[we are all 1]

Dear Spyrelx,
I enjoyed reading your post here. You strike me as someone that is somewhat open minded. You ask questions that few will ask. The answers are not all that complex and no, I don’t have all of the answers. But I do know where to look. It is an inner journey. The answers do not exist in the outer. And it requires temporarily setting aside your personal beliefs, or information filters, and open wide the space of possibility for new ideas. The days of traditional wisdom’s effectiveness in the affairs of humans are coming to an end.

If I may quote you here:”In sum, external codes of conduct – whether imposed on you by the Catholic Church, Buddha or your grandmother – have value, precisely because they come from traditions that are, collectively, older and wiser then you; traditions that take the long view of both the human race and your own spiritual development. You ignore such teachings to the detriment of yourself and the rest of humanity.”

You take a standpoint on morals that is not uncommon. Please note, however, that humans have been doing exactly this for millenia, ie, following the traditions handed down from one generation to the next. Have you noticed that the conflict situations here on earth are not in the least diminished? The problems still exists. Traditional time-tested teachings are ineffective, as to which observation will attest. They don’t work, pure and simple.

The church, whose lists of do’s and don’ts, have modified their standpoint on many moral issues over the centuries, such as not eating meat on Fridays. The Buddah was a kind and wonderful person whose teachings were misinterpreted by those Buddist leaders that followed. The problem is dogmatism. If, in fact, free will is our spiritual heritage, then dogmatism would set a paradox in place. We either have free will or we don’t. And don’t we all like to have choices?

As for the Winn vs Plato issue, why can’t they both be right? That would depend on the definition of self. The self refered to in Taoist practice is the universal, or BIG self; the “all that is”; the “all of everything”; THE source; the “I AM”. Plato refers to the “self” in context as the ego, or little self, And there is a universe of difference. Enlightened compassion comes from the recognizing the BIG self everywhere you look.

My understanding is that while all human goals may be as different as their individual appearances, the souls that encase these temporary portals that we call bodies all have exactly the same goal: that the “I AM” may know itself in its own experience. The paths to “Who am I?”, the whole point of life in physicality and relativity, are more than the number of grains of sand that exist in totality; infinite in scope.

I could go on, but in lieu of that I’d like to make a recommendation if I may. There is a wonderful series of books on the very subjects that you bring up. An author named Neale Donald Walsch has written a series of books, the first of which is titled A CONVERSATION WITH GOD. Read it. You may disagree with the ideas presented, but at least give it a shot and consider the possibilities. There may be another way than the one currently in place. With warmest regards…

[Author]

Posts