What this means though in reality is that we simply do not yet have
full knowledge of whatever it is that seems so.
I think that there are many tools to knowledge, personally although I
may disagree with some, I have not the hubris to declare that this
tool or that tool is invalid. However having just said that, we all
know the old adage 'the right tool for the job'.
Spirituality is, as per my understanding, a subset of ideas on the
metaphysical, it being an idea takes place in the brain, that is all
that I am really saying.
As to souls, well although I certainly believe in such a thing, I am
at a loss as to explain exactly what it is or where it resides. The
best I can do on that is make a distinction between 'matter' and
'spirit'. Matter is all that is and spirit is that which exists but
is not composed of matter.
I often explain it thusly.
Before the beginning there existed only God, God in spirit. Until God
created the creation from the 'body' (read spirit) of God's self. Lo
matter was created, but being that matter was created from spirit, all
matter is imbued with spirit.
We Sikhs say that God is a part of yet apart from the creation, the
above is the way I both understand what this means and rationalise it
to myself. Is it correct? Meh, I dunno, it is though what I believe.
To me science is just a tool that we use to understand the mechanics
of the creation. I don't see that religious faith and science clash
at all, nope if viewed rationally we can see that they complement each
other.
On Jan 5, 2:52 am, Eman Abdulla <emana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thank you Lee. I appreciate your response. I guess the question of 'the
> soul', if you will, is only one aspect of an entire worldview and one has
> to be true to one's beliefs that are accrued throughout reflection
> on one's life and experience. To me, contemporary science seems to
> be revealing very mysterious and counter intuitive aspects of existence
> that make the metaphysical more plausible today than in the previous
> centuries. The hidden dimensions, the principle of uncertainty,
> entanglement, arbitrariness of time and the very place of human
> consciousness in all that signify a level of complexity that is irreducible
> to mechanistic functions alone.
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 11:49 AM, Lee Douglas <leerevdoug...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > A huge welcome from me too Eman. I'm afraid that I shall be the voice
> > of dissent (just for a change) and agree with RP. All that you are
> > takes place in the old grey matter, when that no longer functions the
> > person is truly gone. All thoughts and feelings take place in the
> > brain, and what is spirituality if not an amalgamation of thoughts and
> > feelings?
>
> > On Jan 4, 1:41 pm, Eman Abdulla <emana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Thank you Archytas for your welcome. Such non physical phenomena are
> > hard
> > > to prove experimentally by definition but there is no need to disregard
> > > all possibilities of existence outside the physical realm. I personally
> > > believe in dreams as a possible connection between the worlds of the
> > living
> > > and the dead, I also believe in telepathy and think that the quantum
> > > principle of entanglement can apply to humans in someways, and I see
> > death
> > > as a transition between two states rather than the end of personal
> > > existence, thinking again that once we come to life, we won't end but
> > > transform and the data that make up our individuality lingers on in one
> > > form or another. But then again, these are only my beliefs. This universe
> > > is full of mysteries that we are just beginning to explore, and I think
> > we
> > > need to approach such mystery with openness to all possibilities.
>
> > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 6:26 PM, archytas <nwte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I agree Abdulla - welcome as a member of the group. Many scientists
> > > > think an information world or third realm (of thought) exists. I have
> > > > always tended to agree with RP on human responsibilities but am not so
> > > > sure on this. I must say I doubt a lot of the evidence you suggest,
> > > > but I'd still like to see more focus on spirituality in practice (even
> > > > as an atheist - or at least agnostic).
>
> > > > On Jan 3, 6:05 pm, Eman Abdulla <emana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > I tend to disagree as there is absolutely no proof that human
> > > > > consciousness, let alone spirituality, is merely a function of gray
> > > > matter.
> > > > > Many will argue that humans leave an invisible imprint on the
> > universe
> > > > that
> > > > > is felt after their physical death. Near Death experiences,
> > communicating
> > > > > information to the living by means of dreams, and other similar
> > phenomena
> > > > > that, although not captured by science, have been repeatedly
> > reported> I
> > > > > think that reducing spirituality to a physical fuction is a
> > disservice to
> > > > > science which has been able to point out the reductionist fallacies
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > areas of quantum physics and cosmology. There is still much to be
> > > > explored
> > > > > when it comes to one of the most complex aspects of existence, i.e,
> > human
> > > > > consciousness and spiritual transcendence.
>
> > > > > On Tue, Jan 3, 2012 at 3:42 AM, RP Singh <123...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > The conscious-active individuality is an attribute of a living
> > > > > > organism. When the life of an organism snuffs out, the attribute
> > > > > > vanishes. Spirituality is tied to the physicality of an organism
> > as it
> > > > > > is the gray-matter in the head which determines spiritual activity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment