The soul, suffering, healing, learning, and spirituality [Night Shift split]

An attempt to broadly summarize this issue:

As you bring out, there isn't much in the deep historical record, especially of channelings or other psychic pronouncements, that souls actually choose the broad outlines or even details of their next incarnations in some sort of soul learning process.

Such claims do come out occasionally as part of accounts of veridical NDE OBEs and veridical CORTs for instance, but the claims themselves due to their basic nature can't be veridical (checkable through later investigation and verification in the physical world).  Most such claims have seemed to come via unverifiable psychic channelings and intuitions by sensitives, after long immersion in the belief system.

That is true, however, it is important to remember that much of the framework on which such ideas are based is well documented.

1) Reincarnation seems to be pretty well established by people such as Dr. Ian Stevenson, and is indeed part of the folk understanding of reality in many parts of the world.

2) Every positive Psi result that is adequately verified challenges the idea that consciousness derives from conventional physical action within the brain. Psi is all about consciousness doing things it is not supposed to do!

That leaves the persuasiveness of these claims to be mainly from the fact that they seem to make some sort of sense of life and its trials and tribulations in addition to its joys, rather than leaving this to some arbitrary or even random process. The mind shys away from the latter kind of "explanation", since this makes our existence with all its drama and good and bad experiences seem sort of pointless.  

However, as has been somewhat explored in these discussions, the "physical Earth life is a self-selected and determined school for souls" model has some very unpleasant downsides.

OK, I realise I am repeating myself, but once you realise that from the point of view of souls selecting whole lives - souls who may have already experienced zillions of previous lives, and expect to experience many more  - the suffering experienced in one life may appear negligeable. Some people throw themselves into exceedingly unpleasant short term activities, enduring intense exhaustion, frostbite, fractures, and sometimes death. This at least gives a hint as to why souls with a much larger perspective might choose as they are said to do.

This is a very trivial example, but as I have mentioned before, I have one leg that is weakened by polio (mainly in the ankle). Since this happened to me at age 6, I am sure my parents were mighty worried for a while. However, I remember quite a number of exhilarating aspects of my illness. Few of us remember learning to walk the first time, but I remember learning to walk again - and this experience was very rewarding, I can tell you. I wasn't given a bike until after I borrowed my mother's bike and rode it round the garden until the process became automatic. To use the right pedal, I had to press using my heel, and that is still the way I ride my bike even today.

What I am saying is that people often enjoy learning activities which are just on the edge of their abilities


Moving on to lives that contain much more suffering, I don't know, but maybe such people don't see the issue in the same way as we do, or who knows what happens. I'm sure it doesn't make sense to in effect reject a scientific idea because it is unjust!

The idea that our lives contain totally random components seems unlikely to me, and yes, I obviously do realise that wave functions are supposed to collapse in that way.

Mainly this is the clear implication that the usual assumption that the human is one with and the same as his soul, in other words that the human is in some important sense actually his soul, is actually invalid, since common sense would indicate that the human obviously would never select some of the very suffering-filled lives that actually in real life afflict many humans.

I tend to think the mind/soul simply expands to encompass its previous lives when it isn't embodied, and then forgets them to experience their current life without contamination. Something similar seems to happen when we watch a film - we are engrossed in the action, and then as we walk away from the cinema real life returns into focus.

David

That is true, however, it is important to remember that much of the framework on which such ideas are based is well documented.

1) Reincarnation seems to be pretty well established by people such as Dr. Ian Stevenson, and is indeed part of the folk understanding of reality in many parts of the world.

2) Every positive Psi result that is adequately verified challenges the idea that consciousness derives from conventional physical action within the brain. Psi is all about consciousness doing things it is not supposed to do!

OK, I realise I am repeating myself, but once you realise that from the point of view of souls selecting whole lives - souls who may have already experienced zillions of previous lives, and expect to experience many more  - the suffering experienced in one life may appear negligeable. Some people throw themselves into exceedingly unpleasant short term activities, enduring intense exhaustion, frostbite, fractures, and sometimes death. This at least gives a hint as to why souls with a much larger perspective might choose as they are said to do.

