hiya. am reading a book called Journey of Souls and one thing that struck me was the issue of young or old souls. Do you think souls are constantly being created? At the other end of the scale do you think some are "absorbed back" into oneess with God or something? And what is the correlation between youngness and traits - for example are young souls more likely to behave brutally and selfishly, or are they just more naive and easily hurt etc ? Also what was going on in terms of soul journeys back in the days when there was no intelligent life here to speak of ? were they incarnating somehwere else, or did they just have to wait until humans came along?

HiOrlando-
My personal view is that souls are created at the sub-microbial level and more or less work their way up.  Most people seem to identify with having been an animal and I can recall a long transition through stages of being a hairy ape-like thing. (That was after being a worm, Alysia, but I'm willing to share the muddy slop with others.)

Assuming that this is a valid perspective, then the progression would be similar to what we see with infants as they mature. Initially, everything is I-Me-My-Mine and screw the rest, with whom I am willing to fight to steal their goodies. Then learning occurs, and finally (after umpteen rebirths) we realize that love is the most stable and productive attitude.

The idea that this makes too many new souls to fit on the Earth suggests that there will be a better place to go eventually, which will be occupied by more advanced souls. Only those who refuse to allow others in their universe really have a problem with that.
d

dave_a_mbs wrote on Sep 6^th, 2007 at 6:56pm:

HiOrlando- My personal view is that souls are created at the sub-microbial level and more or less work their way up.  Most people seem to identify with having been an animal and I can recall a long transition through stages of being a hairy ape-like thing. (That was after being a worm, Alysia, but I'm willing to share the muddy slop with others.) Assuming that this is a valid perspective, then the progression would be similar to what we see with infants as they mature. Initially, everything is I-Me-My-Mine and screw the rest, with whom I am willing to fight to steal their goodies. Then learning occurs, and finally (after umpteen rebirths) we realize that love is the most stable and productive attitude. The idea that this makes too many new souls to fit on the Earth suggests that there will be a better place to go eventually, which will be occupied by more advanced souls. Only those who refuse to allow others in their universe really have a problem with that. d

thanks for the input. i guess that is certainly a possibility. I guess would implie then, thinking about it, that there is a hierarchy of importance - with beings evolving towards being as aware and loving and wise and so on as possible, from simple organisms to saint.. I guess equally some scientists would say this is just typical human thinking, that we are the pinnacle of creation etc, and actually some bacteria etc get along fine in their own way without being very clever, creative or loving etc, and it is just a matter of our human point of view! just musing!

I agree, Orlando,

with the slight exception that maybe we're involved in a 'heirarchy' of experience rather than importance. I was once told that manta rays ans some other deep sea cretures are quite highly evolved, but just have different goals for their manta ray incarnations for 'earthly' experience.  :)

Bets

Can't remember me as worm or so, one scene (I had asked for a former life info) though seemed to be a group of pre-humans where one of them seemed to be me, or at least somehow connected to me.
 When I asked for informations about "me" before first incarnated on earth, I came up with impressions/brief story of a nonphysical being, a glowing rainbow-colored ball of light with a tail. A quite nasty being as far as I could make out. It was a sort of arrogant predator, destroying systems just for fun and/or nutrition.
 I think the answer of where souls come from in the end is over our heads. There are so many re-shapings, evolutions, meltings and separations that the question maybe doesn't make much sense.

Spooky

Quote:

And what is the correlation between youngness and traits - for example are young souls more likely to behave brutally and selfishly, or are they just more naive and easily hurt etc ?

according to that book, i'd say more likely to behave brutally & selfishly,  which relates to ignorance.  if we're all "one," then being selfish means taking from yourself, which you would only do out of ignorance.  obviously you wouldn't say someone like hitler was a mature soul.  

the_seeker wrote on Sep 6^th, 2007 at 9:41pm:

[quote] obviously you wouldn't say someone like hitler was a mature soul.

err, no.. I guess not!

the_seeker wrote on Sep 6^th, 2007 at 9:41pm:

[quote] obviously you wouldn't say someone like hitler was a mature soul.

