As has been said quite recently one of the evolutionary factors on which your race is based is the sexuality: the very fact of having a sexuality characterized by two sexes leads to certain consequences ...
Being born male or female has different implications, leads to different experiences and ensures peculiar dynamics within the entire race.
Just consider the fact that all of you can be fathers, or mothers and therefore already have the possibility of having a parent-child relationship depending on whether you are male or female, with all the different projections that this entails.
Not only that, but also remember that everyone can be mothers or fathers but, on the other hand, everyone is indiscriminately children! Usually we think of the adult person who has children as a big evolutionary factor, but it is not a general possibility at most, while the experience of being children is totally generalized and common to the entire race!
This is an important point forevolution of your race as being children already entails obligations towards parents (because it is not only parents who have obligations towards children), and this combined with the fact of being sons or daughters towards the father or of the mother, already leads to four different variables, in addition to all the possible nuances that give meaning to this birth from time to time male or female, leading to the unraveling of the evolution of the entire race.
Readings for the interior: every day, a short spiritual reading of the Ifior Circle and of the Florence 77 Circle, on Whatsapp.
(Read only, cannot comment) To subscribe
Q - I was wondering if the “myth of the fall”, of many traditions and the original sin, of which the Bible speaks, are the same thing or different things? And above all, what is this fall actually?
The fall, mainly, it is the transposition of a myth; it is the introduction, within the culture of the next race, of the fall of the previous race. It is an ancestral memory.
You know that the races overlap for a certain period of time and then there remains the memory of this superior race, which was present when the next one was still in the dawn of understanding; and therefore the former was considered semi divine.
The collapse of this civilization, which seemed enormous, perfect, beautiful and so on, is then symbolized, passing from mouth to mouth, from story to story, in what it is the fall of the angels.
For what concerns the original sin, it is a slightly different speech; here we go back to the attempt to put a moral brake on people. Except that this idea of sin is not that we all like it very much; because there is no sin, only a lack of understanding.
This does not mean that the concept of sin was perhaps necessary at the dawn of your race, since, as there was not yet an ethics, a well-constituted understanding, it was somehow necessary to put some brakes, so that individuals did not commit all possible actions. and imaginable; and, in fact, the system used was that of posing the idea of sin; however, like all ideas that are posed, then - a little at a time - they must be overcome; and therefore also this idea of sin, especially of original sin, must, little by little, be dissolved and removed from society, in order to return to a freer, more serene, more joyful vision of life.
Life isn't always just about suffering, as you all seem used to thinking. Georgei
Few things from me, creatures.
So we see "original sin" very quickly, in the light of the teaching.
How is it possible that original sin exists?
I do not give you homework because it does not seem the case, also because previous experiences have taught that you do not do them all very willingly; but if (as we say, and assuming that we tell the truth, of course) each individual is part of the Whole, can original sin exist?
Or is it the Absolute itself that is original sin?
Can there be disobedience within the Whole?
Can the Whole disobey itself?
Or do we find ourselves with a dissociated God? And away, and away, and away, meditate creatures. Scifo
Privacy policy of this site to consult before commenting, or subscribing to feeds.
Some time ago I posed the question of original sin, unfortunately I am not able to search, but above all to identify, past posts. The question I posed then was: in the Christian paradigm the fall following original sin justifies the path of man to return to God, hence life itself. In our paradigm what situation originated the human condition (with all its evils) and its path from ego to love?
This post further clarifies the question and confirms the reasons for the impossibility for me to return to a confessional religion. In short, it adds to that reflection made in recent days on the words and gestures of the Pope in the face of the pandemic.
Another step towards inner clarity is taken, aware that the road is becoming more and more lonely.
Sin is a lack of understanding
The idea that there have been races in this manifestation of the Cosmos of which we only know in the form of myth leads me to think how partial our knowledge of human affairs is, as they are found in the narration of the official "History". Not that I did not doubt this discipline before, but this reminds me once more. And it makes me think how the "Myth" is closer, at times, to the "reality" of Becoming.
Thank you.
I agree with Georgei when he states the need to return to a more joyful view of life.
However, this perspective cannot be imposed, it will only come when peoples develop adequate understandings and no longer need the idea of sin as a catalyst for the inner search.
The post is very clear, I am particularly struck by the explanation of the myth of the fall of the angels, to which I had not been able to understand the symbology.
I too like Catia, touched by the explanation of the myth of the fall of the angels… Thank you.
What then disobedience is not that it is such a sin ... "original"! 🙂 😉
If I think how much the so-called "original sin" has influenced the role of women, it always moves me a little nervous.
I think about how a distorted interpretation can affect people's culture and customs, but on the other hand, as long as understandings are not acquired, it cannot be otherwise.
Somehow I find the statement reassuring that there may be a time of greater joy!
I wonder if the feeling that every existence has to deal with conditionings that are not attributable to actions carried out during this very existence could have influenced the birth of the concept of original sin. Like a ballast with which you are born.
In other words, can it be a primitive form of intercepting the law of "negative" karma?
Regarding original sin and adherence to any kind of religion codified as such.
When the feeling widens it cannot remain closed in the "rules" of any religion.
Religion is limiting and, as a function of any limit, it must be overcome, expanded.
It all depends on the degree of evolution ...