AlexisJacobi is Intuitively Heideggerian, common sense really, untilAlexis Jacobi wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 9:58 pmWell, what you could not understand, obviously, is that the idea or the concept that you are speaking about, which you dismiss absolutely (and for your own reasons naturally, and within a social and cultural context that can't, or won't, examine the idea in depth (for a group of reasons), is an idea that I have mulled over. In thought of course but also on other levels (intuitively, internally, subjectively).
In a basic sense I accept the idea as *being true*. I put a different twist on it, and in a way expand the idea, which amounts to a way to open up the idea to consideration. But the way I do this is somewhat outlandish and, also, I borrow from other religious traditions.
I believe that souls enter this world through an inconceivable process. Yes, it is through biological conception, but in the sense of my understanding that is a *superficial* sense of it. A soul enters this domain of experience, which means the flesh-body, through processes of what I might call *attraction*. All kinds of souls are, allow me to say, attracted to this specific sphere (the notion of loka or 'planet' can help in the conception of what I mean). Yet since I see in all creation, and the entire cosmic manifestation, endless possibilities and non-limitation of possibilities, I speculate, or intuit, that any number of similar planes of manifestation, lokas or planets, may well exist. [Loka (Sanskrit: लोक) is a concept in Indian religions, that means plane or realm of existence.]
So, how it happens that a given soul -- I refer to you or to me or to anyone -- arrives here, that is, incarnates into a body that carries it and births it, my sense is that there are many many mysteries connected with that.
The notion of 'conceived in sin' or 'born in sin' is an idea that (of course only if one is inclined to do so) one that can be sounded out. But I know of no other way that this could be carried out except one that is subjective and intuitive.
I see the very nature of the world, the ecological systems of the natural world, as encasing the rather terrible situation we are really in, if we take time to examine it. To be thrust into the natural world, like an animal, is to be thrust into a cruel world where 'biological machinery' determines everything. That world is merciless and in that world beings feed on other beings. Because this is inevitable, one is bound-into this system when one arrives here (in one way or another, to one degree or another). So just in that basic sense one is 'born into a sinful world' or born into circumstances where *sin* is inevitable.
But how to explain 'guilt'? Or how to explain debt and/or incarnation, here, as 'punishment'? Because obviously in this sense the Fall is punishment and also simply consequence. But what is that debt or punishment? How did this happen?
It requires a comparative perspective to work this idea out. So, there must be worlds (planes of experience) that are either far *better* and less inflicted compared to ours, or simultaneously far more difficult, far more torturous, and in this sense far more punishing.
I recognize that these are very old metaphysical notions, and I recognize as well that they are Stories told about life. In the sense that DontAskMe seems to mean, all such ideas are notions "painted thinly on the void" (to quote an Incredible String Band song).
There seems to me a certain definite advantage that can be gained by entertaining a deeper examination of these sort of ideas. Yet I also recognize that they can be simply dismissed by those without the inclination in this direction. It is a tendency of certain people to do this, I have noticed. And for some there is absolutely no sense to the endeavor.
There is insufficient reason to believe in the ontic reality of worlds (planes) of experience that are better (Heaven)than this one or worse (Hell) than this one. It's our responsibility to decide on our values, so Heaven is value, top quality, beauty, peace, justice, mercy, and truth. Brief glimpses of any of those are also experiences of this world. Absolute reality is probably true, whereas Heaven is what we aspire to and hope for.It requires a comparative perspective to work this idea out. So, there must be worlds (planes of experience) that are either far *better* and less inflicted compared to ours, or simultaneously far more difficult, far more torturous, and in this sense far more punishing.
The absolute can be personalised but few people understand personification and in a scientific materialistic age I doubt if personal deities are much general use except for consolation of believers. The rituals of mainstream Christian churches, and mosques , can offer occasional glimpses of goodness. I am not a Calvinist , and I appreciate symbolism, and I regret that the RC mass is not open to pagans like me.
Ideas and perceptions are "painted on the world" (nice metaphor; fine art is a medium for the transcendent virtues) and that's a main insight of advaita vedanta, which DontAskMe seems to support.
Most people can see this world is sufficiently hellish, so there is no need for other-worldly punishment .