the soul

[inMalkuth]

So, it looks like this section of the forum is mostly youtube links that Desecrated finds some enlightenment in. Im going to offer up my two cents on what a soul is.

I am having a difficult time deciding that I have or will have access to a soul. If this soul existed before my birth, or was placed in me at birth, as I have not had conscious awareness and interaction with it I wonder if I ever will. In light of the idea that we exist at all, and that we may have a soul, I have concluded that there are a few ideas as to why this is.

1. We are here to partake in the manifest world and interact with it as influenced by our soul, which will return to the source, at death. The self (the mind) enters some other type of experience, potentially forming a new kind of soul in this new life experience (not here).

2. We are here to create a new soul from the influence of the old soul. The mind still enters another phase of life, and the soul moves on.

3. We are here to create a new soul without the influence of an old soul, by virtue of all the other lives around us in this school of life. The mind still enters a new phase while the soul ascends to someplace else, in which case the soul that is formed is never here.

4. We do have influence of an old soul but not all the time, and not that often. The possibility that everyone develops into a permanent soul seems hard to believe, and it sounds true that we might incarnate over and over until this possibility arrives. The mind therefor is responsible for re-entering this life phase until it is formed into a permanent soul, or until it deteriorates into nothing.

5. There is only one Soul and we are all soulless. We create another realm of existence through our minds from where, and to where, we go depending upon our choices and experiences.

6. A soul is a soul is a soul. The mind dissolves and the soul is gathered and weighed and placed into a new life form at some time to influence that life form, and to add its experiences to the souls experience.

As living and willful beings who are not ourselves immortal and are simply citizens of some larger society, but probably partake in a cycle of immortality, I wonder at what stage we abandon experience to enter into taking part of maintaining this reality? Is that even possible? Would you desire to abandon experience for a job? What if this job robs you of your humanity, and yet you are still meant to maintain order in the human realm? Would that not mean that you should not be allowed to interact with it? If so, what then?

The idea that there is only one God provides an answer to the question of authority over mankind. I am not certain that any of us deserve to have an influence on the world from above. I cant say that this will ever be our role. Imagine the amount of knowledge you would acquire were you to see from above, and to interact with the below. Imagine now being one of those beings and inviting one of us to partake in that. Who could really prove to be ready for this type of access? What are the rules of engagement from this point? Is, then, anyone really interacting with us at all?

I know from personal experience that something is interacting, but whether I am to become one of those that interact remains to be seen. It would seem that whomever is in charge has a plan, and should I be set free to engage in this world without knowing the plan, then I could be a source of problem for that which initiated this plan. Unless the plan is simply all of this and there can be no wrong action, in which case we cannot rely on an order to any of it, and it truly is all chaos. Still, there would be a process of entering into a Divine State, one would believe. Do we reflect this in our lives? We must conform to basic ideas such as safety, security, and need. We are not free immortal beings who can act without consequence. But, if that is the nature of the Divine, then we probably should be learning how to act this way should we want to rise into immortality.

Anyway... more than likely most of us simply come and go and come again, whether we are helping create a soul, or are these souls, or are meant to achieve entrance into the Divine Realm. I have to conclude that it all comes down to what we individually believe. In which case we (our minds) regardless of a soul, find a place in a new life form (probably not here) and engage in that reality on these terms.

The question really becomes: Will I retain my free will, or will I become a reactionary being subjected to my desires? If this life is any indication, we are meant to master our free will and become decisive. I imagine that on the side of knowing and doing for the self, and knowing and doing for the whole, that either side can be prone to being subjected to desire. So, how do we, and is it even possible to, interact with this world from above? I dont think it happens. It is said that angels have no free will. This would make sense that God is the only one that does.

[inMalkuth]

I am already trying to answer these questions that I pose.

1. I cannot expect to rise into the above
2. I can assume that from above, one is able to see what needs to be done below
3. From above I should be aware of the chaos and injustice that occurs. Unless I am a War God, I will want to see peace and prosperity through kindness and wisdom and not brute strength prevailing over the compassionate.
4. I would surmise that, as a God, I am aware of the most noble method of fairness and interaction and would want to embrace those whom are fair and noble
5. Therefore the pursuit of enlightenment should also be the pursuit of nobility, fairness, grace and compassion while being strong and firm.

