TA106 (Müller)


Commentary 56



by Philip Benjamin

25 September 2009, posted 3 October 2009




[Zvi] wrote to Serge Patlavskiy


"I am not interested in religion, I am interested in spriritual experiences, such as meditation, communion with nature, music."



[Philip Benajamin]


I have not, rather never I might say, understood why or how the "word" spiritual do a better job of explanation or exploration (unintended pun or rhyme) than the more obvious, accurate and meaningful word "psychological". The root word of spiritual in Sanskrit, Hebrew, Greek and Latin is "breath" (wind) referring to the "breath of life". Psyche as it is understood now in the English language, is an essential part of that life. Is it not redundant to say that "spirit = breath= wind is an essential part of the breath of life?



[Serge Patlavskiy] wrote:


"....he agrees on the possibility to approach both science and religion using some universal objective theoretical explanatory framework".



[Philip Benjamin]


    How is that possible without breaking the "law of non-contradiction". One religion has +A as the ultmate reality, another has -A as the ultimate.




Philip Benjamin

     E-mail <medinuclear (at) hotmail.com>