OK, the anatomic triangulation then. The soul is associated with matters concerning the heart and the spirit with the brain.
On 10 Mrz., 18:09, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > ... > > Erfahren Sie mehr » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