This is all pretty well conceived of by the Jews. Pagans however, have multiple Divine Beings that each represent a portion of what life is or can be. Gods of pleasure would champion the cause of pleasure seekers while Gods of Wisdom would champion the cause of those who would be wise. Compassionate Gods would champion those who help the poor and unfortunate and etc... In a Pantheistic pagan world, all things deserve to be considered as legitimate paths of experience and Divinity. In my view there are three Divine Portions of man and the life mankind leads, and within them all things are legitimate, though not all of them are equal in activity. Again, I doubt that any mortal becomes a God (in the sense of interacting from above with other mortals, or being above in the realm of the Gods). I think that it is all imagined and that through our imaginations we create our souls destination. This can be most frustrating for someone that has been engaged by the invisible Gods.

[chowderpope]

You definitely have some challenging ideas. I have a few questions about some of what you said if you are interested in a dialog.

How do you get to your idea of the soul and mind being separate things? You mentioned in life you build a soul which moves onto another life and then the mind goes a separate way. How do you figure that they are separate?

Where does the idea of building a soul come from? You indicate that Heaven is something to be attained, through some kind of effort you must meet some criteria in order to be an immortal, at the level of God. I'm curious how you arrived there.

You surmise that God favors people who exhibit fairness, nobility, and other agreeable qualities. I would like to respectfully disagree. I think that God has no preference for how we behave. God is beyond good and evil.

You suggest that you have been engaged by invisible Gods, I am interested in hearing more if you care to share.

This kind of stuff is difficult to make definite assertions about due to its intangible nature. I'm curious how you're able to make such strong assertions about the nature of the afterlife and the soul, especially given how non-traditional your ideas are.

My feeling is probably more traditional. I think that we are all part of God, and deeply cared for, regardless of the direction or circumstance of our material life. Heaven is not difficult to attain to, it has a large welcome sign. I think that Heaven is much different than what the Baptists told me, though. I use Heaven as more of a metaphor for what we're unable to articulate.

But honestly, it's difficult to speculate on the afterlife because we don't have the data. I mean, I could study Kaballah, read the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and other documents related to afterlife and try to connect the dots. I trust there have been a lot of sages, saints, and people who actually died and came back, who can assist in painting a more complete understanding.

I also think the mind and soul are united and not separated at death. God itself does not interact with people directly, we are just dreamt inside of the mind of God. There are rules to reality, and the dominos fall where they may. I think good qualities like fairness, nobility, compassion, are all just symptomatic of being spiritually focused. If you are materially obsessed you might be a jerk, but if you're more spiritually focused you might naturally incline toward those good qualities because the competitive nature that separates us becomes less important.

Again this is the sort of thing that's very nebulous because of its intangibility so I'm not saying you're wrong about anything, just wanting clarification on the lineage of some of your ideas.

[inMalkuth]

You definitely have some challenging ideas. I have a few questions about some of what you said if you are interested in a dialog.

How do you get to your idea of the soul and mind being separate things? You mentioned in life you build a soul which moves onto another life and then the mind goes a separate way. How do you figure that they are separate?

-Aside from the soul having been considered as separate by other traditions, my own experience has shown me that there is an inner being within me, or was, for a short time (may still be there) that was me, but not the me I know. I cant be certain that this is not me forever or that it was just me for a little while, or that it is still me at all. What I can say is that for myself, I saw this other me. If this other me existed outside of the me that is now, I can assume that the me that is now is not as permanent as that me that I saw, and that this moment in time is not the absolute reality that my other me will reside in. Being that I observed this other me, which I definitely knew was me, from an outside perspective; I realize that there are two mes. This means that the now me is either impermanent or is now becoming its own entity separate of the other me. As this all took place on an inward spiritual experience I call it a soul. Aside from that observation I am also aware that the mind is not the absolute of anything, that it can easily be overcome and therefor it is probably temporary. I see the mental faculty as a tool that we use to process environment and make choices. These choices are then reflected withing this soul that I am forming, and in forming it, I form that souls destination in another life.

Where does the idea of building a soul come from? You indicate that Heaven is something to be attained, through some kind of effort you must meet some criteria in order to be an immortal, at the level of God. I'm curious how you arrived there.

You surmise that God favors people who exhibit fairness, nobility, and other agreeable qualities. I would like to respectfully disagree. I think that God has no preference for how we behave. God is beyond good and evil.

