tibetan Buddhist monks simply abandon the body to nature so it can complete its cycle and return to earth. It is the soul that is of importance, I really do not see much difference than the the soul being reborn as...
Allan
This is aggressive stuff, Allan ! Thank you.
The hardest thing in context is that we believe we are the body,
empirically. Hence, people find no one, no " I," no possibility of
anything even remotely akin or connected to our self, before the body
is born.
Soul to such people is an obscure thing, conceptually and
phenomenally. We therefore find the suggestion, of a soul before the
child is born, fantastic. Ridiculous, in other
words.
On Jul 4, 11:06 am, Allan H <allanh1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What is so hard about seeing the possibility of the soul existing before
> the child is born?
> Allan
0 comentários:
Postar um comentário