Of course not, when looking at the entire subject from view of a human consciousness level of 25%. However looking at it from the purpose of his incarnation, I find yes it was a mature soul. Even though it may be hard for some to believe, however if I am not mistaken Hilters soul came from the 2nd Copy, meaning his TS (partial soul) was that of an Angel. For purpose of understanding the balance of such, my soul would be that of a 5th copy.

His purpose was to help set a stage of a "mass reality" for all souls. I didnt come to understand this until I read the protocols between Sara (afterlife Guide) and Peter H. Kirchner (only available on their german server at current)

Taking away all human emotions & ego driven hatred (which I certainly had enough of, re: the subject Hitler) We have to admitt, his particular incarnational purpose had been adeqitely forfilled. The stage was set, took its course and I believe theres not any intellectual inhabitant on this planet which hasn`t heard of Hitler and the works of WWII. The aftermath shows clearly that "humans" began to evolve afterwards into "a new" & another era of consciousness. Maybe they learned something out of it .. aka "scared of another war like that one".  :-/

So how can we say that Hitler was not a mature soul?

All major stage setters have left a lasting impression, a lesson in our lives, hearts, minds and souls. As that was their incarnation purpose, right? So at this point each one of us have to make a choice, either we know that everyone has a purpose or we don`t.

To the question of : >> were they incarnating somehwere else, or did they just have to wait until humans came along? << I had a simular question in my mind and it had been explained  to me only this morning as I read in the topic: Creation Primer http://www.jenseits-de.com/e/forums/afterlife/messages/98.html

It summed up a lot of questions in a very selfexplanitory way.  

I liked Betson`s way of stating: >> we're involved in a 'heirarchy' of experience rather than importance <<. That made a lot of sense to me personally, as we "define" importance according to our own consciousness, right? One person may find that the incarnating soul Arnold Schwarzenegger is more important to stage setting of this world as that of the incarnating soul of Hilter, whileas another person may find that Hilter`s incarnating soul moved more people (in mass) into one direction, than that of good ole`Arnie.  ;)
Not to mean, that ones soul is more important than the other, but rather to identify that their "purpose" is to forfill their incarnation according to PLAN. Meaning according to 'heirarchy' of experience .

Sending you all lots of love today and everyday,
Nanner

Quote:

We have to admitt, his particular incarnational purpose had been adeqitely forfilled.

this brings up some theoretical issues open to debate.  i believe in journey of souls, it says the holocaust victims chose to be victims to achieve a higher purpose.  however, that doesn't mean that hitler was "fulfilling his purpose."  it means that the victims' souls chose to take a negative situation and give it a higher purpose.

some people choose to be murdered, but that doesn't make murder right, does it?  all of our purpose is to love more and turn away from things like murdering each other.

seeker,
Your question regarding Hitler being a mature soul.. Not that I am pro hitler or anti Jew for I am neither. A possable view could be that it took a very advanced soul to create what was needed to change the world. Evil in many peoples eyes. But there was a most profound change in consciousness world wide due to his and those around him's actions.  What was done was not right but the changes it made to all of us was for the better of man kind. If he, Hitler, as a sprit selected his earthly existence as it played out to help move mankind down the road to a higher plane then how mature as a soul was he? Is the planet a better place for what he had done? Is it worse? After this long I am sure "he" has had the opportunity to judge his own actions and knows if he was right or wrong. As for me, I don't have to be that judge. I will have my own life to look at and I will know if what I have done and/or acheaved the goals I set for myself. ( Am I to change the world?)
Joe    

There are numerous sources which in their own way, including Robert Monroe, Bruce Moen and Betty Eddie, state that we start out as spirit beings, and at some point some of us decide to become human. There are many spirits that "never" take on a physical life form.

I agree with this way of thinking.  Perhaps some animal Souls work their way up to human form, but perhaps we place too much value on the necessity of "human" life when it comes to what is necessary in order for consciousness to evolve.