This is a very trivial example, but as I have mentioned before, I have one leg that is weakened by polio (mainly in the ankle). Since this happened to me at age 6, I am sure my parents were mighty worried for a while. However, I remember quite a number of exhilarating aspects of my illness. Few of us remember learning to walk the first time, but I remember learning to walk again - and this experience was very rewarding, I can tell you. I wasn't given a bike until after I borrowed my mother's bike and rode it round the garden until the process became automatic. To use the right pedal, I had to press using my heel, and that is still the way I ride my bike even today.

What I am saying is that people often enjoy learning activities which are just on the edge of their abilities


Moving on to lives that contain much more suffering, I don't know, but maybe such people don't see the issue in the same way as we do, or who knows what happens. I'm sure it doesn't make sense to in effect reject a scientific idea because it is unjust!

The idea that our lives contain totally random components seems unlikely to me, and yes, I obviously do realise that wave functions are supposed to collapse in that way.

I tend to think the mind/soul simply expands to encompass its previous lives when it isn't embodied, and then forgets them to experience their current life without contamination. Something similar seems to happen when we watch a film - we are engrossed in the action, and then as we walk away from the cinema real life returns into focus.

David

I think the challenge here is that it isn't at all clear that even with trillions of years of existence the soul would decide to explore extreme suffering.

The evidence that we choose all the circumstances in our lives is also not very strong.

Finally, I would draw a distinction between "randomness" in the sense that something happens for no reason and the competing agencies with limited awareness that leads to unpredictability. If this world is a way point for different incarnations being done for different reasons, and incarnation itself limits the soul, then it stands to reason we would end up with a state of affairs that we currently [have] with all the good & bad that entails.

That is true, however, it is important to remember that much of the framework on which such ideas are based is well documented.

1) Reincarnation seems to be pretty well established by people such as Dr. Ian Stevenson, and is indeed part of the folk understanding of reality in many parts of the world.

2) Every positive Psi result that is adequately verified challenges the idea that consciousness derives from conventional physical action within the brain. Psi is all about consciousness doing things it is not supposed to do!

OK, I realise I am repeating myself, but once you realise that from the point of view of souls selecting whole lives - souls who may have already experienced zillions of previous lives, and expect to experience many more  - the suffering experienced in one life may appear negligeable. Some people throw themselves into exceedingly unpleasant short term activities, enduring intense exhaustion, frostbite, fractures, and sometimes death. This at least gives a hint as to why souls with a much larger perspective might choose as they are said to do.

This is a very trivial example, but as I have mentioned before, I have one leg that is weakened by polio (mainly in the ankle). Since this happened to me at age 6, I am sure my parents were mighty worried for a while. However, I remember quite a number of exhilarating aspects of my illness. Few of us remember learning to walk the first time, but I remember learning to walk again - and this experience was very rewarding, I can tell you. I wasn't given a bike until after I borrowed my mother's bike and rode it round the garden until the process became automatic. To use the right pedal, I had to press using my heel, and that is still the way I ride my bike even today.

What I am saying is that people often enjoy learning activities which are just on the edge of their abilities


Moving on to lives that contain much more suffering, I don't know, but maybe such people don't see the issue in the same way as we do, or who knows what happens. I'm sure it doesn't make sense to in effect reject a scientific idea because it is unjust!

The idea that our lives contain totally random components seems unlikely to me, and yes, I obviously do realise that wave functions are supposed to collapse in that way.

I tend to think the mind/soul simply expands to encompass its previous lives when it isn't embodied, and then forgets them to experience their current life without contamination. Something similar seems to happen when we watch a film - we are engrossed in the action, and then as we walk away from the cinema real life returns into focus.

David

I don't reject the notion of soul choice of upcoming physical lives. I think it is quite possible if maybe improbable; if it is the case so be it, but I just remark on its great injustice from the standpoint of the human. The notion that during an incarnation on the Earth the soul compresses itself down and forgets all its soul knowledge of previous lives and whatnot goes against there sometimes being what appear to be intuitional psychic promptings from the soul, and claims of psychic communication with the soul. These are just claims of course, but apparent communications from the soul while incarnated need to be considered.

The main problem with this is that it does not properly honor the individuality and unique individual sentience of the human person and his/her perspective of instinctively identifying with the unique and limited and impermanent physical body, mind, personality and memories going back to childhood. This is the human individual person as actually lived, and honoring his/her humanity it appears to be clearly unjust for him/her to suffer because of soul choices. 

