|
Bill wote:
>Definitions are limiting and cannot completely express in words what these mysteries hold. <
RC: Yes, I agree on this as well. We, along with all things (animate and inanimate) are all differentations of one infinity.
But in order to communicate our thoughts effectively it is important to have basic definitions of the things, ideas, and concepts we wish to discuss or interact with. Otherwise we will be sauteeing carpet tacks instead of onions!
If it is helpful to you to have a belief in eternal soul and that works for you that is great, but the same thing that works for you may not work for someone else and this must be respected -- just as you want your belief respected.
Most pagans, pantheists, atheists, communists and Taoists do not believe in the transmigration of soul -- or even have a vague handle of what it is. Webster tells us that both soul and spirit are the same and that it is an animating entity which originated (and returns) to the sea. It is also defined as having no physical or material reality and is credited with the functions of thinking and willing. Since thinking and willing are functions of nearly all of the animal kingdom, then this would mean that all animals have souls. Since the kingdom of plants and minerals do not think and will, this would mean that they do NOT have souls. Does your experince validate this meaning of soul/spirit, or are there different takes on this depending upon one's level of judgment/consiousness? I know in the old message post you wrote that you couldn't be a macrobiotic unless you believed in God. Does this still hold true fro you?
In peace, Roy
|