- I agree that in our limited view it would appear that God is beyond the evil and the good, because I cannot say I know what God sees that would provoke an action that seems to me to be evil. I can surmise that God is good, and that God loves the good, because as an omniscient Being God must be aware of the cause of things that we consider to be bad or evil, and therefor God would understand what is good the same as we understand it. Its possible that God simply observes, but I find that hard to believe, because I have experienced for myself that God takes action. Why would God take action on anything if not to provoke a change? This is why I comment that it may be all chaos, that it is simply activity that drives things and we are only meant to be at the mercy of forces of experience and interpretation. Its a difficult point to defend on either side, but I choose to believe that God has set this in motion for more than just setting things in motion, otherwise we would not have arrived at an idea of any such thing as good or evil at all.

You suggest that you have been engaged by invisible Gods, I am interested in hearing more if you care to share.

- Theres not much more to say than this. I can leave it up to your own imagination to figure out whether this is possible or not.

This kind of stuff is difficult to make definite assertions about due to its intangible nature. I'm curious how you're able to make such strong assertions about the nature of the afterlife and the soul, especially given how non-traditional your ideas are.

-I think I explained this in the previous commentary.

My feeling is probably more traditional. I think that we are all part of God, and deeply cared for, regardless of the direction or circumstance of our material life. Heaven is not difficult to attain to, it has a large welcome sign. I think that Heaven is much different than what the Baptists told me, though. I use Heaven as more of a metaphor for what we're unable to articulate.

-I have heard it argued, and I myself have taken the position that Heaven awaits us all no matter what our deeds, mostly because there is no way of controlling how someone reacts to my actions and words. Then I realize that there is one important factor to consider; Free Will. It is our ability to decide that forms who we are. Regardless of what little or much I understand, I understand something, and it usually begins with good and bad. Should I, in whatever limited or expansive understanding that I possess, sin against what I believe to be good, then I am committing that crime. It is logical to assume that the reason for our ability to choose is to choose well, and that should there be a favorable afterlife, then it is provided to me because I chose well. Should I have chosen to commit evil, then I would be subjected to those choices as well. This would mean that Heaven is not guaranteed to anybody, and that Hell most definitely does await.

But honestly, it's difficult to speculate on the afterlife because we don't have the data. I mean, I could study Kaballah, read the Tibetan Book of the Dead, and other documents related to afterlife and try to connect the dots. I trust there have been a lot of sages, saints, and people who actually died and came back, who can assist in painting a more complete understanding.

I also think the mind and soul are united and not separated at death. God itself does not interact with people directly, we are just dreamt inside of the mind of God. There are rules to reality, and the dominos fall where they may. I think good qualities like fairness, nobility, compassion, are all just symptomatic of being spiritually focused. If you are materially obsessed you might be a jerk, but if you're more spiritually focused you might naturally incline toward those good qualities because the competitive nature that separates us becomes less important.

-As I state above, the mind is the tool that we use to exercise Free Will. The Soul is an eternal thing that motivates us spiritually. The idea of a spirit is that of an overview, which would lead one to believe in a sort of communal perspective rather than a selfish one. The pursuit of the self over the pursuit of the collective tends to lead a person into actions that are more easily named to be evil. This does not have to be the case, but it require some caution when taking action. You mention Christianity, and the essential teaching of that Master God is that the closest way to protecting ones self from an unsatisfactory after-life is by becoming absolutely selfless so as not to harm anyone, ever. He illustrates this by declaring that acts of charity (feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned) are the best possible actions to take to avoid harming anyone. It would certainly be hard to find fault in a person who dedicated their lives to feeding the hungry. Obviously there is a lot to do here, and many reasons to do them. While I agree that Christ is right, I can also say that because I am here and have opportunity to choose and desires that motivate that choice, then I may want to examine them before deciding that what he says is how I should live. I definitely believe that honing my awareness to whatever sharpness of understanding that I possess will eventually lead me to a breakthrough of understanding, and for this reason we allow people their liberty; patiently awaiting the day that they become aware that there is far more to this world than meets the eye, and my existence is just as legitimate as yours, and so now what have you done and what should you do?

Again this is the sort of thing that's very nebulous because of its intangibility so I'm not saying you're wrong about anything, just wanting clarification on the lineage of some of your ideas.

