What is a soul?

[Age]

I will never pretend that I "know" with absolute certainty that what I stated in my prior post is true.

However, the reason why I made those assertions about the soul...

(assertions that I personally believe are quite plausible)

...is a result of many years of obsessive analyzing of a mind-blowing, life-changing epiphany I experienced when I was 20 years old (approximately 53 years ago).
_______

And does having these beliefs have much influence on the way you live your life, or on how you percieve the world?

Well, seeing how having those beliefs...

(which, again, were brought about by the experience of a profound spiritual epiphany in 1970)

...has caused me to spend the last 53 years of my life trying to put into words and images what the epiphany revealed to me,...

(for example, years of creating a video lecture series that aired on public access television in the 90s, plus the self-publishing of two books - one in 1986 and another in 2008, not to mention spending vast amounts of time posting on philosophy forums)

...then, yes, it is safe to say that the beliefs I hold have had a major influence on how I have lived my life and on my perception of the world.

Here is ANOTHER PRIME EXAMPLE of just HOW, and HOW MUCH, BELIEFS, themselves, DISTORT, CONFUSE, and BLOCK 'one' from the ACTUAL and IRREFUTABLE Truth of 'things'.

In a subsequent post you stated the following to Iwannaplato...

"...I have never experienced anything in my life that has led to my considering the possibility of the existence of anything that could be called a soul..."

As always, I'm not suggesting that I can't be wrong (i.e., delusional), however, if nothing else, you need to be open to the possibility that some of us (for whatever reason) have indeed experienced events in our lives that have made us aware of the existence of a spiritual realm.

The REASON WHY some of 'you' have come CLOSER to SEEING, UNDERSTANDING, and KNOWING the 'Spiritual realm', like 'you' HAVE "seeds", is because of the 'past experiences' 'you' have HAD and because of becoming MORE OPEN, through being MORE Honest, at the 'time' when 'you' did.

But this WILL ONLY COME-TO-LIGHT WHEN 'you' people START BECOMING MORE OPEN and START SHARING HOW and WHY 'they' CAME to SEE what 'they' HAVE.

I'm talking about a transcendent context of reality of which the universe, in comparison, is nothing more than a sort of "vestibule" that momentarily stands between our previous non-existence and that of our entrance into a higher dimension of reality in which after crossing the vestibule's threshold (via death), our true (and eternal) form (our "soul" and its purpose) will finally be revealed to us.
_______

But the 'soul' IS NOT 'eternal'. Some 'Thing' ELSE IS.

Although the 'soul' does NOT die, and so IS 'eternal' in this sense that the 'soul' is ONLY 'eternal' AFTER its birth or beginning. So, the 'soul' is NOT 'eternal' in the True sense of having NO beginning NOR ending.

[Age]

As always, I'm not suggesting that I can't be wrong (i.e., delusional), however, if nothing else, you need to be open to the possibility that some of us (for whatever reason) have indeed experienced events in our lives that have made us aware of the existence of a spiritual realm.

I'm talking about a transcendent context of reality of which the universe, in comparison, is nothing more than a sort of "vestibule" that momentarily stands between our previous non-existence and that of our entrance into a higher dimension of reality in which after crossing the vestibule's threshold (via death), our true (and eternal) form (our "soul" and its purpose) will finally be revealed to us.
_______

I'm not closed to the possibility of anything you have said, and, at this present time, I neither accept it nor reject it. Supposing you are right, and there is a "higher dimension of reality" to which we transcend after our physical death, why do I need to be aware of it before my death?

There is ONLY One Universe, which IS eternal AND infinite. So, there is NO 'other place' of MORE NOR HIGHER 'reality'. There is ONLY this One and ONLY 'Reality'. So, the question you ask here IS REDUNDANT.

Why not just concern ourselves with the realm we happen to be existing in at the present?

Now this is a VERY GOOD and VERY RELEVANT QUESTION.

Considering that there is ONLY One 'Realm', then being concerned about, or contemplating, this One and ONLY 'Realm' ACTUALLY makes the MOST and BEST SENSE.

[Age]

As always, I'm not suggesting that I can't be wrong (i.e., delusional), however, if nothing else, you need to be open to the possibility that some of us (for whatever reason) have indeed experienced events in our lives that have made us aware of the existence of a spiritual realm.

I'm talking about a transcendent context of reality of which the universe, in comparison, is nothing more than a sort of "vestibule" that momentarily stands between our previous non-existence and that of our entrance into a higher dimension of reality in which after crossing the vestibule's threshold (via death), our true (and eternal) form (our "soul" and its purpose) will finally be revealed to us.
_______

I'm not closed to the possibility of anything you have said, and, at this present time, I neither accept it nor reject it. Supposing you are right, and there is a "higher dimension of reality" to which we transcend after our physical death, why do I need to be aware of it before my death? Why not just concern ourselves with the realm we happen to be existing in at the present?

