What is a soul?

[Mr H]

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

if your personal unconscious is made up of complexes then the collective unconscious is made up of archetypes and that is what religion is working with

I have no evidence of personal unconsciousness. 

 

The dream state is indeed more archetypal in nature than waking state. But I don't see how this makes the stories in the bible anymore than just stories written by humans. Passed down, mixed with other stories 

[Macnamara]

5 minutes ago, Mr H said:

I have no evidence of personal unconsciousness. 

 

The dream state is indeed more archetypal in nature than waking state. But I don't see how this makes the stories in the bible anymore than just stories written by humans. Passed down, mixed with other stories 

 

the story of the child jesus is an archetypal story. Its like a recurring motif in mythology and when this archetype of the child comes to you in dreams it can have certain meanings for you unless of course you subscribe to the work of sigmund freud who said that the unconscious is all personal. I don't subscribe to the work of freud and i think something far more enigmatic is going on

 

if you think of the fears of our child stage of development we fear abandonment and danger through persecution and those are represented in the story of jesus whose parents have to conceal him and birth him in a manger to avoid the infanticide of herod. But in most people the child motif will represent a coming synthesis of the conscious and the unconscious and jesus is the redeemer

Edited February 25 by Macnamara

[Mr H]

3 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

the story of the child jesus is an archetypal story. Its like a recurring motif in mythology and when this archetype of the child comes to you in dreams it can have certain meanings for you unless of course you subscribe to the work of sigmund freud who said that the unconscious is all personal. I don't subscribe to the work of freud and i think something far more enigmatic is going on

I've never read Sigmund Freud. 

 

I have no evidence of unconscious mind. This is just a concept invented by human minds. Based on incorrect first principles, that I am separate and I control thoughts and actions, to explain the actions they perceive we don't control.

 

I'm no expert but I thought the baby Jesus story was passed on from older religions.

[Macnamara]

12 minutes ago, Mr H said:

What do any of these terms actually mean and what evidence is there of their existence?

 

you'll hear a lot of people in the alternative scene try to reduce religions like christianity down to mere astrotheology but that is just a veil

 

yes there ARE astrotheological elements to religion but even those are merely an allegory of inner psychic processes

 

those who pierce that veil and understand things on THAT level are illuminatus. That's the problem we have: there are dark occultists who have deep knowledge of the inner psychic processes of humanity and they are using that knowledge to systematically disrupt humanity on the individual and the societal level

[Macnamara]

1 minute ago, Mr H said:

I'm no expert but I thought the baby Jesus story was passed on from older religions.

 

it is a recurring motif because it is an archetype of the collective unconscious

 

In an ideal world all people would be undergoing a process of individuation where they seek a maturation of their personality so that they may fulfil their potential. When this happens on a grand scale then that person acts as a redeemer of their age

 

This is really what crowley fancied himself as: the prophet of the new aeon. he was seeking to resolve what he saw as the weaknesses and failings of his age.

 

No doubt the dark illuminati also see themselves the same way. Just look at how people like bill gates and klaus schwab and noel hurari speak with a messianic verve. They have THEIR vision of the new age. Their vision does not involve helping people along the path of personality maturation but rather the path of dumbing down, toxification and capitulation to enslavement.

 

The question is whether or not we share that vision.

[Macnamara]

6 minutes ago, Mr H said:

I've never read Sigmund Freud.

 

i suspect he was a sabbatean

[Mr H]

3 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

you'll hear a lot of people in the alternative scene try to reduce religions like christianity down to mere astrotheology but that is just a veil

 

yes there ARE astrotheological elements to religion but even those are merely an allegory of inner psychic processes

 

those who pierce that veil and understand things on THAT level are illuminatus. That's the problem we have: there are dark occultists who have deep knowledge of the inner psychic processes of humanity and they are using that knowledge to systematically disrupt humanity on the individual and the societal level

I don't know what this really means. But I do know that religions were written by some bloke. Reading through some of them, sometimes there is some good practical guidance. But I've not seen any evidence that these stories are anything more than stories. 