A Soul's essential nature isn't determined by what kind of body it used for a "short" while.  Therefore, it's ability to evolve wouldn't be limited by whether or not it ever got around to using a human body.

Michael Newton tends to represent the reincarnation viewpoint in conventional terms.  He hasn't noticed a contradiction that occurs within his own books. He states that some Souls will take on multiple incarnations. What happens when such incarnations return to their Soul center? Do they fight it out over which new personality will be the surviving personality? Does the Soul center tell them you're both being dissasembled according to my liking?  If any of these answers is true it negates the theory that one needs to incarnate over and over and over again in order to work out personality traits.

I believe that we are closely connected to other Souls in the spirit World. We share our lessons with each other to an extent that negates the necessity for any one particular self to incarnate over and over and over again. Why would a self want to do such a thing when physical life contains so much sufffering, while the spirit World doesn't, except for when one ends up in a lower realm, which is something Michael Newton refutes the existence of (numerous out of body explorers have found differently).

Think of it. A self is born into a very difficult incarnation. Raised by violent racist parernts. Becomes the same kind of person. Ends up in a lower realm for a while until he finally, if at all, works his way out. Goes through a healing process in the spirit World after he chooses to go to the light.  As many near death experiencers have found a heavenly realm isn't a place one would ever want to leave. Would such a guy be willing to go through it all again, if he found there are other ways in which he could grow? Certainly the World of spirit has growth methods and ways of releasing negative energy that are hard for us to conceive of while we are in the physical.  Including the fact of Souls sharing their experiences with each other as already mentioned above.

I believe it is possible there are some exceptions.  But such exceptions aren't enforced on us.  It is up to us.  

recoverer, How right you are... Who is to say of the greater importance. Being Human or being animal. The true importance is of the lession learned.
Joe

recoverer - NO lives recovered through hypnosis sound like a good time to me.  in fact, i'm anti-life in the sense that i think living a life on earth is stupid and pointless.  however, other people don't, and yes they do choose to come back into terrible lives.  most people enjoy life, or at least enjoy the spiritual lessons it imparts.  of course heaven is a much better place, and souls know that.  but they see a life on earth as like a duty or a chore (a means to an end).   one book descirbed souls as seeing it as "like mopping the floor." some are grumpy or unsure about leaving heaven, but they leave anyway.  and they know it will be temporary.  compared to the endless time in heaven, it's not even as long as the blink of an eye.  

The seeker:

I had an experience which I believe was a pre-incarnation experience. I told a spirit I knew, "I'll miss you." The spirit answered: "I know."  I felt very concerned about incarnating because of the difficulty I would have to go through, and because I didn't want to leave my friend and the place I was at.  I don't believe I was forced.  It was more a matter of doing what was necessary for whatever reasons.


the_seeker wrote on Sep 7^th, 2007 at 1:48pm:

recoverer - NO lives recovered through hypnosis sound like a good time to me.  in fact, i'm anti-life in the sense that i think living a life on earth is stupid and pointless.  however, other people don't, and yes they do choose to come back into terrible lives.  most people enjoy life, or at least enjoy the spiritual lessons it imparts.  of course heaven is a much better place, and souls know that.  but they see a life on earth as like a duty or a chore (a means to an end).   one book descirbed souls as seeing it as "like mopping the floor." some are grumpy or unsure about leaving heaven, but they leave anyway.  and they know it will be temporary.  compared to the endless time in heaven, it's not even as long as the blink of an eye.

Hawkeye:

To add more, if you really look at what a biological organism is, how could one form be more worthy than another.  If you looked at the organism of a dog real closely,  threw human vanity out the window, and then compared the dog organism with the human organism, you'd find a lot more commonality than differences.

Plus, consciousness, which comes from no other place than the source of all, doesn't stop being the same as all other consciousness, simply because it hung out in a dog body for a while.