But you are concerning yourself re 'it'. You don't need to be aware of 'it' before you death, but clearly your soul wants to know since you appear to have created a thread to question the matter ....and here we are.

There is NO use using the term 'your soul' WHEN 'one' does NOT YET EVEN KNOW what the 'soul' IS, EXACTLY, let alone what the 'you' IS, YET.

[Age]

But you are concerning yourself re 'it'. You don't need to be aware of 'it' before you death, but clearly your soul wants to know since you appear to have created a thread to question the matter ....and here we are.

Questions can only arise to the sense of 'separate self' when there's a contraction of energy appearing as if there is a sense of 'self'. This separation does not exist in the real world, 'it' is illusory. Nothing can see itself. Nothing can know itself. Nothing lives. Nothing dies.

WHY do 'you', "dontaskme", KEEP TELLING "others" your OWN 'fictional story' as though 'it' is ACTUALLY TRUE?

LOOK, there IS A 'Thing' that CAN and DOES SEE, UNDERSTAND, and KNOW 'Its' 'Self', as well as 'you', human beings.

Also, 'you', human beings, CAN KNOW human beings. Although 'you' may NOT YET KNOW 'this', in the days when this is being written, the ABILITY TO KNOW EXISTS WITHIN 'you', human beings.

That which appears to live, never dies. And that which appears to die, never lives.

'Physical matter' just CHANGES in shape AND form, ALWAYS. But then it is NOT 'me' who talks about 'matter' dying NOR living. It is people like 'you', "dontaskme" WHO DOES. SEE, 'they' say 'things' like; 'I WISH I was NEVER born' or 'I WISH I was NOT alive'.

The video I have left you will explain how there is no distance between the seer and the seen, and that reality is seamless, one without a second

But this is just an OBVIOUS Fact, that does NOT NEED a video NOR explanation.

Nothing being Everything, rendering all knowledge an illusion.

This is just MORE of 'you' RE-REPEATING the 'fictional story' that 'you' have been TOLD, and which 'you' WANT TO BELIEVE IS TRUE.

Knowledge can only point to the illusory nature of our reality, albeit a persistant one.

Sadly, a LOT of these human beings, back in the days when this was being written, would BELIEVE what they were TOLD. Just like the previous ones also BELIEVED the 'things', which they were TOLD. And, SADLY and UNFORTUNATELY, they WOULD SPREAD these BELIEVED 'fairy tales' or 'fictional stories'.

('It') means someone's trying to make themselves sound important and 'sensitive' by pretending they have super-powers.

LOL WHO is PRETENDING here that they HAVE so-called 'super powers'?

Mind needs to know. Mind always needs some sort of purpose, some sort of meaning and reason for being to fill up the empty nature of itself. Mind is always seeking to fill the void, but there is nothing to fill it with, it's already empty fullness.

This is just MORE IRREFUTABLE Truth that these ones, LITERALLY, had NO IDEA AT ALL what they would talk ABOUT and EXPRESS as though 'it' is IRREFUTABLY True.

To PROVE this Fact all I have to do is just ask, 'What is the 'mind', EXACTLY?' And there INABILITY TO ANSWER, SUCCESSFULLY, PROVES that they did NOT KNOW ANY thing ABOUT what they TALK ABOUT.

The Art of Seeing what I am without looking Duration: 7mins.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmF3FLfl0vM
In this short film I witness how the Observatories collapse the space between what I am looking at and where I am Seeing from. When all distance collapses, I am no longer looking into the world, all of the world is Seeing out of me. What I am looking at is where I am Seeing from.

Hitherto, there has ONLY ever been one person that I KNOW OF who spoke of 'spatial distance' being AN ILLUSION. And, it was ONLY through asking that one CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, within a philosophy forum, from a Truly OPEN perspective I was ABLE to ASCERTAIN EXACTLY what they were talking ABOUT and MEANING. See, on first reading and first thought I could NOT understand HOW that CLAIM could make ANY sense. But not did it just MAKE SENSE, it MADE PERFECT SENSE.

[Age]

I would still like to know what a soul is, if anyone has come up with any ideas.

It would also be interesting to know what reason there is to think there even is such a thing as a soul.

'Thoughts' and 'emotions', which are both invisible.

As these two 'things' are invisible, and it is said that the 'soul' is also invisible, and lives on after the body is not alive anymore, then that is the reason that there is a 'thing' as a 'soul'. Among other reasons.