[Mr H]

1 minute ago, Macnamara said:

 

it is a recurring motif because it is an archetype of the collective unconscious

 

In an ideal world all people would be undergoing a process of individuation where they seek a maturation of their personality so that they may fulfil their potential. When this happens on a grand scale then that person acts as a redeemer of their age

 

This is really what crowley fancied himself as: the prophet of the new aeon. he was seeking to resolve what he saw as the weaknesses and failings of his age.

 

No doubt the dark illuminati also see themselves the same way. Just look at how people like bill gates and klaus schwab and noel hurari speak with a messianic verve. They have THEIR vision of the new age. Their vision does not involve helping people along the path of personality maturation but rather the path of dumbing down, toxification and capitulation to enslavement.

 

The question is whether or not we share that vision.

Hmm well I still don't know what collective unconscious is or what evidence there is.

 

In reality there are no peoples not individuals. From either an experiential perspective or a scientific one. So deffo dont share their vision on that 

[Macnamara]

1 minute ago, Mr H said:

I don't know what this really means. But I do know that religions were written by some bloke. Reading through some of them, sometimes there is some good practical guidance. But I've not seen any evidence that these stories are anything more than stories. 

 

right but the abrahamic religions are religions of REVELATION ie they claim their creation from a divine source

 

joseph of the 'technicoloured dreamcoat' had a shining aura (his 'dream coat'). He had insight into these inner psychic processes which is why when the pharoah rescued him from the pit his jelous brothers threw him into he employed joseph to act as his dream interpreter: because they believed dream content had meaning

 

Freud was claiming to also interprete peoples dreams in the modern era but for him it was all relating to peoples personal content and experience which then denies that there is anything going on that transcends the individual

 

If the 'story' as you put it was written down by someone then it wasn't some meaningless drivel someone cobbled together for their amusement. It has archetypal significance so in relation to what you are asking in this thread about whether there is soul and what is it i am trying to say that there IS a transcendent experience going on here. Joseph Campbell speaks about these processes and encourages people to go on their own heroes journey

 

Just speaking from my own experience that process is not a purely inner process and things manifest in the external world thereby showing a connection between the  two. Jung for example would speak about synchronicities.

 

So i don't see life as this mechanistic, empty and soulless trudge through this world until we die. of course the people who have fallen into the trap i spoke about above do see the world in those materialistic terms and they will sometimes spitefully seek to try and drag others down through the mud as if to make some sort of point (envy is the drive to destroy that which one can't have for themself).

 

 

[Mr H]

Just now, Macnamara said:

 

right but the abrahamic religions are religions of REVELATION ie they claim their creation from a divine source

 

joseph of the 'technicoloured dreamcoat' had a shining aura (his 'dream coat'). He had insight into these inner psychic processes which is why when the pharoah rescued him from the pit his jelous brothers threw him into he employed joseph to act as his dream interpreter: because they believed dream content had meaning

 

Freud was claiming to also interprete peoples dreams in the modern era but for him it was all relating to peoples personal content and experience which then denies that there is anything going on that transcends the individual

 

If the 'story' as you put it was written down by someone then it wasn't some meaningless drivel someone cobbled together for their amusement. It has archetypal significance so in relation to what you are asking in this thread about whether there is soul and what is it i am trying to say that there IS a transcendent experience going on here. Joseph Campbell speaks about these processes and encourages people to go on their own heroes journey

 

Just speaking from my own experience that process is not a purely inner process and things manifest in the external world thereby showing a connection between the  two. Jung for example would speak about synchronicities.

 

So i don't see life as this mechanistic, empty and soulless trudge through this world until we die. of course the people who have fallen into the trap i spoke about above do see the world in those materialistic terms and they will sometimes spitefully seek to try and drag others down through the mud as if to make some sort of point (envy is the drive to destroy that which one can't have for themself).

 

 

Yes they do claim from divine source as do thousands of writings. 

 

No it's not some drivel, but seems to coincide with stories from earlier religions. How the first one came to pass or how they got the story originally I don't know.

 

Yes I was trying to get the meaning and evidence for a soul. But still no joy. Saying life isn't mechanical, or talking about others', theories doesn't satisfy the question 

[Macnamara]

7 minutes ago, Mr H said:

Hmm well I still don't know what collective unconscious is or what evidence there is.