 

Spirit is


hawkeye wrote on Sep 7^th, 2007 at 1:34pm:

recoverer, How right you are... Who is to say of the greater importance. Being Human or being animal. The true importance is of the lession learned. Joe

While I fully agree with Hawkeye's and Bet's assessment, that the evolutionary purpose of the incarnation is the driving force, I'm not too sure whether we can differentiate between "Good" and "Bad" purposes any more than we could differentiate between "Good" and "Bad" children.

Hitler, in his own mind, seems to have viewed the world as a place in which he, through his force of will, was going to establish a paradise that would last for three thousand years. He was, according to those who knew him, a very pleasant person, with only a few sexual hangups. He initially wanted to be an artist, and had his art advisors been a little more tolerant, we might never have heard of him again.

In the same way, the Inquisition was a sincere and holy attempt by the Church to save souls by rooting out the witches, sorcerers and such, as well as the Knights Templars. These efforts seemed to merit every contrivance known, merely because the ends seemed to justify the means.

Although Pres Bush has alienated a large number of people by ignoring details of Constitutional law and by making war on another nation, he has not done this because he is a "Bad man", but most likely because he views himself as extremely good, and that his actions are required as his moral God-given duty.

Another example is the theory of "Manifest Destiny" by which the Japanese rulers of a century ago decided that it was up to them to conquer and rule the barbarians in Korea and China.  

We can add the Chinese Liberation of Tibet, in which Mao said that he was acting to free the enslaved peoples from the tyranny of the monks and nuns of the Buddhist government. The subsequent persecution of the religious by Chinese troops was thus to free them of their presumably psychotic attachment to religion.

All of these can be viewed, with a little effort, as good and useful activities. Of course a lot of people got hurt in each case, which is what most of us look at now. But from the viewpoint of the perpetrator, each is an instance of Good Works.

If we compare the general functional level of progressively more complex beings, then even the worst of humans is more advanced than the best of monkeys, or whatever it was that we looked like before we got here today. With that increased competency comes increased responsibility. That seems to be the issue. As an example, if we watch two colonies of ants engage in civil war, caturing the larvae of their opponents and enslaving them to a new purpose, we rarely look at the attackers as "immoral". Instead, we view it as the nature of ants to do those things.

In the same way, we rarely view politicians as unusually evil just because they lie, cheat and steal from the public. We simply assume that this is the nature of the people who go into politics. Historically, politicians are the descendents of the tyrannical warlords who led earlier tribes by the force of their sword or club. So their species seems to be gaining ground a little bit, now that they have largely stopped tormenting their own citizens for sport or spite, and have accepted rule of law (in some cases, anyway).

My suggestion is thus that we have a series of adaptive changes, recalled by many as some kind of transmigration sequence that begins wth a freeform spark emitted from the creative fires of God, and which ends with reabsorption into that same Source. At each level, we are taxed with problems appropriate to lfe at that level. When we resolve those problems and come into a sort of balance, we get kicked into a higher level by virtue of no longer clinging to the past values which seemed important at lower levels. This amounts to a progressive nirvana - echoed by a Tibetan saying, "All persons are Buddha, All sounds are mantra. All reality is nirvana."

Extrapolating from this posture, those who have accepted the Bodhisattvic Vow to return forever for the aid of others, will presumably return to whatever level of the hierarchy of transmigrations that their dedication merits. Let's guess that they will return as pure spirits, to be Helpers for Bruce and others, or to act as Guardian Angels or whatever. There are implied rules and standards of conduct and existence that apply, so that what to us looks like beautiful spirits glowing in the transcendental dark might actually be actions based on some spiritual depravity that we couldn't understand at our level. (As a practitioner of Buddhism, this interests me.)

A side issue pops into mind at this point - assuming that we are not unique in the cosmos, there must have been others of "us" in various other galaxies and solar systems. I wonder if they might be willing to contact us to give us some hints about living. Or - since understanding is state specific - is that even possible? (This gets into Juditha's area of expertise.)

d

seeker, I have read that there are many souls lined up to have the human life existence and that we are the envy of many for having expearenced it.
Joe

Regarding Hitler and such, I believe it is incredibly obvious that the World has been set up so it is possible for people to become mentally deranged in numerous ways. This can be measured not only by the number of leaders such as Hitler, but the numerous people who chose to follow what such leaders have to say.