BUT, if one BELIEVES that a 'soul' does NOT exist, then that one will NOT look at, listen to, contemplate, NOR explore 'this'.

When the brain is damaged, it can cause loss of memory, it can cause personality change, and it can cause unconsciousness.

Okay.

Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that when there is no brain at all, there can be no memory, no personality, and no consciousness, as these things all seem to be dependant on a functioning brain.

What do you mean by, 'NO brain AT ALL'?

If, after physical death, the soul "transcends" to a higher level of existence (heaven), or becomes attached to another living organism (reincarnation), it must proceed without memory, personality, or consciousness.

BUT, LOL, the 'soul' can NOT and could NOT do what you say and are proposing here. And this is just because of the Wrong INTERPRETATIONS or DEFINITIONS you are USING for some of the words here.

So, without these attributes, what could actually remain?

Did you read the first post I wrote in this thread?

The 'thoughts' that have been instilled into "another" human body, from the body that stops breathing and stops pumping blood REMAINS.

What ALSO REMAINS are the 'things' that a body HAS CREATED through and because of the invisible 'thoughts' within.

So, what ACTUALLY REMAINS are SOME of the invisible 'thoughts', which are 'now' in OTHER bodies and are creating or causing an 'ever-lasting effect', think of the saying, "jesus is alive", or if that does not work, think about how the thoughts that your grandparents HAD have been PASSED ON to your parents, and which are now STILL alive or a part of 'you'.

And, ALSO the human CREATED visible 'things' REMAIN, as well. Just LOOK AT the WAY 'the world' is 'now', and the affect that 'this world' is having on "other" new ones.

[Dontaskme]

'I WISH I was NEVER born' or 'I WISH I was NOT alive'.

Yes that's right, in the dreamstory no one wrote, there was a character who wished it was never born to be alive.

[Harbal]

So, what ACTUALLY REMAINS are SOME of the invisible 'thoughts', which are 'now' in OTHER bodies and are creating or causing an 'ever-lasting effect', think of the saying, "jesus is alive", or if that does not work, think about how the thoughts that your grandparents HAD have been PASSED ON to your parents, and which are now STILL alive or a part of 'you'.

And, ALSO the human CREATED visible 'things' REMAIN, as well. Just LOOK AT the WAY 'the world' is 'now', and the affect that 'this world' is having on "other" new ones.

So this is your interpretation of what a soul is, is it? Why not just call it an influence, rather than a soul? But that's fair enough, but there are other interpretations, and it's reasonable for others to present theirs, as that is what I asked for in the first place.

[Age]

So, what ACTUALLY REMAINS are SOME of the invisible 'thoughts', which are 'now' in OTHER bodies and are creating or causing an 'ever-lasting effect', think of the saying, "jesus is alive", or if that does not work, think about how the thoughts that your grandparents HAD have been PASSED ON to your parents, and which are now STILL alive or a part of 'you'.

And, ALSO the human CREATED visible 'things' REMAIN, as well. Just LOOK AT the WAY 'the world' is 'now', and the affect that 'this world' is having on "other" new ones.

So this is your interpretation of what a soul is, is it?

Do I NEED TO CLARIFY 'this question' for you, or, was this a 'rhetorical question'?

Why not just call it an influence, rather than a soul?

BECAUSE WHOEVER CHOSE to USE the 'soul' word, IN THE BEGINNING, did so WITHOUT wanting to call 'it' 'an influence', INSTEAD.

I guess we could now ASK, 'WHY were ALL the words that were CHOSEN, CHOSEN?'

i do NOT KNOW WHY.

But I have come to SEE how ALL of the ALREADY CHOSEN WORDS, when USED in A SPECIFIC WAY, with SPECIFIC definitions, can and DOES FORM, SHOW, and ILLUSTRATE a CRYSTAL CLEAR Big, WHOLE, and FULL Picture of ALL-THERE-IS.

As "attofishpi" would say, There WAS some 'thing' BEHIND ALL-OF-THIS, which created the english language the way it is. Or, as you would say, 'There is still something UNDERLYING your illusions', or, 'There is AN ENTITY OF SOME KIND that I call my mind, and that I am aware of.'

It was NOT the writer known as "age" here who CHOSE to call 'it' 'a soul' and NOT 'an influence'. There was something ELSE, or some OTHER ENTITY UNDERLYING or BEHIND what IS HAPPENING and OCCURRING here. "age" is just giving 'its' OWN perspective of 'things', that is; WHEN asked FOR.

But that's fair enough, but there are other interpretations, and it's reasonable for others to present theirs, as that is what I asked for in the first place.