 

the part of the psyche that retains and passes on the common psychological inheritance of man. The archetypes that are manifested are so old that the modern man/woman struggles to make sense of them

[Macnamara]

7 minutes ago, Mr H said:

No it's not some drivel, but seems to coincide with stories from earlier religions. How the first one came to pass or how they got the story originally I don't know.

 

no it's not that they just copy older stories!

 

each generation also experiences these archetypes and some people WILL use archetypes religiously but once they start to do that they do imprint their own consciousness and if they are a bad actor they may seek to do that in a way that isn't going to redeem anyone

[Macnamara]

from a really great article, defo worth a read! Link posted below:

 

The deconstruction mindset views nothing as sacred and this includes moral compass. While arguing from a position of moral superiority, the political left will often rationalize highly immoral practices. For example, this is why we now see aggressive attempts by leftists to normalize the indoctrination of very young children into trans activism. This is why we are seeing hundreds of gender affirmation clinics with procedures for children springing up all over the country. This is why we are seeing numerous sexualized drag shows for kids, and why highly sexualized reading materials are being planted in school libraries.

This is why some leftists in the media are promoting pedophiles as a victim status group rather than aberrant criminals that need to be weeded out of society. Innocent children are fair game for them because the ends justify the means. Brainwashing and denigrating the next generation is the fastest path to their Utopia.

This is the inevitable progression of the deconstruction ideology. Morality is a “binary” based on what is right and what is wrong. It is the most vital binary for human survival and without it our species would self destruct, but this seems to be exactly what leftists and the globalist puppeteers behind them want. They see traditional morality as a restrictive and oppressive dynamic, another binary that must be eliminated. Thus, they propose moral relativism instead; the idea that conscience is merely a product of social conditioning and that right and wrong, truth and lies, good and evil are based on personal preferences.

It is, ironically, the recipe for ultimate evil. It is the philosophy of pure chaos. When individual conscience becomes the enemy of society because it is considered an “act of discrimination”, then only evil can prevail.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/deconstruction-why-leftist-movements-cannot-coexist-people-value-freedom

[Michi713]

47 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

from a really great article, defo worth a read! Link posted below:

 

The deconstruction mindset views nothing as sacred and this includes moral compass. While arguing from a position of moral superiority, the political left will often rationalize highly immoral practices. For example, this is why we now see aggressive attempts by leftists to normalize the indoctrination of very young children into trans activism. This is why we are seeing hundreds of gender affirmation clinics with procedures for children springing up all over the country. This is why we are seeing numerous sexualized drag shows for kids, and why highly sexualized reading materials are being planted in school libraries.

This is why some leftists in the media are promoting pedophiles as a victim status group rather than aberrant criminals that need to be weeded out of society. Innocent children are fair game for them because the ends justify the means. Brainwashing and denigrating the next generation is the fastest path to their Utopia.

This is the inevitable progression of the deconstruction ideology. Morality is a “binary” based on what is right and what is wrong. It is the most vital binary for human survival and without it our species would self destruct, but this seems to be exactly what leftists and the globalist puppeteers behind them want. They see traditional morality as a restrictive and oppressive dynamic, another binary that must be eliminated. Thus, they propose moral relativism instead; the idea that conscience is merely a product of social conditioning and that right and wrong, truth and lies, good and evil are based on personal preferences.

It is, ironically, the recipe for ultimate evil. It is the philosophy of pure chaos. When individual conscience becomes the enemy of society because it is considered an “act of discrimination”, then only evil can prevail.

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/deconstruction-why-leftist-movements-cannot-coexist-people-value-freedom

 

In John Bunyan's book Pilgrims Progress, there is the 'village of morality' where everyone is civil and gets along.  It ends up being more destructive than the 'city of destruction' where overt sinfulness abounds.  How could this be?  

 

The inhabitants of the village of morality act civil towards one another.  It's  a nice place to raise a family, but their morality is only an outward expression, not grounded in an authority.  

 

Such a society is easily compromised and doomed to ultimately resemble the city of destruction.  This is what happened when Western society was secularized, and evidenced now by trans story time at the library.

 

[Campion]

4 hours ago, Macnamara said:

do we know what age range it is mostly in? Surely pedos also prey on people under 14?

 

Biologically speaking 14 onwards is moving into puberty which means that child rearing is technically possible and perhaps cultures in the past had different timeframes for that due to certain pressures such as shorter lifespans (many people may not have been making it as far as 50) or economic pressures where a family may have felt a need to marry off a daughter as they could not afford to feed her whereas a son may have been more productive on the farm. India for example has a dark past of infanticide where baby girls were killed because they were not seen as being able to contribute as much to the family and also because of the high cost of a dowry that would be needed to pay to marry off a daughter in an arranged marriage

 

I'm probably not explaining myself well. Yes of course pedos prey on younger children, my point is that the legal definition of paedophilia is preying on children below the age of consent, which does vary. Although the word is a total distortion, -philia means love and once again something good is being twisted into evil. Laws and customs are based on cultures which are relativistic, religion and the economic needs of the people, life expectancy etc.  That I would place in the relativistic bucket (with the exception of those rare few with a deep insight into religious truth).  However, if we accept that all humans, as belonging to the same species, have basically the same psychological makeup. Therefore we can imagine creating an objective morality based on the health and welfare of the children. Psychological trauma can still occur at older ages even if the local culture has allowed children to marry at that age. 

 

4 hours ago, Macnamara said:

Its true that in modern western society we don't have set coming of age rituals for people to transition from childhood into adulthood like tribal societies do but perhaps apprenticeships used to serve that function in a way as young people worked around older people and learned not only the craft that would give them employment going forward but also how to conduct themself around adults and also in business?

 

I can see how that has changed even in my lifetime: I got confirmed at 14 which the nearest thing I had to an initiation ceremony. Jews have their Bar/Bat Mitzvah and other religions no doubt have their equivalents. But these day's they're more symbolic and real initiation comes in practical ways of growing up such as leaving school, starting work and getting married, having children. All of which we do when older than our ancestors (if at all like marriage). 

 

5 hours ago, Macnamara said:

In a modern western society there can be consequences for having children at a young age just as there can be consequences for having children at a much older age. Arguably there is an optimal stage in life for that in terms of health, maturation, economy, opportunities, education etc

 

That's true but there needs to be a minimum level of fertility to have a sustainable society, which most western (and some non-western) have been well below for a long time now. Some things are objectively true, such as the decline in fertility as we get older. 

[Mr H]

20 hours ago, Macnamara said:

 

the part of the psyche that retains and passes on the common psychological inheritance of man. The archetypes that are manifested are so old that the modern man/woman struggles to make sense of them

This still seems to me that this explanation requires belief and faith.

 

Belief in theories by humans e.g Joseph Campbell, and beliefs about religions texts.

 

 

[Campion]

20 hours ago, Michi713 said:

Such a society is easily compromised and doomed to ultimately resemble the city of destruction.  This is what happened when Western society was secularized, and evidenced now by trans story time at the library.

 

Morality has been reduced to 'social justice' for minority interest groups competing for victimhood, and we are discouraged from looking at the state of our overall society. It's also a consequence of multiculturalism and liberalism breaking up society as much as secularisation (tho these are probably connected). 

[Michi713]

On 2/25/2023 at 8:51 AM, Campion said:

so according to our values we can argue that the holy spirit was a paedophile when he (who was very old) fathered Jesus with Mary, a girl

WTF dude?  Don't answer that. 

[Macnamara]

3 hours ago, Mr H said:

This still seems to me that this explanation requires belief and faith.

 

gnosis is direct experience isn't it?

 

3 hours ago, Mr H said:

Belief in theories by humans e.g Joseph Campbell, and beliefs about religions texts.

 

but they are not just theories as they are looking comparatively at religions and myths across the world and finding commonalities between people separated by vast distances and by large spans of time

 

this is because the collective unconscious is shared

[Macnamara]

23 hours ago, Michi713 said:

The inhabitants of the village of morality act civil towards one another.  It's  a nice place to raise a family, but their morality is only an outward expression, not grounded in an authority. 

 

well the point about satan is that he said 'non servium': 'i will not serve'

 

however there are different interpretations of that situation. For example i've heard muslims see satan as in a kind of bet with God over whether or not humanity is worth a damn. Satan then acts as a kind of tester to see what people are made of eg will a person sell their soul for 30 pieces of silver?

 

But i also heard another perspective which is that satan was the only angel who refused to kneel before mankind which means that he was the only angel that actually obeyed God's decree that they should not bow before anyone but God.

 

I guess many of us serve something or other. For example we serve our families, we serve our communities and in an ideal world we serve the truth

[Mr H]

4 hours ago, Macnamara said:

 

gnosis is direct experience isn't it?

 

 

but they are not just theories as they are looking comparatively at religions and myths across the world and finding commonalities between people separated by vast distances and by large spans of time

 

this is because the collective unconscious is shared

Sorry dude you've completely lost me in your explanation.

 

To me to be certain of something you have to experience it, otherwise it's a theory, which is interesting but not very real to the experiencer, a mind puzzle answer.

 

What I personally think people refer to as soul, is the experience of our true nature which is consciousness which transcends the human experience from an experimental explanation. There are many theoretical explainations such as from.stories in bible, tales about Ascension etc.

[Macnamara]

13 hours ago, Mr H said:

Sorry dude you've completely lost me in your explanation.

 

ok but i've put a lot of stuff out there that provides a good starting point to further enquiry for those that are interested

 

13 hours ago, Mr H said:

To me to be certain of something you have to experience it, otherwise it's a theory

 

and these archetypes i'm speaking about ARE experienced by all of us in the dream state

[BeeThrive]

It’s an interesting question, something ive pondered for some time.

 

Soul and spirit seems to be used interchangeably, synonymously. Intuitively, i’ve found that irksome without knowing why, yet just something within me refused to believe they are the same ‘thing’.

 

Through (mostly unintentioned!) travels through consciousness, i’ve gathered a clearer view of the layers that make us ‘us’. Yet i still fully realise i’ve glimpsed a teeny piece here and there, and always keep an open mind to enable more wholesome understanding.

 

Soul (for me) seems to be the essence distillation of knowledge and wisdom, that the lower/animal ego ‘learns’ via its incarnational journeys.

I’m referring more to very distilled wisdom, rather than ‘dave at the corner shop is a nazi’ - which is lower ego opinion judgement crud, not knowledge or wisdom of creation and reality.
Carrying on the same analogy with Dave, i eventually learn he’s not a complete nazi and is a very tolerant bloke - this tells me that a) i judged wrongly, b) expressions of consciousness from people vary and we can never assume anything, c) dave acted more like a nazi when i projected that ‘label’ upon him, so once again judgement is full of dis-service for the whole.

All of these realisations i have via Dave at the corner shop condense and distil to knowledge, that creation is made via self or other judgements projected out into reality creation, so don’t judge anything so quickly with a blase attitude. 
 

The above is a lazy example, but you get my gist…

 

Therefore, the Soul self is more like what is these days termed as the ‘higher self’ - the one with knowledge and wisdom.

The vedic breakdown of the 7 fold ‘divine ego’ has wisdom and knowledge Self as being beyond the usual ‘lower ego’ veil. Hence why pure knowledge is hard to access when the lower ego only is in the driving seat.

 

Spirit, on the other hand is, for me, the field of pure consciousness without ‘identity of anything’ attached.
Its the ‘blank canvas’ of reality before any part of ego ‘paints itself’ upon it. 
This field of consciousness we are all plugged into, as its the primary ‘cause’ of all. It delivers power to each and everything ‘to be’ what it chooses.

 

This field of non-dual consciousness is what i suspect is ‘Spirit’. Because of its non-dual nature, it is the centre of all dualistic created reality. ‘Zero point’ consciousness is another term for it.
Its often reached by meditators when they slide out of dual ‘me-ism’ and punch through the separating veils that separate the whole ‘7 part divine ego’. 
 

