On 10 Mar, 14:55, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
> You see no connection? Interesting. Does it in any way interest you
> that to me soul and spirit are two different things?
>
There are many who would agree that soul and spirit are two different
things. But few(er) can define the difference. So, in your opinion,
what is the difference between them.
I'm familiar with a few different schemas with respect to spiritual
anatomy, if you will. The one I'm most familiar with is the
kabbalistic breakdown, which divides generic 'spirit' into 5 parts:
Nephesh: animal soul
Ruach: spirit
Neshamah: soul (divine soul rather than the animal nephesh that we
[animals] all have. This was an additional soul that is, supposedly,
only granted to humans.)
Chiah: life force
Yechidah: divine spark
Now, whilst I understand that schema, I don't know, for sure, if it's
valid. It certainly COULD be, but how does one test it? Until we can
scientifically define any of these into a comprehendable field of a
specific type of measurable energy, Faith is our only guide. And
Faith, as a guide, has millions of eyes looking in all directions yet
they're all blind and see nothing. ;-)
I'd only be guessing but I suspect you view spirit as something
grosser than soul, i.e., soul is smaller, yet, perhaps, more
concentrated? Which, as a rational way of looking at it, would also
imply that there are soul/spirit aspect ratios/dilution gradients.
> On 10 Mrz., 13:34, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 9 Mar, 15:11, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Just to make sure I get your soul concept right, Pat, how would you
> > > describe the difference between a ghost story and a fairy tale?
>
> > A ghost story is a story about ghosts; a fairy tale is, usually, a
> > folktale derived from some local folklore. There is some overlap, as
> > ghost stories may develop into fairy tales and some fairy tales
> > (because of the former reason) contain ghosts. None of this, though,
> > has anything to do with the soul. My concept of a soul or spirit is
> > 'a coherent field of energy'. And, in the above, I extrapolated that,
> > in order to maintain coherence, the field MUST exist within space-
> > time, therefore making it a spatio-temporal object. In fact, in order
> > for it (or anything) to exist, it must exist at some place and at some
> > time (feel free, though, to put forward an exception if you can think
> > of one). Existence itself is the property that places us (and
> > anything) within the confines of space-time.
>
> > > On 9 Mrz., 14:00, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > On 6 Mar, 18:54, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Speaking purely theoretically - I accept Orn's point completely, that
> > > > > discussions about reincarnation are pure theory - I don't see the
> > > > > problem. If there is a soul (theoretically speaking, since I have no
> > > > > idea what a soul IS), upon disincarnation it (presumably) leaves
> > > > > space-
> > > > > time. That's space-TIME. So, theoretically, there's no reason not to
> > > > > assume that a soul experiencing disincarnation in 2009 might not be
> > > > > reincarnated in 1909. Wow, I could even be Albert Einstein in my next
> > > > > life. Or Helen of Troy. Or my own grand-dad.
>
> > > > If the soul/spirit is a coherent field of energy, then it must,
> > > > somehow, retain coherence. It could only do that given space and
> > > > time. That is, there is no 'coherence' outside of time (or space).
> > > > Ghosts, if disincarnate souls, would stand as evidence that spacetime
> > > > is STILL a factor after disincarnation.
>
> > > > > Personally, I have never found speculation about reincarnation
> > > > > particularly useful for living in the here-and-now.
>
> > > > > Francis
>
> > > > > On 6 Mrz., 16:36, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > As to theory when it comes to things like reincarnation....theories
> > > > > > are like comic books. Entertaining, and keep one distracted.
> > > > > > As to proof...the only proof would be if one remembers experiencing
> > > > > > it. I have nothing against those who make such a claim.
>
> > > > > > On Mar 6, 4:32 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On 4 Mar, 16:04, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > This may be a silly question that has already been answered by
> > > > > > > > those
> > > > > > > > who posit reincarnation, or you may have an answer, Slip.