SURE. I AGREE that the MORE, OPEN and Honest, INTERPRETATIONS that ARE PRESENTED, then the BETTER this is for EVERY one, here. As we, literally, have FAR MORE to LOOK AT, and DISCUSS.

[attofishpi]

I'm not closed to the possibility of anything you have said, and, at this present time, I neither accept it nor reject it. Supposing you are right, and there is a "higher dimension of reality" to which we transcend after our physical death, why do I need to be aware of it before my death? Why not just concern ourselves with the realm we happen to be existing in at the present?

But you are concerning yourself re 'it'. You don't need to be aware of 'it' before you death, but clearly your soul wants to know since you appear to have created a thread to question the matter ....and here we are.

There is NO use using the term 'your soul' WHEN 'one' does NOT YET EVEN KNOW what the 'soul' IS, EXACTLY, let alone what the 'you' IS, YET.

YOU have NO idea WHAT a SOUL is EITHER.

[attofishpi]

What is a soul?

U can catch them...off of the cliffs of Dover.

[Age]

But you are concerning yourself re 'it'. You don't need to be aware of 'it' before you death, but clearly your soul wants to know since you appear to have created a thread to question the matter ....and here we are.

There is NO use using the term 'your soul' WHEN 'one' does NOT YET EVEN KNOW what the 'soul' IS, EXACTLY, let alone what the 'you' IS, YET.

YOU have NO idea WHAT a SOUL is EITHER.

What are you on about here?

I was talking ABOUT the term and phrase 'your soul'. I was NOT referring to what 'a soul' is, AT ALL.

What 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY, is a VERY DIFFERENT matter.

And, what are you even basing this CLAIM of YOURS here on, EXACTLY, anyway?

To be ABLE to KNOW, CORRECTLY, if "another" has NO idea AT ALL of what 'a soul' IS, or not, then that one would HAVE TO KNOW what 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY. "themself" FIRST. Do 'you' KNOW what 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY, "attofishpi"?

If no, then HOW do 'you', supposedly, KNOW that 'I' have NO idea what 'a soul' is, NEITHER?

[attofishpi]

There is NO use using the term 'your soul' WHEN 'one' does NOT YET EVEN KNOW what the 'soul' IS, EXACTLY, let alone what the 'you' IS, YET.

YOU have NO idea WHAT a SOUL is EITHER.

What are you on about here?

I was talking ABOUT the term and phrase 'your soul'. I was NOT referring to what 'a soul' is, AT ALL.

What 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY, is a VERY DIFFERENT matter.

And, what are you even basing this CLAIM of YOURS here on, EXACTLY, anyway?

To be ABLE to KNOW, CORRECTLY, if "another" has NO idea AT ALL of what 'a soul' IS, or not, then that one would HAVE TO KNOW what 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY. "themself" FIRST. Do 'you' KNOW what 'a soul' IS, EXACTLY, "attofishpi"?

If no, then HOW do 'you', supposedly, KNOW that 'I' have NO idea what 'a soul' is, NEITHER?

Ah, you GOT me THERE, your LOGIC is IRREFUTABLE.

So.

Do YOU know WHAT a SOUL is YES or NO?

[Dubious]

...not to be found anywhere in one's DNA and if not there, nowhere. Nature found it completely unnecessary to provide one probably because it contributes no useful function where life itself is concerned. Nature deals in physics, not personal metaphysics...the means by which we recreate ourselves, jettisoned into some form of anti-gravitational spirituality beyond the earth-bound vulgar reality which created us.

As a species capable of but hardly ever accomplishing enlightenment WE deserve more!

[Gary Childress]

I suppose a soul could be various things, depending on which culture’s conception of soul you were considering. In my part of the world a soul seems to be thought of as a sort of immaterial spirit that inhabits the body of a living human being. The usual implication is that the soul is somehow the core essence of the being it inhabits; even perhaps what we regard as “I”. But what could a soul possibly amount to after separation from the body?

An immaterial spirit doesn’t have physical sense organs, so it would have no means of seeing, or hearing, or sensing anything in the material world. Our memory is in our brain, and our capacity for thought is made possible by the brain, and our character and personality are produced by the brain, and these are our main sources of identity. A spirit does not have a brain, hence no memory, no thought, and no identity. What’s left for a soul to be?

It seems to me that, at most, a soul could be nothing more than a kind of awareness, but with nothing to be aware of other than awareness itself, and even that could only be a vague awareness. I don’t think I’m looking forward to being just a soul.

I've said the same on many occasions. I don't see what there is going to be to enjoy or otherwise in an afterlife. This world is where everything we know and understand resides.

[MagsJ]

The soul.. the Innate self.. the spritely spirit, within.

What we are and what we are to become, so what we shall eventually be.