I believe we are like one giant being, and until each member returns home, we won't be complete.  Despite how things might seem, while in the physical World, we all effect each other much more than we often think. Therefore,  when a particular body part has a problem, rather than amputate it, we should try to heal it.  If we become too focused on some parts of our greater Self being punished severely for the wrong they have done, we'll live according to the same confused mental energy our judged parts lived according to, and never heal our entire Self.

Regarding President Bush and his claim of doing what is best for the people of Iraq, perhaps he forgot to consider that when he was elected to be the president of the United States, the country of Iraq didn't take part in the vote. Regarding the whole WMD thing, give me a break. More than one person who has left the White House stated that President Bush wanted Iraq before 911 happened.  The White House always tries to dismiss such people as some sort of outcast. If you can't get the word from people who were a part of the white house, who can you get it from? If somebody like Condoleezza Rice left the white house all of a sudden and spoke the truth, would they categorize her as an outcast?

I could go on but I won't, because I'm not political.  I really mean that. :)  I will say this. Going to war because God supposedly wants you to do so, is a bunch of hooey. That would be like him saying I want the right half of my body to beat the hell out of the left side of my body.







[quote author=dave_a_mbs link=1189114265/15#15 date=1189190680]

Although Pres Bush has alienated a large number of people by ignoring details of Constitutional law and by making war on another nation, he has not done this because he is a "Bad man", but most likely because he views himself as extremely good, and that his actions are required as his moral God-given duty.

I've read the same, can't remember where.  In Robert Monroe's second book there is being named AA. He (?) wanted a human incarnation so bad. Other spirits tried to talk him out of it,  yet he still decided to have one. Ended up having a horrible incarnation.


hawkeye wrote on Sep 7^th, 2007 at 2:56pm:

seeker, I have read that there are many souls lined up to have the human life existence and that we are the envy of many for having expearenced it. Joe

Of course GB relates it all to the God thing. He is a follower of the religious right. Hes big into oil stocks and what a better way to make more money for himself than to have a war in a country that controls a large part of the worlds oil. what was the first thing he did when he got there? Took control of the oil wells. He said to pay for rebuilding the country. Ya right! More than likely to finance the war and to boost the price of oil so as to make more money for himself and his "people". WMD were not there. Never found after years of searching. But through fear, he convinced the majority of the US to go to war. Now his religious right movement has just what they want. The door way to Armageddon. Muslums vrs Christion. And with the money to get it all going. No thanks George!! Get out and go home. Of course I am not into the whole killing thing and hero worship, like you are raised up in the US. Up here in Canada, and although our missinformed and delusional goverment who is curently kissing the rear of your president and is at war also, the majority of us want to help and peace, not war and the death of Muslums or Islamic religious followers  

To have real faith in Christ is to have faith in the power of love.

A war monger approach shows a lack of faith in the power of love.

I'm not into the word "sin," but to commit mass murder under the name of Christ, is sinful.

Do people really expect to be patted on their backs for going around killing their brothers, without seriously trying to reconcile their differences? As long as people believe in satan, they'll believe it is okay to demonize just about anybody. If satan really existed in some form, his presence is increased by war like activity and the mindset that accompanies it, and is diminished by love and the action that follows.


hawkeye wrote on Sep 7^th, 2007 at 3:41pm:

Of course GB relates it all to the God thing. He is a follower of the religious right. Hes big into oil stocks and what a better way to make more money for himself than to have a war in a country that controls a large part of the worlds oil. what was the first thing he did when he got there? Took control of the oil wells. He said to pay for rebuilding the country. Ya right! More than likely to finance the war and to boost the price of oil so as to make more money for himself and his "people". WMD were not there. Never found after years of searching. But through fear, he convinced the majority of the US to go to war. Now his religious right movement has just what they want. The door way to Armageddon. Muslums vrs Christion. And with the money to get it all going. No thanks George!! Get out and go home. Of course I am not into the whole killing thing and hero worship, like you are raised up in the US. Up here in Canada, and although our missinformed and delusional goverment who is curently kissing the rear of your president and is at war also, the majority of us want to help and peace, not war and the death of Muslums or Islamic religious followers

