Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale, Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: Original Sin [Re: Psiloman]
    #2947840 -

Psiloman said:
Oh ,,yes ,when we used to run wild (prefferably naked) amonst trees,streams,friendly and unfriendly animals,parasites that want to make their way in our guts,but also beautifull unspoiled sunsets,clean fragrand air and no cement around!



Ohhh man, how i miss that!


..... why do we humans use this cement, when im overly sensetive and walk on paved roads i can feel this negative radiation emmiting from everything cemented, its torture i tell you! But then again if there was no roads we would stiill be riding ponies and it would take 100 days to cross Europe and we wouldn't be as advanced as we are today and we woundt have interenet and and ... i give up its just so complicated

i guess its all part of our evolution

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: ferago2]
    #2948769 -

The very best Jungian psychological explanation (the 'right' tool for the job) for the Genesis account can be found in the book Ego and Archetype by the late Edward Edinger. It makes more sense of the mythos than anything I have ever read theologically, as the birth of consciousness from the matrix (mater, matter) of the unconscious, and attendant experiences of guilt, shame, dependency, suffering, etc. - all consequences of self-conscious identity.

BTW, the doctrine of Original Sin was invented as it were by Augustine of Hippo (St. Augustine) and adopted completely by the Catholic Church. It then 'spread' into Orthodoxy and Protestantism. It is NOT the Old Testament doctrine that we all have an 'evil inclination' [Yetzer Hara] but that we have all inherited the spiritual disease (sin) from the Primordial Mother - Eve - and we are totally depraved from the womb. Despite the fact that Jesus was supposed to have said 'I am not come for the righteous, but for the sinners,' the Church overlooked the notion that there were righteous Jews and Gentiles. Original Sin is the original power-trip of the Church.

Feeling shame for nakedness - actual nudity, not a metaphor for the transparency of one's soul before GOD - is caused by enculturation. Nudist families (and there is a nude beach near my home with straight, gay and family sections) do not train their children to feel shame at being viewed in the nude. This really has nothing to do with the metaphorical and theological language of Genesis, but it has been made shameful by anti-sex Christian doctrines, and the US is a Christian culture by and large.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: ferago2]
    #2948887 -

This is my thought on original sin and this is in my own ideas not the ideas tought by christianity. I feel that the originl sin was the seperation of people by saying there are the pure and the sinners. I think it was the cause from the start.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: MAGnum]
    #2950218 -

MAGnum said:
Please, elaborate, Jono



In a number of eastern religions, (Buddhism, Hinduism for example), there is the idea of 'delusion' where individuals, from the time of their first birth in Samsara, go about many lifetimes in the deluded state where they assume themselves to be an individual entity, who is interacting in a world that is separate or altogether different from 'themselves'. As they consider themselves to be a separate agent to all other things, they hold beliefs about such notions as right and wrong, and hold onto the idea of Metaphyiscal free-will. On experiencing Moksha / satori / enlightenment etc, the delusion of being a separate self is lost, and all previous beliefs about the nature of the world are over-turned. I've often wondered if the idea of 'original sin' is infact synonymous to the idea of 'original delusion' in this manner, where sin is not actually referring to morally rephrensible actions, but delusion as to our true nature (in a sense the only real 'wrong' for want of a better word).

Jono.


--------------------
Our problem results from acting like cowboys on a limitless frontier when in truth we inhabit a living spaceship with a finely balanced life-support system." David C. Korton

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: jono]
    #2956455 -

Hinduism and Buddhism are both categorized as 'acosmic' religions, as opposed to 'historical' religions such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The former type do not attribute essential meaning to historical events and persons but tend to view all of historicity to be transcended. There is a decidedly 'impersonal' bent to the Absolute, and thus to essential human nature. Although Hindu thought makes allowances for God-with-attributes (personal God) and God-without-attributes (Transpersonal God), Buddhism, by-and-large, only recognizes an Absolute without attributes (much like Hinduism's Nirguna Brahman - God-without-attributes). Moreover, in the East, a 'shame culture' predominates. One registers shame for one's 'sins' in the sense of someone 'knows better,' not in a social sense, but in a spiritual sense. I mean, if you Know who and what you really are, you don't allow petty desires get the better of you and shamefully pursue them.

Conversely, the West embodies a 'guilt culture' with regard to 'sin' inasmuch as the personal God is seen to be offended by our impure actions. We are cosmic criminals, and we are 'living souls' - individuals. Our individual selves, egos, carry meaning. We are significant in the eyes of God, not just fleeting moments of self-conscious cytoplasmic life like the billions of human beings who came before us and who will follow our demise.

As you described the human condition, the assumption is of an Ontological nature - we are actually one with the Ground of Being (Ontos). The Western mind-set is decidedly Existential. We are creatures, we are one with the fabric of space-time and hence one with nature, with existence. We do not partake of Being, of Spirit, of Eternal Life in Christianity at least, unless we have been baptized, receive the Holy Spirit, receive Communion and imbibe the Body and Blood of Christ, etc. Jews and Muslims differ of course, but only certain mystics (Gnostics, Kabbalists, Sufis) of these Western traditions come close to perceiving true identity as you have described it. These are the 'Awakened' ones in the West, the inhabitants of Zion, awakened from The Matrix.


--------------------
γνῶθι σαὐτόν - Gnothi Seauton - Know Thyself

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: MarkostheGnostic]
    #2956817 -

f*ck Origional sin, F*ck it in the ass

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: ferago2]
    #2957114 -

Recommended read for anyone taken by the idea of original sin - Philip Pullman's trilogy "His Dark Materials." (The Golden Compass, The Subtle Knife, The Amber Spyglass)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: cleaner]
    #2981990 -

>> how can one take lightly and calmly whats happening on the planet, how can one not fear of what might happen if people do not wisen up?

