Consciousness: A Symptom of the Soul?

[seattlegal]

What does everyone think about the role of conscience in connection to soul?

[soma]

I feel pure consciousness is the highest point of the soul. It is similar to a mountain peak that has been hidden in the clouds, but when the sun melts the clouds away, the mountaintop receives the full light of the sun. Love burns away ignorance and illuminates the mind with unity and the presence of a pure consciousness that gives rise to a mind that is capable of seeing a totally new dimension. On the mountain peak of the soul one can see a new horizon in the clear, upper, rarefied air of pure consciousness where one is able to guide the mind’s activities in a new direction that one has never before known. In this way God gives the spiritual mind new instincts to prepare it to move in a new spiritual consciousness.

[China Cat Sunflower]

Originally Posted by Neemai

Consciousness cannot be denied. A body without consciousness is a dead body. As soon as consciousness is removed from the body, the mouth will not speak, the eye will not see, nor the ears hear. A child can understand that. It is a fact that consciousness is absolutely necessary for the animation of the body, but what is this consciousness? Just as heat or smoke are symptoms of fire, so is consciousness a symptom of the soul? Is it infact, consciousness, that proves that the soul is present?

This body is not like a machine. When a part of a machine breaks down, it can be replaced, and the machine will work again, but when the body breaks down and consciousness leaves the body for a siginificant period of time, there is no possibility of our replacing the broken part and rejuvenating the consciousness.

Because we cannot perceive the soul by our gross senses, we may deny it. Actually there are so many things that are there which we cannot see. We cannot see air, radio waves, or sound, nor can we perceive minute bacteria with our blunt senses, but this does not mean they are not there. By the aid of the microscope and other instruments, many things can be perceived which had previously been denied by the imperfect senses. Just because the soul has not been perceived yet by senses or instruments, should we conclude that it is not there? Or can it be perceived by its symptoms and effects?


... Neemai

OK, so...what exactly is a soul? Is it a thing, or is it a purely conceptual vehicle? How do we know that the human body and it's organically constructed brain aren't a necessary component in creating consciousness? I mean, is consciousness just the radio signal, or is it the combination of signal and organic receptor in one symbiotic process?

Chris

[soma]

If everything is pure consciousness, collective unconscious, or God then a power super-imposes a force over some of the pure consciousness, but it doesn't have the power to change it. This force is what hides from the individual consciousness that which connects it to the Whole or the Father, the pure consciousness. This super-imposition of the particular over the universal is the birth of the individual soul. If you take a cup of water from the ocean, the water in the cup is the same as the water in the ocean. There is no difference. The ocean is God the Father, pure consciousness, the Holy Ghost creates the cup, the soul and the water in the cup is the Son, individual consciousness. I used the Trinity to try tod describe the abstract.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by soma

If you take a cup of water from the ocean, the water in the cup is the same as the water in the ocean. There is no difference. The ocean is God the Father, pure consciousness, the Holy Ghost creates the cup, the soul and the water in the cup is the Son, individual consciousness. I used the Trinity to try tod describe the abstract.

Steady, that is an anthropomorphisation — it assumes that 'consciousness' is all that God is — it determines God according to a human standard.

The fault in the argument is that the water in the cup and the ocean are the same substance, with the same nature.

The same cannot be said of God and man, different substance, different nature.

Thomas

[soma]

We are humans so we explain and talk using human standards, if not we would not be able to communicate about something beyond human. To express God we would have to meditate and go beyond the mind because words are human symbols. Let us use those symbols to express that God is the Almighty and understand that He is all pervasive.

The Word within a Word can be referred to as the microcosm within the macrocosm each containing all the qualities of the other. That is why we can say we are made in the image and likeness of God.
"And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

[Paladin]

I believe it was Ramana Maharshi that postulated: "That which is not present in deep dreamless sleep, does not exist"

[Neemai]

In reply to a number of comments :

Somebody once told me the story of how a person in coma (for some length of time) upon waking turned to the person by their bedside and said "why didn't you read louder." Their carer had been sitting by the bed each day, reading a book out-loud, even though they weren't sure if the person was really conscious of it or not. This instance would suggest that consciousness remains in some form, even if we are comatose.

In terms of sleeping, the Indian philospher, Jiva Goswami, was of the belief that as souls we are always connected to God, and in deep sleep we actually have some of kind of 'darshan' or closeness with Him which refreshes us spiritually each day - although I do not have the exact quotation to hand...

As for what the soul is (if there is a soul)? - That seems to me to be the first and foremost question we could ask in any philosophical or religious system. What is so interesting is the amount of diverse answers on what is really a fundamentally simple question. Who are we?

... Neemai

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by soma

We are humans so we explain and talk using human standards, if not we would not be able to communicate about something beyond human. To express God we would have to meditate and go beyond the mind because words are human symbols. Let us use those symbols to express that God is the Almighty and understand that He is all pervasive.

Agreed, but then we have to be very precise in our use of symbols.

Originally Posted by soma

The Word within a Word can be referred to as the microcosm within the macrocosm each containing all the qualities of the other. That is why we can say we are made in the image and likeness of God.
"And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

OK.

But you have not signified what 'qualities' you are referring to, and my point was we must ensure not to 'qualify' God, taking ourselves as the mean.

If we assert how like we are, we must also assert how unlike — for 'image' and 'likeness' does not mean the same 'essence' or 'substance'

God is being : man is being : dog is being : rock is being — and as such God, men, dogs and rocks are in the same 'image' (they are all perceived as beings) and likeness (they have properties common to 'being' eg they all exist) but they are very different things.

That God chose man to share in His 'likness' and 'image' means that man manifests this is a superlative manner with regard to the rest of the created order, but it does not mean than a creature is of the same essence, substance or nature as its Creator.

That way leads to monism, and pantheism, and founded on the argument of Genesis 1:26, is ontologically an error of interpretation.

Thomas

[soma]

1. DEUTERONOMY 4:35,39 — Unto thee it was shown, that thou mightest know that the LORD he is God; there is none else beside him. (39) Know therefore this day, and consider it in thine heart, that the LORD he is God in heaven above, and upon the earth beneath: there is none else.
2. DEUTERONOMY 6:4 — Hear, O Israel: The LORD thy God is one LORD. [Note in Mark 12:28-34 how Jesus and a Jewish scribe he encountered understood this text.]
3. DEUTERONOMY 32:39 — See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me:

Yes, I believe in one God.

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

What does everyone think about the role of conscience in connection to soul?

Conscience, Unconscience.... Just be greatful.

[Postmaster]

I think that true consiousness and free will is more subtle then we care to realise.

[Postmaster]

We always try to justify of our actions in ways that make sense, however take a closer look and they are actually controlled by our emotions and basic nature.

To change a deep emotional state it takes quite a lot of nurture and grooming.

I think it’s a great system, stops us from being pure anarchists, progressing with our limits and harmoniously, also stops the heretics from going way beyond there bounds. I must warn though, tampering with emotions can cause adverse effects.

[17th Angel]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

also stops the heretics from going way beyond their bounds.

You can prove that?

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Postmaster

We always try to justify of our actions in ways that make sense, however take a closer look and they are actually controlled by our emotions and basic nature.

To change a deep emotional state it takes quite a lot of nurture and grooming.

I think it’s a great system, stops us from being pure anarchists, progressing with our limits and harmoniously, also stops the heretics from going way beyond there bounds. I must warn though, tampering with emotions can cause adverse effects.

Originally Posted by 17th Angel

You can prove that?

Exhibit A:

Adolf Hitler: "I am liberating man from the degrading chimera known as `conscience'."