Re: Mind's Eye Re: Spirituality

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 may say that that the word spiritual is obsolete and we should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?
>> >