>
> > > > > > > > But it just occurred to me that the world population keeps
> > > > > > > > growing,
> > > > > > > > over time. So let's begin to flesh out the mechanics of
> > > > > > > > reincarnation
> > > > > > > > theory. Since the world population keeps growing, new souls
> > > > > > > > must be
> > > > > > > > coming into being (on the starting premise that souls exist, of
> > > > > > > > course). What is your belief as to whether all souls
> > > > > > > > reincarnate? Is
> > > > > > > > it that, each year, of the 300 million people who die (I'm
> > > > > > > > guessing
> > > > > > > > here, not bothering to look up how many people actually die each
> > > > > > > > year), those 300 million souls immediately reincarnate? Is
> > > > > > > > there some
> > > > > > > > lag time? Given that the world population grows by, say, 200
> > > > > > > > million
> > > > > > > > a year, does this mean that 200 million entirely new,
> > > > > > > > non-reincarnated
> > > > > > > > souls are generated each year?
>
> > > > > > > > More importantly, when a new baby is born, how is it decided
> > > > > > > > whether
> > > > > > > > that new baby gets a reincarnated soul, or an entirely new soul?
>
> > > > > > > > The basic premise of my e-mail is that the number of people
> > > > > > > > dying
> > > > > > > > falls short of the number of people being born, so not every
> > > > > > > > new birth
> > > > > > > > can have a reincarnated soul. How does reincarnation theory
> > > > > > > > think
> > > > > > > > about this?
>
> > > > > > > Firstly, whose theory? There are theories that don't limit
> > > > > > > reincarnation to only human form. If you count ALL the lifeforms
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > existence (and, not just Earthbound ones), THEN you'll see how
> > > > > > > full
> > > > > > > the pool of souls, as it were, is. Whilst I take your point, an
> > > > > > > Earth-
> > > > > > > limited view must be thrown out. Odds are that there's a huge
> > > > > > > whopping amount of life out there that could re-incarnate (or re-
> > > > > > > invegetate, for that matter!).
> > > > > > > Although there IS the Jewish view of 'The Guph', or 'Hall of
> > > > > > > Souls'
> > > > > > > where souls wait for (re-)incarnation. There is also a belief
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > the Guph can be emptied and soulless individuals born. This is
> > > > > > > explored in the Juergen Prochnow/Demi Moore film "The Seventh
> > > > > > > Sign" (Great film!).
>
> > > > > > > > On Mar 3, 10:51 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Slip, can you clarify what you mean by saying "Thought, as
> > > > > > > > > > I see it, is not physical or tangible<<<<<MB
>
> > > > > > > > > Simply for me thought is not something that you can put in a
> > > > > > > > > box and
> > > > > > > > > ship out or place in a zip lock bag for storage. I feel
> > > > > > > > > thought and
> > > > > > > > > imagination are homologous but not identical in that thought
> > > > > > > > > itself
> > > > > > > > > may be considered more of a process, which imagination uses
> > > > > > > > > to create
> > > > > > > > > ideas, concepts, theories etc.
>
> > > > > > > > > though it is the subject of multiple scientific
> > > > > > > > > experiments." ?<<<MB
>
> > > > > > > > > I may have hastened to use the expression scientific
> > > > > > > > > experiments, no
> > > > > > > > > intended reference to "thought experiments", but more so
> > > > > > > > > leaning
> > > > > > > > > towards the nature of thought, it's use as in telekinesis,
> > > > > > > > > telepathy,
> > > > > > > > > clairvoyance, the overall power of thinking, and the law of
> > > > > > > > > attraction, much of which admittedly, is speculative and/or
> > > > > > > > > hypothetical.
> > > > > > > > > Discovering the physical nature of thought is aside from what
> > > > > > > > > I am
> > > > > > > > > projecting because once thought takes place it becomes
> > > > > > > > > independent of
> > > > > > > > > it's originating source as does the light emanating from a
> > > > > > > > > dead star.
