A reasoned look at the spirit.

[Amorphos]

A reasoned look at the spirit.

Ok what section should this one go in …

I would like to ask how you would correlate the material body with the spirit and soul. presuming that we aren’t actually born, that there is no magic moment when something enters the body of an infant or foetus, how then does spirit enter the world ~ or does it not.

Perhaps you have other ideas that don’t include spirit, e.g. the Buddhist self, how though does the emptiness connect, does it simply mean that we don’t exist and hence we don’t enter nirvana and feel bliss etc, it is simply oblivion.

Somehow I feel we must find answers to these things, ones that add up!

_____________________________


This is an extract from something I wrote in one of the group forums.

As concerns birth, if we go beyond the individualistic, we may see life perhaps in two overt universal contexts;

metaphor; Gaia and the spark of Zeus.

With the Gaia aspect [yin] we see life as unending, we arise from mere cells [part of a former being] and become humans. If we take infinity to possess or literally be ‘life’ and thought/mind as one thing, then from the beginnings of evolution and indeed the universe, this life is the body of existence.

With the zeus aspect [yang] we see that running alongside the gaia aspect is the mind expression of infinity. This I would think of as the emptiness within all things [even mass] and mainly connected to energy on the subtle level. When an egg is fertilised [even if artificially], there is a moment when a brief jolt of electricity fuses the cells together to begin the foetal period [a child’s life]. At this point there would be little difference between the foetal mind and the universal mind, then gradually as we become more distinct [both foetal and in maturity after birth], the mind becomes increasingly distinct.

At death then, the mind simply resumes its former connection with the universal and infinite mind, due to the breakdown of differences created by each stage of our development.

On the spiritual multiverse level, we may see a mirroring of what we become on earth and its reflection in the universal mind. From our perspective we would at first feel distinct after bodily death, but after some time and as minds meld, there would be a gradual reunion with our celestial father [the nature of], culminating in blissful complete re-emergence with the infinite. Just as like history exists eternally [in a sense], so shall we as semi-distinct personalities, this ’body’ of mind may be called up as we so wish and the spiritual multiverse is its playground - so to say.

So there is no mind-body dichotomy until death, when the consciousness can no longer be supported.

We are a material soul!

[Denny Crane!]

Quez so you aren't dualistic?

Also I've a podcast that may be of interest to you on conciousness and the universe.

[Copperknickers II]

I would like to ask how you would correlate the material body with the spirit and soul. presuming that we aren’t actually born, that there is no magic moment when something enters the body of an infant or foetus, how then does spirit enter the world.

I would answer that there is a 'magic moment', in the very first spark of a neuron firing in the brain. From then on, you are alive. Even for an Atheist such as myself, that is a sacred moment; all life is sacred in that it is sentience and free-will created by chemical reactions. From the moment you are alive, you have a purpose, an impulse. Even the basest of animals has something more than existance, it has a self-maintained structure, it has needs. Humans, one could argue, are a strata above animals because they have not only needs, but sheer illogical whimsical wants. That is a wondrous thing, and is in my view the essense of the soul.

[Amorphos]

Oh I have replies at last, well its very late here and I have been modding all day, I will get back to you tomorrow.

Thanks for replies!



ps, no i am not dualistic, yes i am dualistic. is there a middle ground as i feel both are equally true.



...

[Amorphos]

I would answer that there is a 'magic moment', in the very first spark of a neuron firing in the brain.

So creatures too small to have brains are not alive?

I wonder if the electro-magnetism in thought is an expression of the infinite, in that infinity is alive. Really I am trying to look at how spirit/soul works with the material? Unless we concede that there is no beginning and that ‘factor x’ [mind or spirit etc] does not actually enter the world, then I think we have logical inconsistencies?

[Hippolord]

So creatures too small to have brains are not alive?

I wonder if the electro-magnetism in thought is an expression of the infinite, in that infinity is alive. Really I am trying to look at how spirit/soul works with the material? Unless we concede that there is no beginning and that ‘factor x’ [mind or spirit etc] does not actually enter the world, then I think we have logical inconsistencies?

I belive that any creature that is self-aware, is thusly able to be universally aware. I think that all creatures can change the whole universe, through simple action, but creatures that are per say, self aware enough to as i said, be universally aware. Are the ones able to change the course of the universe through simple thought, and the exsistance of the mind, behind the brain, and that is a very powerful thing indeed.

[Amorphos]

I belive that any creature that is self-aware, is thusly able to be universally aware.

why do they have to be universally aware ~ are you? They don’t have the qualia to exist or think beyond what they are. The mind behind a human and animal/insect brain may be singular [probably is] in the infinite context, mast creatures don’t have utility of it.

we have to perhaps think; 'mind-ocean' and then mind.

[Bongfu]

Really I think the soul, as Plato thought, is the force which drives us through life. Though I do not believe it to be some magical entity, I think a soul, or spirit, is simply the will to survive, kind of like the engine in a car. It keeps us going even when times are rough, and it leads people to extraordinary acts.

