You’re never bored when you play your own game. You’re bored when you play another’s game.
I just can’t believe that some people think meaning is found only in procreation. Well, to use some peoples ideas, religion is the bi-product of human mental limitations. Thus the experiences reported in religious/spiritual experience are inherent to the biology. If this is true, and it isn’t really an elective state, then this tendency in humans toward “delusion” has survival value. Thus even if it can’t be objectified, that still makes it “truth.” Thoughts?
To me spirituality is something you experience, not something you can “know” by reading. It’s like love or morality or … Well, you get the idea.
Life is rhythm of creation, destruction, creation, destruction. Incarnation, birth, death, incarnation … ad infinitum. Creation-recreation-procreation. Procreation = little death. Death = biome wide procreation. Ones corpse will be maggot food, and the material they ingest will remain the basic compounds it was when it was consumed. If consciousness is in matter than consciousness is never lost, just more broadly distributed. The bio-matter that becomes coal will eventually compress into complex carbon silicate crystals, quartz, and if matter and consciousness are synonymous then where does consciousness end? One need not necessarily posit the non-matter to have a spiritual life.
But are matter and consciousness synonyms? In Greek philosophy, they speak of phenomenon or that which is evident to the senses. And the noumenon, that which is not evident to the senses but is evident to the mind. So these forms of the mind that are not explained by the forms of matter would seem to be the precursors to all action/reaction, all causative behaviour, and thus very real material change. Even my own spiritual weak moment has had an impact. Though not of my choosing, it is not “out of order.” As all things seem to move with the principles we experience in the domain of the noumenous, or to use David Bohms term, the “implicate order.”
What are these principles? Love is one. Understanding yet another. Not rationalization. Every evidence seems to point to the observation that reality cares very little for human rationalizations, but every species has a drive to “understand.” To give presence to other things in their awareness, even if that means they will “fear” it.
I don’t get it. Love and understanding can change some things, but not all things. All things cannot be moved by love and understanding? All things are moved by one thing, and everything else is a variant/reiteration of this one thing.
You mean spirit, mind or consciousness? We are speaking of movement rather than essence are we not?
You were speaking of movement, but… What is the one that moves all? In the beginning was the word, communion, communication, and nothing is to be unsaid, unexpressed. The word education comes from another word, educe, to draw out. What drives everything in movement is this drawing out or expression. Two dynamics in the same force. People struggle for words to describe this dynamic so they often call it “love”, which is what many think of when they are encouraged to “come out of their shell.”
The first reflection was of the logos. The logos reflected and recognized/resonated the harmony. “Saw that it was good.” Now things are deranged, but perhaps this too is in order.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.