>
> > > > > > > > > > As I understand you, you posed that perspective in
> > > > > > > > > > opposition to the
> > > > > > > > > > contention that "all thought
> > > > > > > > > > and consciousness dies with the death of the physical
> > > > > > > > > > mind." Are you
> > > > > > > > > > arguing that when a person is alive, his thoughts are
> > > > > > > > > > extra-physical,
> > > > > > > > > > or are you also arguing that consciousness / soul survives
> > > > > > > > > > death?<<<MB
>
> > > > > > > > > I'm not arguing as much as I am suggesting that thoughts are
> > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > confined to our physical being. As I posted early on, we do
> > > > > > > > > see light
> > > > > > > > > from stars that are physically non existent. I believe
> > > > > > > > > thoughts,
> > > > > > > > > imaginations and subconscious manifestations do continue to
> > > > > > > > > exist
> > > > > > > > > beyond the physical demise. I feel very strongly that the
> > > > > > > > > soul
> > > > > > > > > survives physical death and also retains life experiences. I
> > > > > > > > > believe
> > > > > > > > > that some people have lived past lives but not all, as some
> > > > > > > > > people are
> > > > > > > > > Old Souls, ie: child prodigies, brilliant scientists etc.,
> > > > > > > > > while
> > > > > > > > > others are New Souls ie: idiots without a clue who are easily
> > > > > > > > > identifiable. I would not consider reincarnation in the
> > > > > > > > > sense that
> > > > > > > > > our soul returns in the form of a different species but
> > > > > > > > > contend the
> > > > > > > > > soul returns as another human being. A human soul does not
> > > > > > > > > return as
> > > > > > > > > a cow in my opinion. I think we retain life experiences
> > > > > > > > > within our
> > > > > > > > > soul and believe that life might be occurring simultaneously
> > > > > > > > > within a
> > > > > > > > > parallel universe and further that there is a level at which
> > > > > > > > > time is
> > > > > > > > > of no consequence.
> > > > > > > > > Belief in certain aspects of death may give credence to what
> > > > > > > > > some know
> > > > > > > > > as Heaven and the Immortality of the soul. For atheists,
> > > > > > > > > pantheists,
> > > > > > > > > materialists and rationalists there would be no question and
> > > > > > > > > conversation of such idea would be moot. So what meaning does
> > > > > > > > > death
> > > > > > > > > have to us as we are living? Perhaps it is a reminder that
> > > > > > > > > life is
> > > > > > > > > temporary and that we should pay heed to what lies ahead
> > > > > > > > > without
> > > > > > > > > paying as much attention to amassing materialistic treasures
> > > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > > spiritual values. Is death just a marker between lives?
> > > > > > > > > Possibly
> > > > > > > > > and for me most likely, no one has ever come back to tell us
> > > > > > > > > anything
> > > > > > > > > about it. Is there a Karma that carries from one life to the
> > > > > > > > > next? I
> > > > > > > > > would think that if the soul retains it's accumulated
> > > > > > > > > properties then
> > > > > > > > > it might also retain the aspects of retribution. Upon new
> > > > > > > > > life in the
> > > > > > > > > new physical frame is there a clean slate with which to
> > > > > > > > > develop? I
> > > > > > > > > often wonder why some people are born into extreme poverty
> > > > > > > > > and pain
> > > > > > > > > while others live wonderful lives. While both will have to
> > > > > > > > > commit to
> > > > > > > > > death the interim of life seems to have significance in the
> > > > > > > > > fact that
> > > > > > > > > maybe there is for them a lesson to be learned. I would also
> > > > > > > > > have to
> > > > > > > > > examine why it is that a person is born and dies within hours
> > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > living if there is any significance to life between birth and
> > > > > > > > > death.
> > > > > > > > > Some believe that what we do in this life influences our
> > > > > > > > > lives to
> > > > > > > > > come, so I have to wonder what has that person done within
> > > > > > > > > it's few
> > > > > > > > > hours of life to influence it's future life. Can we lay down a
> > > > > > > > > prospective for person's future life
>
> > ...
>
> > Erfahren Sie mehr »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