[Hippolord]

Thought is the awarness of self, the mind is the awareness of thought, and the soul is the awareness of the mind?

(Not in response to what you said Bongfu, just a stand alone post.)

[Amorphos]

Bongfu, hi

Yeah sounds about right, I would also call it the experiencer. Things is how do you connect that to our physicality? Is the experiencer universal and we its expressions? Or are those expressions mirrors of that and hence take on their won life once we are formed.

[Hippolord]

Bongfu, hi

Yeah sounds about right, I would also call it the experiencer. Things is how do you connect that to our physicality? Is the experiencer universal and we its expressions? Or are those expressions mirrors of that and hence take on their won life once we are formed.

We are not the expression of the Universe, the Universe is the expression of us, and our thought, mind, and soul.

[Bongfu]

Bongfu, hi

Yeah sounds about right, I would also call it the experiencer. Things is how do you connect that to our physicality? Is the experiencer universal and we its expressions? Or are those expressions mirrors of that and hence take on their won life once we are formed.

Hippolord pretty much hit it on the spot. We all see the universe in our own light. The same way a color blind person can only see black, white and grays, his universe is that reality, as opposed to the vibrant colored universe of someone who is not color blind. Is one perception any better than the other? No.

The soul allows us to connect to the universe, simply; it acts as a medium in which we are connected with the collection essence that makes up the experience of all things. Then we can draw from that experience when we need it to make sense of a situation and get through it.

[Hippolord]

Hippolord pretty much hit it on the spot. We all see the universe in our own light. The same way a color blind person can only see black, white and grays, his universe is that reality, as opposed to the vibrant colored universe of someone who is not color blind. Is one perception any better than the other? No.

The soul allows us to connect to the universe, simply; it acts as a medium in which we are connected with the collection essence that makes up the experience of all things. Then we can draw from that experience when we need it to make sense of a situation and get through it.

Yes, thank you very much! Each man is bound to his own universe, looking from the inside out. Thereby one is stuck within ones own perceptions. As is, one can change his own universe, with just a simple thought. Therefore if by any and all means, he is the god of said universe. And who among us is to claim to know, how the thoughts of own mind may reverbriate throughout the soul unto the perceptions of all others. To the point that one may begin to argue that you cannot only chnage your own universe with but a thought, but the multiverse of perception itself. We are each masters of how we all perceive the universe, for we change it ad infintium.

But we must never forget our own universe, our own perception, our own Grey. For that is what has made us gods.

"I could be bound to a nutshell, and count myself a king of infinite space."
- Hamlet

[Amorphos]

We are not the expression of the Universe, the Universe is the expression of us, and our thought, mind, and soul.

We did not exist prior to our births though? Infinity must come first.

The soul allows us to connect to the universe, simply; it acts as a medium in which we are connected with the collection essence that makes up the experience of all things.

So back on topic; how does that soul arrive? One has to presume it is already there, yet it is not us until we are made. Consciousness is produced by our form and via the utility of what is already there. Everything/anything is manifest of what is already there.

[Bongfu]

I do not believe I have ever stated that.

Universal is defined as infinite, one must exist before the other. So is the Universal infinite or Infinite Universal?

[Hippolord]

I do not believe I have ever stated that.

Universal is defined as infinite, one must exist before the other. So is the Universal infinite or Infinite Universal?

Your correct i slightly misread what you said.

Universal is not defined as infinite, for who is to say that the universe is indeed infinite? If the universe be infinite, then if i were to take away from it, then i would have effectivly created a new universe. For is you take one away from infinite, is it still infinite? No, it is not. For it will never be the original infinite, A.K.A. the infinite we conceived to be infinite. No it will be something different it will be for all intesive purposes: Infinite minus one. And that is not infinite, we may only guess at the properties that it holds, so one may argue that if the universe is infite, as you hypothesize, that if you were to take away from it, in any way shape or form, then it would no longer be the same universe. So as i said before, we trully are masters of our own universe because we are the universal moderator, we are the variable.

The Universe, thus i conclude, is not infinite. But it is only what you perceive it to be, if my universe is simply me, my family, and my friends, then my universe is indeed not infinite. But on the other hand if my universe may include all of my mind, and all things that may lay with in it, then who knows how far it may expand, it just may be infinite. Infinity did not create the universe, and the universe is not infinite, instead it is we, the consious ones, who create infinity, we give bounds to something that has none. Therefore we know all of infinity, for it is in part, our creation.

And thusly once again i conclude:
Conception is our infinity. And it is the only infinity.
For it only exsists within conception.
And within coneption...
Is all things.

[Bongfu]

Your correct i slightly misread what you said.

Universal is not defined as infinite, for who is to say that the universe is indeed infinite? If the universe be infinite, then if i were to take away from it, then i would have effectivly created a new universe. For is you take one away from infinite, is it still infinite? No, it is not. For it will never be the original infinite, A.K.A. the infinite we conceived to be infinite. No it will be something different it will be for all intesive purposes: Infinite minus one. And that is not infinite, we may only guess at the properties that it holds, so one may argue that if the universe is infite, as you hypothesize, that if you were to take away from it, in any way shape or form, then it would no longer be the same universe. So as i said before, we trully are masters of our own universe because we are the universal moderator, we are the variable.