Thank God a lot of people in the US are ready to get their boys (and girls) home. There is no shame in calling it quits over there. The Christion God is no better than the Islamic or Buddha, or any of the rest. Let them sort it out and then go in and help rebuild. George has and is creating a lot more work for us into recovering. I really don't need the extra work. The Islamic's need to be recovered to ya know, not just ours. (Wait till some of those bombers figure out there are no virgins in heaven. Nor a need for one.)
Joe

Quote:

All of these can be viewed, with a little effort, as good and useful activities. Of course a lot of people got hurt in each case, which is what most of us look at now. But from the viewpoint of the perpetrator, each is an instance of Good Works.

true.  the truth is, hitler is inside each of us, just as God is in each of us.  and the fact that so many people followed hitler just serves to underline that fact.  i think "evil" is given a skewed definition by the Bible.  it seems to me "evil" is just spiritual immaturity and ignorance.  if we're all One, then anything you do to another person, you're doing to yourself, and of course you might experience the same as karma.  

recoverer wrote on Sep 7^th, 2007 at 3:18pm:

I could go on but I won't, because I'm not political.  I really mean that. :)  I will say this. Going to war because God supposedly wants you to do so, is a bunch of hooey. That would be like him saying I want the right half of my body to beat the hell out of the left side of my body. Although Pres Bush has alienated a large number of people by ignoring details of Constitutional law and by making war on another nation, he has not done this because he is a "Bad man", but most likely because he views himself as extremely good, and that his actions are required as his moral God-given duty.

Which leads us to the actual core of "consciousness" and that of being "guided" by a Guide.
Is it just me or do others feel it too when looking at Bush. He`s not "real", its hard to explain, but when I see him on CNN, I sense : this man is not real, he`s fake thru and thru. His smiles, his care, his waving, his ego - all of it does not look nor feel genuine  :-? and this leads me to feel that he`s being guided by a Guide to do the things he does.

Lets face it theres a lot more to it than it being striped like a zebra, where one can clearly see the colors on the coat of an animal.

G.W. Bush must be part of a mass stage setting. Since we all know there is no real good or bad, we also "see" the "impact" which the last few years have brought us, has brought forth mass communication. Dismay, love, togetherness but also anger, poverty, price changes in living expenses. Although from my human standpoint I must declare, my ego >:( didnt find it too kosher that 2747 lives had to die in the WTC  :'( , nor did it like to see the execution of Sadam Hussin  :'( on Youtube either. The folks in Irak whom still today live in fear  :'( , even after the person whom dictated has been deceased for a while now. We will see what happens when re-election time comes. As for their incarnation purpose, I love each and everyone of the above equally, for without their playing the part of the stage, I wouldnt have felt the deep rooted emotions which I had been allowed to "feel", without them.

I think I literally cried for hours on end, looking at the pictures on TV and the Net of the WTC, then I balled when I saw the execution of Sadam and I am still crying over seeing the troops being seperated day and night from their loved ones and the people in Irak fearing their next day on earth in uncertainty. They don`t really know if the USA is gonna kill them or their next door neighbor. Does it mean that I stand behind all of the peoples actions playing their roles: My ego says: NO, cause it hurts me too, my soul must have said: YES, or it wouldnt have agreed to the incarnation during this particular epoche.

Do we collectively seek for quality, vanity, quanity, peacefullness or power in the new Pres? Is it about having a Pres who leads us ego driven or one whom leads us concentrating on peace as this can be also achieved without bombs, wars or fighting. It will show what the mass has learned out of this whole ordeal soon.  [smiley=thumbsup.gif]