Re: Mind's Eye Re: Spirituality

Lee , you may insert " human purpose " for " Spiritual purpose ".

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 5:24 PM, Lee Douglas <leerevdouglas@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think RP we are going around and around in a contraditory circle here
> mate.
>
> If all is predetermined, and spirt has no concept of good or bad, or at
> least it makes no sense to talk about good and bad and spirit together, then
> why do good at all? What is the porpouse, what is the spiritual porpouse?
>
> On Thursday, 10 May 2012 16:11:41 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>>
>> When all actions good or bad arise from Spirit there is no sense in
>> claiming good to be from the spirit and bad from non-spirit , so there
>> is no sense in calling anything spiritual. But being active agents in
>> all actions we have the ability  to choose those actions which are for
>> the upliftment of humanity , we can choose to be ethical and not
>> religious because many sins are committed in the name of religion.
>>
>> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 5:58 PM, Lee Douglas <leerevdouglas@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > You see RP that also makes little sense to me.
>> >
>> > If actions arise from spirit, then how do they loose their spirtual
>> > meaning?  If it is humanity that falsly see's a division, a duality
>> > where in
>> > reality none exist then my original question is very relevant.  For if
>> > all
>> > actions arise from spirit then in reality there is no good or bad.
>> >
>> >
>> >  If a man can be unscupulos and then claim his actions as being moved by
>> > spirt does he not  seek to disengage his self from fault, from blame?
>> > This
>> > is clearly wrong, as much religious faith holds doing good as the
>> > correct
>> > thing to do.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wednesday, 9 May 2012 13:00:18 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Since all actions arise from the Spirit, actions lose their spiritual
>> >> meaning and we ascribe human  meaning to them , that is , good and bad
>> >> in relevance to human ethics and not under the authority of religious
>> >> scriptures. An unscrupulous man is unscrupulous and determinism
>> >> doesn't change anything.
>> >>
>> >> On Wed, May 9, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Lee Douglas <leerevdouglas@gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > On Tuesday, 1 May 2012 16:50:20 UTC+1, RP Singh wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> As everything is predetermined it follows that everything is done by
>> >> >> the
>> >> >> spirit , which makes all actions spiritual. But that has no meaning
>> >> >> ,
>> >> >> so we
>> >> >> may say that that the word spiritual is obsolete and we should
>> >> >> distinguish
>> >> >> between good actions and bad actions , good people and bad people ,
>> >> >> scrupulous people and the unscrupulous. Also the definition of the
>> >> >> good
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> bad changes from clime to clime , but generally the definition of
>> >> >> good
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> bad is universal if you look at it with a humanitarian eye. Thus
>> >> >> spirit
>> >> >> ,
>> >> >> being all-encompassing, goes into the background.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > More importantly if everything is predetermined then why even speak
>> >> > of
>> >> > good
>> >> > and bad, scrupulous or unscrupulos?
>> >> >