To follow Christ does not mean to commit idolatry and venerate an idea of an individual man above everyone else; it means to "let the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus" as said in Philippians 2:5.
Conversation
Is the soul separate from the body? Is the body and its senses not a means for the soul to experience reality?
2
Replying to
The mind referred to in my tweet you subtweeted was not the 'mind of Christ' of this tweet. I meant a mind preoccupied with prejudices and abstract information, not the mind that is empty of itself like Christ's mind was empty of himself.
A mind empty of itself perceives reality in a direct way, acting as though a clear window for the input from the senses. Thus, it is *as if* the mind is not there, because it's not in the way, . . .
1
. . . allowing one's whole perception to function in the most fluid and responsive way—arguably making thus a lot more sense of reality than efforts of figuring it out in abstract or theoretical ways in the mind, dissociated from or lagging behind the sensory input of reality.
Replying to
Ok, I agree, it is wise to clarify what we mean by the words we are using. “The mind empty of oneself” that you mention is for me “the soul”. And this is why I can't even accept that “Christ had a mind” (which if you consider my use of words, I think you will readily understand).
Replying to
And he who perceives in such a manner (unprejudiced by the mundanity of the "mind-self") perceives “fluidly and responsively” everything, i.e., not only sensory objects but also any kind of emotion, thought or abstraction.
Replying to
But he who perceives in that way also discovers that he is not the "mind-self", given that the very fact that after discarding the "mind-self" he is still "himself" clearly proves the existence of a higher or "soul-self", as it is precisely the "soul-self" who is then perceiving.
1
Oh, certainly yes. I presume you are familiar with 'Atman'? It sounds to me you're describing it here. I don't deny its existence, but rather question the reality of the jivatman, the individual soul—albeit I know that on the final level all these are one.
4
Show replies
Replying to
Now, tell me what it is that interests you the more: sensory objects (matter) or spirit? That's fine if it is sensory objects, but if it is spirit, then consider that spirit is intangible and hence, more similar in essence to thoughts or emotions than to sensory expressions.
1
I draw no distinctions between matter and spirit. It is all the same reality; 'matter' is just one part of the spectrum—a certain vibratory frequency of this intangible reality that we perceive with our senses—and 'spirit' the rest.
2
Show replies