Alan, I never thought I`d see the day that our Alan writes a shorter thread! I stand corrected! Thanks..  


I agree to your thoughts on this however even though you seperated them by using words, they are connected to another in the most remarkable way, for exactly those words which you wrote is the grounds in germany for the now honored symptoms called:  "psychosomatic disorder". In germany ( I can merely speak for it right this moment) the new age docs realise that if the soul is hurting then it can and will reveal itself through physical ailments, all the way to desease.

I have come to see that many physcians in germany and many other countries in europe tend to invest more time with their patients and want to know whats going on in their life, so to adiquatly diagnose and treat. In most rehab hospitals here, (be the reason for hospitalisation of a heart attack, bone transplantation or even child deseases).. theres always a sector of rehab which is called "psychosomatic therapy" there, "psychologists" work on the soul whileas the "physicians" in the same hospital work on the physical ailment of the patient. I am glad that the medical system is tending towards understanding that the body, mind and soul can work together to cure.

Hugs,
Nanner

I don't believe it is a matter of what tradition one comes from.  The truth of the matter isn't a matter of opinion.

I've found that there is more to a soul that just a bunch of delusional aggregates. Once beings know how to make use of the creative aspect of being, they can use it to create all kinds of beings, including independent souls that are much more than a bunch of delusional thoughts that puff out of existence once a....?....gets around to questioning its existence.

I wrote....?.....because if there is no such thing as a self to ask about its aggregates, then what precisely is it that asks about these aggregates? Pure consciousness couldn't ask about these aggregates, because it doesn't have a form that would enable it to ask questions.

However, once the creative aspect of being started to manifest, awareness had a basis for establishing relationships between the various things that the creative aspect of being created,  until it reached the point where it knew how to make use of the creative aspect of being in a meaningful way.  Since love is probably the most wonderful aspect of being that exists, perhaps things were worked out so that in the end many beings get to share a state of love and oneness together, rather than just one self being by itself for all of eternity.

Sometimes it is good to consider our own experience, rather than what people write in books. If we experience ourselves an unique beings, doesn't this have some merrit regardless of what others might write?  Can we question what others write, if we insist on viewing them as infallible?  There are people who have experienced being at one with others, without having to lose that which makes them unique. It is more of a matter of their getting rid of the ideas that prevent them from loving others completely. 


Vajra wrote: "it's not very helpful, but I don't think there's a clear answer Alan. It depends on the view or tradition (is there any such thing as a soul?) , and on how the words are defined. (suspect you'll find differing uses of these terms in different places)"

Alan, I realize that I don't actually use the word "soul" unless I am referring to a musician playing with a lot of soul....

I have taken to using the word "spirit" more often than I used to use it. However, in my mind, it is both a personal and an impersonal term.  I guess it's two for one, for me.  It seems to cover it all.

love, blink

Maybe I could add a tad -
Regressions (as well as everyday experiences) indicate that whatever we are-think-do etc, to the extent that it is valid, we retain it.

Thus, at death, we do not specifically "lose" our ego-identity. Instead, to the degree we are able to allow it, we put on the God identity, which includes all the other identities in the cosmos.

The drop returns to the bucket, remaining a drop, yet also being all the water in the bucket.

That translates into being, at least potentially, at one with God forever - which is what I'd call "heaven" if you want to use that term, since it is opposite to total loss of awareness of God as is found in those who are so proud that they create their own little personal hells in the depths of the lower astral.

The issue of "eternal reward in heaven" thus reduces to willingness to stop being exclusively an ego-self, and to accept being ALL potential ego-selves as found within the inifinity of God. We fall out of heaven because of our own desires to regrasp the old limited ego-activities. It's like choosing a shard of broken glass when a diamond has been offered.

dave

Alan:

Dave and Vajra are coming from an Eastern perspective. I know this perspective quite well, because I was involved with it for years. Eventually, after finding about false guru after false guru, I allowed my self question the viewpoints of the Eastern way of thinking.

First I did so on my own. I thought I had it covered. Then after being in abidance for a number of years, my kundalini reawakened. This was a concern for me because I knew that kundalini can be troublesome at times, and I knew that I couldn't rely on gurus for help. So I prayed for help from spirit guidance and received it. In my case, this help has come from Christ and higher self.

Eventually, I found that I hadn't gotten over certain nihilistic eastern ideas as much as I thought.  I found that there were parts of myself that didn't want to let go and open to love completely, because I believed that doing so meant that I'd have to become non-existent as an individual soul.