[inMalkuth]

The fact is that we live in a world of needs. We all live here together. We are not living in a world with no consequence. Perhaps when the day comes that we are free of the burdens of survival there will no longer be a need for moral decisions. However, that time is not now. It may be argued that one can talk their way out of any decision that has been declared bad were they to examine the evidence long enough, and this is what the Sophists taught. The reason that Socrates and Plato defied them is because they recognized, as do I, that there is a level of proper action and knowledge that we must observe not only for our sake, but if there were a Divine Source that takes action upon us for our deeds, then for that reason also. In light of a naturalist view it seems at first glance that we are meant to rule by force and that strength alone wins the battle. That is what we call the animus or animal world and its laws. Because we are capable of being more than animals, we have begun to define what being capable of more is, and we call it spirituality and religion. This concept of an overview that understands that I am not the strongest beast and therefore king should be enough to provoke anyone into some humility and compassion, if not to become an active proponent for peace and diplomacy. Because I am more capable than other animals I should follow where that leads and start to take responsibility for what I am able to understand. In this way we pursue the Divine of the Spirit. The less animal you are, the more spiritually Divine you become, its that simple. This is not to say that there is no Divine Animal Nature, because there is... its just of a different realm of activity. My point is that when you say God is above good and evil, I am saying that God is inclined to the good- which would lead us away from the animal, because in the animal world we are subjected to things like being dominated, slain, starvation, being exposed to the elements etc... God is a spiritual pursuit and not an animal one (unless of course you worship an animal God, a God of Chaos, or what have you).

It all depends on what you decide God to be (or who).

[inMalkuth]

Aside from a spiritual destination, something that we all should be aware of, I believe that the reason for being is to be and to do. This life and its opportunity is here because we are meant to engage with it. I also believe that because we are allowed to do this that we will encounter choices which we later decide not to be the best choice. We experience this from our own selves and from the actions of others. Were there to be a spiritual reason for our lives it is to analyze these experiences that we had and the choices we made, and to become an active participant in resolving this problem for future generations. To me this is the most legitimate and noble way to live. It requires a more involved process than to simply feed the hungry, but it is the Divine Challenge of Life to become and to do, and not just obey blindly without regard for the self ever. Certainly happiness of myself and others should also be a priority, for the world is more than just hungry mouths; it is invention and exploration and adventure and daring and joy, love and laughter.

[chowderpope]

What I'm saying is God is beyond the dualistic nature of this reality. Lack of preference is the gateway to the divine. God does not incline toward the good because divinity is without duality. Goodness and badness are human constructs. Arjuna has to kill his loved ones on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, but it's totally fine because it's his duty to kill them.

I'm a determinist, so I think free will is illusory. Even if you think you're making a random decision, that decision has a determining lineage of influence.

I think we are equal with all animals, insects, minerals, etc. Our position is not any different from theirs, and ultimately we share the soul of God. As humans, we're not at the top of the food chain on a cosmic scale.

It would appear we are standing on two distant rocks, but that's okay because it was meant to be, in fact, it's our duty to stand on these separate rocks.

And I just hope I don't see you leading a UFO cult down the road. [wink]

[inMalkuth]

What I'm saying is God is beyond the dualistic nature of this reality. Lack of preference is the gateway to the divine. God does not incline toward the good because divinity is without duality.

- thats an interesting view. We still have to.

Goodness and badness are human constructs. Arjuna has to kill his loved ones on the battlefield of Kurukshetra, but it's totally fine because it's his duty to kill them.

I'm a determinist, so I think free will is illusory. Even if you think you're making a random decision, that decision has a determining lineage of influence.

-yes it all comes down to external influence and internal process. I suppose that you dont think we can alter course and avoid our fate, and that all things are equal and we are simply vessels with nothing to discover and just go along for the ride. I imagine you flashing your breasts and waving the peace sign at woodstock.

I think we are equal with all animals, insects, minerals, etc. Our position is not any different from theirs, and ultimately we share the soul of God. As humans, we're not at the top of the food chain on a cosmic scale.

-I almost chose to agree with you but then remembered that I can throw a rock at you and an insect cant. Although... they can choose to bite. (probably not out of anger tho)

It would appear we are standing on two distant rocks, but that's okay because it was meant to be, in fact, it's our duty to stand on these separate rocks.

And I just hope I don't see you leading a UFO cult down the road. [wink]