Also, despite the non-dual field being so glorious to inhabit/glimpse and bathe in, like nothing our lower-ego can ever EVER imagine is possible…..we are inclined to think ‘Is this God?’ - and many modern spiritualists tout it to be ‘God consciousness’.

Yet i don’t agree. 

I lean currently towards understanding this non-dual consciousness/pure awareness field to be Spirit. Infused with God-field force, propelled by God-field force, but not IT, soley God.

An ‘extension’ of God, moreso.

 

Texts talk of pure Spirit being a ‘messenger’ - and the ‘holy spirit’ of christianity as a messenger….the white dove symbolism.

Non-dual thinkers elicit similar analogies, that Spirit is the communication-agent.

Its THE primary field where ‘messages’ are painted upon by ANY level of ego. This field is everywhere completely, hence the ‘universal/global/cosmic’ consciousness model touted - ALL IS ONE. 
All is one AWARENESS, not all is one ego, as that’s blatantly obvious, as we’ve all separated into individual parts, all species have.

What’s universal is we are all linked into the ‘awareness’ field.

Non-dual awareness states occur when awareness is aware of being aware - just that, by itself, not coloured by ego at all. The ego ‘dave’ becomes a grain of sand within the consciousness, while the awareness of Dave finally fills Dave with nothing but pure awareness, because Dave stopped taking Dave so seriously

 

Soul therefore is highly spiritual, but not Spirit. Soul is still part of ego, the ‘best’ part, in comparison to the ‘lower animal ego’ - but never forget, nor take for granted the lower ego has it’s role to play and it’s purpose for contributing to the more divine realisations to be experienced, and spiritual knowledge growth. 

Like is known, we wouldnt know light if it wasnt for darkness, nor heat if it wasnt for cold. The lower ego contrasts nicely to higher ego ‘Soul’ spiritual knowledge, through which, by exploring this lower ego, higher knowledge/soul awareness is *bound* to develop and occur at *some* point for all ego’s. 
 

I’ll always remain open-minded to reality and its construct….this stuff we can never know 100% for sure. Just get drops of clarity that we have to ‘classify’ with labels to explain our experience of reality. 

 

 

 

[Mr H]

6 hours ago, BeeThrive said:

It’s an interesting question, something ive pondered for some time.

 

Soul and spirit seems to be used interchangeably, synonymously. Intuitively, i’ve found that irksome without knowing why, yet just something within me refused to believe they are the same ‘thing’.

 

Through (mostly unintentioned!) travels through consciousness, i’ve gathered a clearer view of the layers that make us ‘us’. Yet i still fully realise i’ve glimpsed a teeny piece here and there, and always keep an open mind to enable more wholesome understanding.

 

Soul (for me) seems to be the essence distillation of knowledge and wisdom, that the lower/animal ego ‘learns’ via its incarnational journeys.

I’m referring more to very distilled wisdom, rather than ‘dave at the corner shop is a nazi’ - which is lower ego opinion judgement crud, not knowledge or wisdom of creation and reality.
Carrying on the same analogy with Dave, i eventually learn he’s not a complete nazi and is a very tolerant bloke - this tells me that a) i judged wrongly, b) expressions of consciousness from people vary and we can never assume anything, c) dave acted more like a nazi when i projected that ‘label’ upon him, so once again judgement is full of dis-service for the whole.

All of these realisations i have via Dave at the corner shop condense and distil to knowledge, that creation is made via self or other judgements projected out into reality creation, so don’t judge anything so quickly with a blase attitude. 
 

The above is a lazy example, but you get my gist…

 

Therefore, the Soul self is more like what is these days termed as the ‘higher self’ - the one with knowledge and wisdom.

The vedic breakdown of the 7 fold ‘divine ego’ has wisdom and knowledge Self as being beyond the usual ‘lower ego’ veil. Hence why pure knowledge is hard to access when the lower ego only is in the driving seat.

 

Spirit, on the other hand is, for me, the field of pure consciousness without ‘identity of anything’ attached.
Its the ‘blank canvas’ of reality before any part of ego ‘paints itself’ upon it. 
This field of consciousness we are all plugged into, as its the primary ‘cause’ of all. It delivers power to each and everything ‘to be’ what it chooses.