Well, this again goes back to learning to stop distinguishing ourselves from other living beings. It is our habit to believe that we are isolated, as though our surroundings are somehow different and detached from us. When we approach the world's state of affairs, we contemplate the matter as though we were observing the world and it's miseries on a movie screen 'out there'. There is no sense that we are making any contribution to what is going on around us. Indeed, we believe that the overall state of the world is something which is happening 'to' us.

In reality, however, we are intimately involved in the world's circumstances. Our own attitudes, feelings, and actions contribute to the state of the whole. If we are always distressed about the world, we are not in a position to effect any positive change upon it's overall state. In the same way that every vehicle on a Los Angeles freeway contribute's to the city's smog, everything that we do with such a negative predispotion serves only as a contribution to the world's further distress. This alone should be reason enough not to allow ourselves to become fearful, frustrated, or hopeless, because it is precisley fear, frustration and hopelessness which lie near the root of the world's troubles.

If we are distressed about the state of the world, feeling hopeless, we are only able to do so because we believe that the state of the world is something that we are observing, and not a process that we ourselves are intimately involved in both creating and perceiving.

It is frequently argued that there is no need to be compassionate, or to approach the world with a positive attitude, because there is no way that one individual can change the entire world simply by being kind. This is like saying that it is irrational to recycle because one person's garbage-sorting cannot reduce the rate at which our landfills are expanding. Of course it is true that one person's kindness cannot put an end to war or famine, and of course it's true that one person's recycling regimen will not save the oceans. How is it logical to refrain from either activity for this reason? Are we really so lazy and self-important that we will not engage in any action that does not have immediate repercussions on the global scale? If we are being kind, at least we are not contributing to cruelty. If we are recycling, at least we are not contributing to wastefulness.

We need to understand that we are either part of the problem or part of the solution. If we allow ourselves to be paralyzed by fear and apprehension, we are part of the problem because we are contributing to the amount of fear and apprehension which paralyzes the globe.

As kaiowas was saying, it's also true that much of our apprehension toward the state of the world comes from an impatience with the discrepancy between the way things are and the way we wish them to be. Impatience is a mind which attempts to command circumstances into being different from what they are. It is sustained by the belief that our surroundings should operate in accordance with our desires, which in turn is an attitude dependent upon self-cherishing, the idea that our own wishes are of higher priority than those of others. Since we cannot cherish ourselves without first conceiving ourselves to be seperate from others, we can see how impatience -- as well as fear, hopelessness, or any kind of suffering -- arises mutually and is sustained upon the mind of self-grasping ignorance: the belief that we are a perfectly discrete "me" floating about a world of linear causality, filled with rigid, sharply defined objects and not-objects, ideas and not-ideas, good and bad, right and wrong, black and white.

In life, there will always be difficulty and suffering. If we are able to make difficult circumstances better, there is no reason to become upset. If we become upset, we waste time and energy which could be invested in pacifying our difficulty. If we are unable to change difficult circumstances, there is still no reason to become upset. How will losing our happiness help? It can only make matters worse. Therefore, it is always appropriate to have patient acceptance, and always illogical to become angered and unhappy when difficulty appears to us.

If we make an effort to be patient and accepting with all the circumstances which appear to us, we directly undermine the mind of self-grasping ignorance, thereby reducing the intensity of our experience of life's unavoidable sufferings. This is true because patience and acceptance are selfless traits which are direct opponents to impatience and non-acceptance, which are traits inextricably linked to self-grasping ignorance.


--------------------


:poison: Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud :poison:
Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: ferago2]
    #2982696 -

Original Sin in my opinion is one's parents having sex and creating another little beast when they know perfectly well that they are going to conform this beast and inject it into an unhealthy society.


--------------------
Insert an "I think" mentally in front of eveything I say that seems sketchy, because I certainly don't KNOW much. Also; feel free to yell at me.
In addition: SHPONGLE

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Original Sin [Re: Strumpling]
    #2983306 -

i think what your hitting on here is simply that society defines sin for itself. Nakedness was a sin because society said so. Thus, before people started being ashamed nakedness wasnt a sin (as a sin is simply something that society makes us ashamed of)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale, Isolated Cubensis Liquid Culture For Sale

General Interest > Philosophy, Sociology & Psychology
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Christ died for our sins?
( 1 2 3 4 ... 11 12 all )		 silversoul7 16,410 231 10/06/03 07:25 AM
by MarkostheGnostic
* is humanity born into sin?
( 1 2 3 all )		 purenergy 4,810 40 09/18/03 10:24 PM
by DoctorJ
* how do you personally classify a "sin"
( 1 2 all )		 CleverName 2,275 30 05/04/04 03:51 AM
by castaway
* fault
( 1 2 all )		 DoctorJ 2,435 26 03/18/05 11:06 PM
by Psychoactive1984
* The passion of the Christ
( 1 2 3 all )		 flowstone 4,132 51 04/02/05 05:03 PM
by JCoke
* If Jesus suffered for our sins...
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )		 Phluck 6,932 107 12/06/02 07:35 PM
by 1stimer
* The Origins of the I Ching
( 1 2 all )		 Dogomush 2,127 22 04/16/03 02:50 AM
by atomikfunksoldier
* HINDUISM Cosm 1,525 13 02/12/05 12:04 PM
by MarkostheGnostic

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
2,241 topic views. 1 members, 109 guests and 38 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.023 seconds spending 0.003 seconds on 15 queries.