Fortunately, because I opened myself to spirit guidance, I have been shown in various ways that ourselves don't dissolve into nothingness, as soon as some supposed delusional sequence of thoughts some how thinks us out of existence. I'll share an experience I had before, in order to share what oneness actually means:

One night while laying in bed awake I wondered about what oneness is. My higher self responded by providing me with this experience. I found myself walking on a city street (not physically).  I was very happy and excited because I understood that everything is one self. I walked up to complete strangers and hugged them, and they hugged me back, because they also understood that everything is one self. The city, the people I hugged, and my existence as a unique being didn't have to be negated, in order for the truth of one self to exist. It is just that this one self, call it God if you like, has the ability to manifest in many ways and still be its divine self, despite how nihilistic gurus say that everything has to revert back to pure consciousness before this can be the case. The problem arrised during this experience, when I first tried to hug my mom, and then a lady I found physically attractive. This is because my limiting ideas about them prevented me from loving them completely and therefore experiencing oneness with them.

If one believes that one is going to be able to reach the point where one can think one's self out of existence, one is fooling one's self.

What I write isn't a matter of my clinging to wishful thinking as Dave suggested above. It is more of a matter of my forgetting what the gurus have to say long enough, so I could see if it is possible that the divine source of everything just might've come up with a way to make it so that in the end, many souls and God get to share a marvelous state of love and oneness with each other.  Years ago I had what I refer to as my night in heaven experience. I experienced myself as a bodyless being who abided in a realm of wonderful happiness with many other beings. I understood this to be the state that we eventually reach. For the life of me, I don't know why a being would want to think its way out of such a glorius state. Because some guru claims that nothing other than pure awareness is real enough to be everlasting?  If the awareness aspect of being is real, then so is the energetic/creative aspect, so what's this talk of only the awareness aspect of being being everlasting?

My guess is that Dave views the higher self/disk/I-there/oversoul viewpoint some of us speak of as nothing but a high level of ignorance. Until he opens himself up to such an experience, he his "not" qualified to comment on it. Neither was a person such as Ramana Maharshi who spoke as if he knew who he was, yet never said anything to indicate that he had even a clue about the higher self/disk/over soul level of existence.  Ramana Maharshi said that a mountain was his guru. I on the other hand receive guidance from light beings who clearly don't have to be negated into nothingness, in order for divine reality to exist.


Questions:
1. Why would God/source being bother with creating all of us, it the plan is to dissolve all of us into nothingness at the end (The Eastern viewpoint is that everything that has been created is nothing more than a big mistake, illusion, maya, samsara).
2. Is love important?
3. If it is, who would God share love and oneness with, if there was nobody to share it with?
4. If we all eventually get negated as if we are nothing more than a bunch of unwanted warts, does this mean that God is much crueler than the fire and brimstone viewpoint some people have?
5. If a spirit being uses its creative aspect of being in a loving and intelligent way, is there a need to lable such activity as nothing but a play of ignorance?

Alan:

I though of something else. You said that during your NDE you reached a point where you felt all powerful. Other NDE people have experienced the same.

This suggests that the being who got everything going, God, is also all powerful. If this is the case, isn't just a little bit possible that he used his power to create many children, souls, who in the end get to abide with him and each other for all of eternity?

You also mentioned all knowledge. Isn't it possible that God had the knowledge to know that if he's going to create children, the most lovable thing would be to create them in a manner where they get to experience their cherished existence for all of eternity, rather than having to commit spiritual suicide someday, because some gurus have claimed that all aggregates are nothing but ignorance.

This is what a guru's nihilistic claims sound like in dialogue form:

One set of a guru's aggregates: "These aggregates aren't real."
Common sense:  "What precisely is it that denies the reality of these aggregates?"
One set of a guru's aggregates: "Pure awareness."
Common sense: "Could something as formless as pure awareness actually come up with such a realization?"
One set of a guru's aggregates: "Well, of course."
Common sense: "But how, when there is nothing within pure consciousness that could take part in such discrimination?"
One set of a guru's aggregates: "It's all an illusion, so there is no need to explain the particulars."
Common sense: "But certainly you see, that it is only one set of aggregates that can attempt to dismiss another set of aggregates? This being the case, even if the dismissing set of aggregates dismisses another set of aggregates, could this set of aggregates dismiss itself?
Another set of the guru's aggregates: "Now, listen here buddy. If I admit to such a thing I'll have to admit that I've been wrong, my followers will stop believing I'm infallible, and I'll go out of business. So get out of here with your common sense talk!"

Hi alan I have always thought that the soul and the spirit are one of the same,i never knew there was any difference ,i have always either said soul or spirit as meaning the same,hence "my soul goes to heaven,my spirit goes to heaven"but now come to think of it my best mate eddie is my soulmate and i love him to bits so there is a difference as i cant excactly call him my spiritmate,i dont really know the difference between the spirit and the soul but i,m learning.

Love and God bless  love juditha