 

This field of non-dual consciousness is what i suspect is ‘Spirit’. Because of its non-dual nature, it is the centre of all dualistic created reality. ‘Zero point’ consciousness is another term for it.
Its often reached by meditators when they slide out of dual ‘me-ism’ and punch through the separating veils that separate the whole ‘7 part divine ego’. 
 

Also, despite the non-dual field being so glorious to inhabit/glimpse and bathe in, like nothing our lower-ego can ever EVER imagine is possible…..we are inclined to think ‘Is this God?’ - and many modern spiritualists tout it to be ‘God consciousness’.

Yet i don’t agree. 

I lean currently towards understanding this non-dual consciousness/pure awareness field to be Spirit. Infused with God-field force, propelled by God-field force, but not IT, soley God.

An ‘extension’ of God, moreso.

 

Texts talk of pure Spirit being a ‘messenger’ - and the ‘holy spirit’ of christianity as a messenger….the white dove symbolism.

Non-dual thinkers elicit similar analogies, that Spirit is the communication-agent.

Its THE primary field where ‘messages’ are painted upon by ANY level of ego. This field is everywhere completely, hence the ‘universal/global/cosmic’ consciousness model touted - ALL IS ONE. 
All is one AWARENESS, not all is one ego, as that’s blatantly obvious, as we’ve all separated into individual parts, all species have.

What’s universal is we are all linked into the ‘awareness’ field.

Non-dual awareness states occur when awareness is aware of being aware - just that, by itself, not coloured by ego at all. The ego ‘dave’ becomes a grain of sand within the consciousness, while the awareness of Dave finally fills Dave with nothing but pure awareness, because Dave stopped taking Dave so seriously

 

Soul therefore is highly spiritual, but not Spirit. Soul is still part of ego, the ‘best’ part, in comparison to the ‘lower animal ego’ - but never forget, nor take for granted the lower ego has it’s role to play and it’s purpose for contributing to the more divine realisations to be experienced, and spiritual knowledge growth. 

Like is known, we wouldnt know light if it wasnt for darkness, nor heat if it wasnt for cold. The lower ego contrasts nicely to higher ego ‘Soul’ spiritual knowledge, through which, by exploring this lower ego, higher knowledge/soul awareness is *bound* to develop and occur at *some* point for all ego’s. 
 

I’ll always remain open-minded to reality and its construct….this stuff we can never know 100% for sure. Just get drops of clarity that we have to ‘classify’ with labels to explain our experience of reality. 

 

 

 

Excellent.

 

I feel very much the same way.

 

But the spirit consciousness part, can always be directly accessed and experienced, where as the soul part for me is more intuitive, occasional insight plus theory. It's not as concrete and I'm not as certain about it as the former

[Certified Green of Heart]

22 hours ago, Mr H said:

the spirit consciousness part, can always be directly accessed and experienced, where as the soul part for me is more intuitive, occasional insight plus theory. It's not as concrete and I'm not as certain about it as the former

 

Bear in mind I have had to do a re-post (with what turned out to be rule breaking so I made edits to other stuff  I wrote alongside, which alas has saved my skin, which it should muchly as the innocent party, haha (it's an private matter,can't divulge)... but for this part of my below it is BASICLY the way IT WAS how I posted earlier, except now without mentioning AN other member! ... So although the following post of mine, was double whammied with something ELSE intertwined, which was bugging me but still half n half regarding this topic, I have slimmed down my answer in order to avoid a clash with some disrespecting person, had to do an edit whether I like it or not, since someone was being a jerk to me in PM's today.....but ok moving on, and no not you Mr H...

 

NOW MY NORMAL REPLY (free speaking, even though as they say, this is not free speech forum):

Anyway.....

Mr H, yeah just going by that post alone, your take on spirit and soul is very understandable too for something I have wrangled with for years, especially my younger years.... So, in some sense the simpler the better & EASIER it is to understand sometimes as you put it, not that I don't appreciate deeper levels of thinking, EDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIT................. but......* I mean some stuff else often commonly analysed in equal detail as this, is as much a complex as Spirit & Soul if anything *....