The Universe, thus i conclude, is not infinite. But it is only what you perceive it to be, if my universe is simply me, my family, and my friends, then my universe is indeed not infinite. But on the other hand if my universe may include all of my mind, and all things that may lay with in it, then who knows how far it may expand, it just may be infinite. Infinity did not create the universe, and the universe is not infinite, instead it is we, the consious ones, who create infinity, we give bounds to something that has none. Therefore we know all of infinity, for it is in part, our creation.

And thusly once again i conclude:
Conception is our infinity. And it is the only infinity.
For it only exsists within conception.
And within coneption...
Is all things.

So then I must ask you this.

If we cannot conclude the universe is infinite, than we ourselves are only limited to its limited possibilities, so is man, the mind, the soul, limited to only what our noninfinite universe can offer?

[Hippolord]

So then I must ask you this.

If we cannot conclude the universe is infinite, than we ourselves are only limited to its limited possibilities, so is man, the mind, the soul, limited to only what our noninfinite universe can offer?

Yes this is indeed a dillema for i have come to this ultimatum before:

Either the universe Is Infinite, and highly unstable. And we trully may trully have more power in it than we may have at first thought. And on top of that, we would as beings would be universal moderators, and thusly...gods in our pwn way.

OR

The Universe is finite, and we are not free. For there cannot be infinite potential within a finite universe. But this also means it is possible that the unverse you were born in, is the same you are in now. And that the laws of physics mean something, for in an infinite universe, laws such as those would no hold up, in such an unstable universe...

So at first we are drawn to the second choice, because the laws of physics do not fail us (Not often), and thusly if it be possible to put laws on the universe, and give it bounds then it is not infinte.

But instead i come to another conclusion: That the universe is or was infinite, but that theough our conception, the infinity of the universe pales in comparison. And thusly we make laws and give bounds, and we make it finite, through our sheer will to do so, to understand it. Thusly i come to one conclusion and the other: The universe is indeed finite, but we are still free. Why? Because we made it so, we are gods (For lack of a better word) within a finite universe. We have infinite potential, but it cannot be met, because we do not understand it. For we have created a finite universe, in which it is possible ot understand things. But also it is immpossible to release our infinite potential.

So in the end: Are we free? Yes. Is the universe infinite? No. Did we make it that way? Yes. Can we understand infinity? No, thats why the universe is finite. etc. etc.

[Bongfu]

Yes this is indeed a dillema for i have come to this ultimatum before:

Either the universe Is Infinite, and highly unstable. And we trully may trully have more power in it than we may have at first thought. And on top of that, we would as beings would be universal moderators, and thusly...gods in our pwn way.

OR

The Universe is finite, and we are not free. For there cannot be infinite potential within a finite universe. But this also means it is possible that the unverse you were born in, is the same you are in now. And that the laws of physics mean something, for in an infinite universe, laws such as those would no hold up, in such an unstable universe...

So at first we are drawn to the second choice, because the laws of physics do not fail us (Not often), and thusly if it be possible to put laws on the universe, and give it bounds then it is not infinte.

But instead i come to another conclusion: That the universe is or was infinite, but that theough our conception, the infinity of the universe pales in comparison. And thusly we make laws and give bounds, and we make it finite, through our sheer will to do so, to understand it. Thusly i come to one conclusion and the other: The universe is indeed finite, but we are still free. Why? Because we made it so, we are gods (For lack of a better word) within a finite universe. We have infinite potential, but it cannot be met, because we do not understand it. For we have created a finite universe, in which it is possible ot understand things. But also it is immpossible to release our infinite potential.

So in the end: Are we free? Yes. Is the universe infinite? No. Did we make it that way? Yes. Can we understand infinity? No, thats why the universe is finite. etc. etc.

So we created an unfathomably big universe to live in so we can understand it?

Ok I will work with that.

Now we have our bounded universe with its universal laws of governance we have come up with. Now everything is limited by those bounds, and nothing can be infinite, for an infinite idea would meet a boundary and therefore cease to be infinite. Then the idea of our universe can only be as large or as small as we conceive of it to be.

In everything we do, we add to the universe. So if it is not boundless, ergo, it will eventually fill up. In an unknown future, we will be cramped inside our bounded universe, with no room for expansion. Because alas, our universe is not infinite.

Therefore, we cannot be free, for freedom knows no bounds

[Bongfu]

So the Universe is not a universe at all then. For your idea is the selfverse - meaning, that we constrain ourselves to only understand what is around us, never conceiving of possibilities beyond ourselves. Therefore, you are correct, there can be no infinite selfverse unless we ourselves were infinite.

However, there are an infinite number of outcomes in life, an infinite possible choices to make, and an infinite ways to come about doing something, therefore the Universe, has to be infinite to hold all individuals ideas and concepts.