Concerning your example of going to the movies and becoming temporarily lost in the story and the doings of the lead character of the story, and then leaving the theater and returning to ordinary self consciousness. This doesn't work to remove the real injustice of the life experience. Do you think that the theater-goer would have actually made the choice to go into this immersive theater experience if he knew that he would become totally immersed in many harrowing episodes of great suffering? Say, if he knew that the character in the theater experience dies after a long and agonizing bout with a rare and inoperable cancer, during which he begs and hopes for quick death but instead pointlessly keeps on past the point of any medical sense. Just a worst-case sort of scenario, but certainly a possible one in our actual physical world.

This doesn't work to remove the real injustice of the life experience. Do you think that the theater-goer would have actually made the choice to go into this immersive theater experience if he knew that he would become totally immersed in many harrowing episodes of great suffering? Say, if he knew that the character in the theater experience dies after a long and agonizing bout with a rare and inoperable cancer, during which he begs and hopes for quick death but instead pointlessly keeps on past the point of any medical sense.

Remember that as the soul makes this choice he is aware of a long sequence of previous lives. He doesn't feel he is dealing out justice, just selecting for himself an experience that he feels he will find useful.

I don't think you are taking account of the vast change of time perspective between the mind/soul outside a body as opposed to being inside it.

OTH, I don't want you to think I am totally satisfied by the explanation in the sense that:

1)        I don't understand how this understanding will ultimately be used.

2)        I suspect a more complicated understanding of time may be needed to understand the whole scenario.

3)        It isn't clear to me how we can use an understanding acquired in a previous life, when we no longer have access to that life!

4)        If people can be incarnated more than once at any one time, is it possible we are all reincarnations of one consciousness?

David

The main problem with this is that it does not properly honor the individuality and unique individual sentience of the human person and his/her perspective of instinctively identifying with the unique and limited and impermanent physical body, mind, personality and memories going back to childhood. This is the human individual person as actually lived, and honoring his/her humanity it appears to be clearly unjust for him/her to suffer because of soul choices. 

I'm just curious to understand how in your model of life on this physical world, where or how does the material body, atoms, molecules, chemical reactions, acquire the ability to experience joy or suffering? How do chemicals have feelings?

I'm just curious to understand how in your model of life on this physical world, where or how does the material body, atoms, molecules, chemical reactions, acquire the ability to experience joy or suffering? How do chemicals have feelings?

Material atoms and molecules, chemical reactions, etc. cannot even in principle have feelings, have consciousness. The receiver/transmitter model of interactive dualism is where in physical embodiment, immaterial spirit occupies and intricately interpenetrates the brain neural structure in order to interact with and manifest in the physical world. While embodied, consciousness is severely limited by this intricate linking with the brain structures, but consciousness is still ultimately immaterial, as indicated by the well known Hard Problem of consciousness. Because of this intricate interaction with the physical brain when embodied,  the human automatically identifies himself with the body and brain.

Material atoms and molecules, chemical reactions, etc. cannot even in principle have feelings, have consciousness. The receiver/transmitter model of interactive dualism is where in physical embodiment, immaterial spirit occupies and intricately interpenetrates the brain neural structure in order to interact with and manifest in the physical world. While embodied, consciousness is severely limited by this intricate linking with the brain structures, but consciousness is still ultimately immaterial, as indicated by the well known Hard Problem of consciousness. Because of this intricate interaction with the physical brain when embodied,  the human automatically identifies himself with the body and brain.

Thanks, that helps.

I know you've posted quite a lot on this topic and I admit to sometimes just skimming quickly through some posts and not quite absorbing all of your meanings and ideas.

At the risk of appearing to present a caricature of your ideas (or how I understand them), it's just that I always feel confused when reading your thoughts on this area.

I have reservations about a kind of picture I'm getting, where the embodied consciousness you described here is a separate entity from the soul. In my view they are one and the same.

The suffering and injustice experienced by the poor human, while somewhere in the background there is some soul-type-thing watching with idle curiosity and a detached disinterest.

