I am so sorry to be late to this discussion! As I read through the many viewpoints, I can't help but see the thread of truth in all - and that thread leads to soul! I see the soul as our eternal vessel, holding our identity from all lives, karma, and also having senses like the body has senses. "Let those with eyes see!" This well known passage, of course, refers to soul vision. I think that like the ego, that holds our personality and patterns of sensation coming from the physical senses, our soul allows us sensations of spirit and the infinite. The more in tune we are to our soul and all it offers, the more we allow God, or spirit or the infinite aspect of life into our lives and experience. The more in tune we are with our rational mind, the less our soulful nature is expressed.
Of course, everything expressed here is true, because each of us has a viewpoint that reflects varying degrees of rationality and soulfulness. I marvel at Justin's ability to make the philosophical case for the possibility of soul, as it requires neither time nor space, but realizes both through the recognition of our individual lives and moments. I can also appreciate Pat's ability to allow physics to lead the way to soul, and while we may not have definitive theories today, there may be some tomorrow with a simple change in viewpoint. I smile, of course, and agree with Neil's plea for soul to show itself in this world with love and harmony. And empathize with Slip's intuitive understanding, which I can feel and understand best. Vam's words are like water, the very nature of spirit. And gabby, like the bible, leads us along with allegory, very soulful, indeed. Of course you know, that I believe this group to be a wonderful soul process, as we hold the space of possibility in points across the globe. Thanks for the contemplation. On Mar 15, 1:59 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > Wood, you have completely misconstrued the meaning of my post which > you also have taken as an individual post without consideration of it > being a reply to the post of another. > > Let's clarify! > Fran posted on Mar 7, at 10:02 "But none of this "needs" some kind > of immaterial soul to hold it > together. > (in other words fran does not find the need to have a soul) > > So I responded with........."The soul is not something you "need", it > is something you have, something you are.” > > So I am not stating that I don't "Need" a soul but more so that a soul > does not exist "Out of Need". > > Is this clear? > > IF you will read further you will see that I clearly state my view of > soul within the Mar 7 10:39 post I wrote: > > I think the "key" word here is "need", which clearly was not a part or > portion of any soul posit. > You don't have a soul because you need one, you just have one. > You don't have a physical body because you need one, you just have > one. Look in the mirror, you are there! Not because you "Need" to be > there but because you just are, just as your soul IS. > > Are the clouds dissipating? > > You are really making my work here wood! > > Remember to read back through posts, especially since you come in to > visit rarely. You can't just show up at will, pick out one post and > comment on it without reviewing the entire thread. Now come by > everyday and become an active participant in our group. > > Good! Now it is clear. > > On Mar 14, 11:15 pm, wood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > ?????? > > It’s not something you need?... all this time I’ve kept my soul > > sacred, and places great value upon it … and all these time I didn’t > > even need a need? I feel I’ve wasted my life… > > Ok before I say anything else let me give you, a chance reflect on > > what you have wrote. > > > On Mar 7, 8:02 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I am who I am because I am who I > > > am; my consciousness, my experiences, my mind, my body and brain, my > > > memories, my relationships with others. A unity which I experience as > > > me.<<<fran > > > > You are who you are because you are who you are? > > > A unity that you "experience" as you? > > > > Really? > > > > Having a soul has nothing whatsoever to do with a god, fran. > > > > starting with the unique genetic mix of my > > > conception<<fran > > > > Uh huh, the unique genetic mix? Do you hear yourself? > > > > and all that I have "experienced" in that time, everything > > > continuously interacting with everything else.<<<<fran > > > > Yeah, that's good, keep going, "experienced" in that time. Possibly > > > soul accumulation. > > > > But none of this needs some kind of immaterial soul to hold it > > > together. <<<fran > > > > The soul is not something you need, it is something you have, > > > something you are. > > > > And now you are going to delineate the makings of data storage blah > > > blah blah............boring! > > > > So you can't see beyond planet earth? > > > > On Mar 7, 11:27 am, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 7 Mrz., 14:17, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I could even be Albert Einstein in my next life. Or Helen of Troy. Or > > > > > my own grand-dad. <<<fran > > > > > > No fran, that is not how it works, you cannot commandeer the soul of > > > > > someone else. You can only be "you" forever, from here in on out or > > > > > from then on. Even in space time, would you challenge the possibility > > > > > that the soul could retain its integrity? Soul is your being, your > > > > > essence in life, you are who you are because of your soul. > > > > > There seem to be things you see clearly, Slip, that I don't see at all > > > > - or maybe it's the other way round. I am who I am because I am who I > > > > am; my consciousness, my experiences, my mind, my body and brain, my > > > > memories, my relationships with others. A unity which I experience as > > > > me. I don't need to call it a soul, because I regard this concept as > > > > superfluous, much as I regard the concept of God as superfluous. > > > > > You, fran, can see the difference when you go out and about in the > > > > world around > > > > > > you. There is obviously a huge difference between you and many other > > > > > people, and when you ask why is that, which you have at times, you can > > > > > simply attribute it all to the fact that your soul has accumulated > > > > > knowledge and understanding throughout many lifetimes. > > > > > I don't see the need to posit any part of what I am as being due to > > > > knowledge and understanding which my "soul" has accumulated throughout > > > > many lifetimes. I am the product of the life I have lived over the > > > > past almost 49 years, starting with the unique genetic mix of my > > > > conception, moving through the development of my body and > > > > consciousness and all that I have experienced in that time, everything > > > > continuously interacting with everything else. I am not who I was ten > > > > years ago, nor who I will be - if I'm still around - in ten years > > > > time. Yet there is continuity here, a continuity consisting of my > > > > consciousness in continual dialogue with my memory and in the > > > > perception of those around me, along with a biological continual > > > > development (even if few of the molecules are still the same after ten > > > > years). But none of this needs some kind of immaterial soul to hold it > > > > together. > > > > > It's rather > > > > > > simple really. As I said earlier, in this day and age when we have > > > > > microwaves and space travel, computers, cell phones, dvd, cd, etc, I > > > > > find it hard to believe the disbelief in this theory. > > > > > In other words, we can store gobs of information on a piece of plastic > > > > > but we can't have a soul? > > > > > The analogy doesn't work, Slip, in my opinion. We don't store the > > > > information on plastic but rather on a magnetic stripe (or an or a > > > > chip on the plastic), where binary code is laid down according to > > > > particular magneto-electrical processes. Even if I don't understand > > > > all the science or engineering involved, I am acquainted with the > > > > basic principles and, if I had the inclination, could learn more about > > > > the details. With the simple use of a magnet I can scramble it all. > > > > The same goes for various techniques involved in modulating the > > > > frequency of particular forms of electromagnetic radiation, such as is > > > > the case in microwave ovens and cell phones. They are physical > > > > phenomena, explainable by science. On a cd or dvd, "data are stored as > > > > a series of tiny indentations known as “pits”, encoded in a tightly > > > > packed spiral track molded into the top of the polycarbonate layer. > > > > The areas between pits are known as “lands”. Each pit is approximately > > > > 100 nm deep by 500 nm wide, and varies from 850 nm to 3.5 µm in > > > > length., The spacing between the tracks, the pitch, is 1.6 µm. A CD is > > > > read by focusing a 780 nm wavelength (near infrared) semiconductor > > > > laser through the bottom of the polycarbonate layer. The change in > > > > height between pits and lands results in a difference in intensity in > > > > the light reflected. By measuring the intensity change with a > > > > photodiode, the data can be read from the disc." (Wikipedia) The soul, > > > > whatever it may or may not be, is not subject to this sort of analysis > > > > or discourse. > > > > > Francis --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