My take is that the soul is the thing which undergoes the joys and pains of this world. Conversely the human as an animal made of physical matter doesn't do anything except serve as a vehicle. Much as a deep-sea diver or astronaut dons suitable wrapping in order to enter an otherwise alien environment.

I don't think I put that very well. I do feel a bit lost, somehow I find a complexity in your explanations when to me things are, in principle at least, rather simpler.

Remember that as the soul makes this choice he is aware of a long sequence of previous lives. He doesn't feel he is dealing out justice, just selecting for himself an experience that he feels he will find useful.

I don't think you are taking account of the vast change of time perspective between the mind/soul outside a body as opposed to being inside it.

OTH, I don't want you to think I am totally satisfied by the explanation in the sense that:

1)        I don't understand how this understanding will ultimately be used.

2)        I suspect a more complicated understanding of time may be needed to understand the whole scenario.

3)        It isn't clear to me how we can use an understanding acquired in a previous life, when we no longer have access to that life!

4)        If people can be incarnated more than once at any one time, is it possible we are all reincarnations of one consciousness?

David

You don't seem to have engaged with my main point: 

The main problem with this is that it does not properly honor the individuality and unique individual sentience of the human person and his/her perspective of instinctively identifying with the unique and limited and impermanent physical body, mind, personality and memories going back to childhood. This is the human individual person as actually lived, and honoring his/her humanity it appears to be clearly unjust for him/her to suffer because of soul choices.

Temporarily, for an Earth lifetime that subjectively can seem to last almost forever (especially if it has a lot of suffering), the human exists as a separate unique and severely limited sentient being. How about considering that sentient being and his/her experiences in themselves as being very important and significant, since this human he/she individuality is quite different and separate from the vastly expanded soul consciousness?

Thanks, that helps.

I know you've posted quite a lot on this topic and I admit to sometimes just skimming quickly through some posts and not quite absorbing all of your meanings and ideas.

At the risk of appearing to present a caricature of your ideas (or how I understand them), it's just that I always feel confused when reading your thoughts on this area.

I have reservations about a kind of picture I'm getting, where the embodied consciousness you described here is a separate entity from the soul. In my view they are one and the same.

The suffering and injustice experienced by the poor human, while somewhere in the background there is some soul-type-thing watching with idle curiosity and a detached disinterest.

My take is that the soul is the thing which undergoes the joys and pains of this world. Conversely the human as an animal made of physical matter doesn't do anything except serve as a vehicle. Much as a deep-sea diver or astronaut dons suitable wrapping in order to enter an otherwise alien environment.

I don't think I put that very well. I do feel a bit lost, somehow I find a complexity in your explanations when to me things are, in principle at least, rather simpler.

I might point out that the actual nature of the soul and its relationship to the human, and the overall design of reality as it applies to the ultimate nature of the physical and the spiritual realms, appears at least to me to be very complex, as indicated by the existence of so many different types of paranormal phenomena, many pointing in apparently different and conflicting directions regarding the relevant mechanisms. Like the many quite different reports of the nature of the afterlife emanating from mediumistic communications over the years, from NDE OBEs, from experiences of "cosmic consciousness", and from cases of the reincarnation kind (CORTs). And from the many and various bizarre reports involving other spiritual and esoteric practices such as animism. It should also be noted that this extreme complexity also applies to many aspects of the physical world, especially the design of living organisms, where ongoing research over the years keeps revealing more and more (seemingly endless) layers of complexity especially in the design of living cells at the molecular biology level.

Reality appears to be very complicated, as would be expected if it is designed by powerful but ultimately limited being(s) forced to make very many tradeoffs in the design.

You don't seem to have engaged with my main point: 


Temporarily, for an Earth lifetime that subjectively can seem to last almost forever (especially if it has a lot of suffering), the human exists as a separate unique and severely limited sentient being. How about considering that sentient being and his/her experiences in themselves as being very important and significant, since this human he/she individuality is quite different and separate from the vastly expanded soul consciousness?

I have to admit I am not seeing this quite the same as you are. If I willingly chose to temporarily erase my memory of being a transcendent entity then chose to enter a life of suffering....that is still me who made that choice?

For me it is certainly possible souls choose everything that happens to them in this life, but I just don't [think] the evidence points in that direction. At least not for every soul.