Redefining soul and spirit

Friday, September 4, 2015
F: 5:45 a.m. All right, let’s keep going. Into the breach: soul and spirit, some clarification.
TGU: You have been given a view of the non-3D life from the point of view of the soul created to hold together various strands to create a new habit-pattern, a new viewpoint, a new window on the 3D world and thus a new window on the non-3D world thereafter. But this view must now be corrected, or shall we say compensated, or complemented, by the same reality seen from the point of view you call spirit.
In this phrasing we are being careful to imply that soul and spirit, though different manifestations, are not in any way absolutely different.
F: I know what you are meaning to convey there, but I’m not sure how to get it across. I guess a good analogy would help, but I can’t think of one and I gather you don’t have one to suggest.

TGU: Why not spell out your understanding, and we will correct or modify if need be?
F: All right. I think you’re meaning, soul and spirit are the same essence, manifesting differently enough to seem like different things. Like, I suppose, vegetables and animals might be seen as fundamentally different but are both living matter.
TGU: Maybe a more productive analogy would be humans and animals being different expressions of animal life – physically identical except for a small percentage of their genetic make-up, but that small percentage being enough to render them vastly different in appearance and function in their environment – yet still mostly the same thing, not easily seen to be such when looked at only in the physical environment.
In fact, this is a very good analogy. In 3D, humans and other animals may not even be able to communicate except indirectly because only humans have intelligent speech, and humans have lost the ability to understand non-vocal communication. So, the gap is widened, perceptually. Now as humans re-learn the language they lost – as they begin to realize the other ways animals communicate, and mostly as they realize that animals who cannot talk can nonetheless understand – the differences between humans and other animals will seem to shrink, and what they are in common will seem to expand.
F: All through writing that, I was in mind of the analogy the guys once provided of the difference between us in the 3D and us in the non-3D – the difference between ice cubes and water. Same substance, different expression because different environment.
TGU: Yes, but look at that closely. The ice cube, though it experience itself (and other ice cubes) as separate and different, is still water, only temporarily frozen in form, or let us say firmed up in expression, made more rigid. So the soul is still spirit, only somewhat more rigid in expression.
F: For the first time I got the sense that souls, too, like bodies, may be only temporary.
TGU: Yes. Yes. Ice cubes are not intended to be forever as ice cubes. The water does not cease to exist, whether as liquid or as vapor. But in solid shape, it may have only a very limited life. Can anyone in his right mind say that this is a tragedy? Only if it sees things exclusively from the point of view of the ice cube. But in that case, this is the same mind-set that sees physical death as a tragedy because the 3D body ceases to exist as a container after the end of its time to function.
F: Okay, were circling back on old material and looking at it again, aren’t we? Understanding A better because we now understand B better.
TGU: You can see that your earlier questions could not be answered clearly except in whatever context you inhabited (or, you may think, created). The whole discussion of minds being discarded as insufficiently unique to be worth keeping could go only so far because of the contents of your conceptions to that point.
F: Yes, it looked very much like murder, or callous indifference, to some who read it.
TGU: And it may still look like loss to many, as long as they cling to identification with soul – that is, as individuality – rather than with spirit, or identity.
F: You’re going to confuse people with the word “identity.” You mean, more, universality, I think. Or – well, I don’t know – what?
TGU: Oneness, perhaps. If one identifies with any specific thing, loss is the inevitable result. If one identifies with the “all” of things, loss is out of the equation entirely. That isn’t the reason to identify with the all, just to avoid the feeling of loss. The reason is, that is a valid way to see it. But perhaps a more balanced view while you are in 3D is to recognize that life does involve loss, but only relative loss, never absolute loss. A hand of playing-cards, once thrown in so a new deal may proceed, ceases to exist as a present reality. It exists as a memory, and as a potential future reality again, but not (in the given 3D moment) as an existing reality. So, the soul.
F: Thoreau expressed a similar thought once, though not in the context of playing cards, of course. He said he identified not with the individual but with the thing that pre-existed the individual and would not cease to exist with the end of the individual.
TGU: Yes. But to most people until they come to think about it – and that’s what we’re doing, here, trying to help you all think about it – the thought of an individual soul ceasing to exist will seem as final as death, and perhaps even more wasteful and tragic.
F: It will, unless you can tell us how else to think of it. We have become accustomed to the idea of the soul as immortal.
TGU: And here is where things get tricky. The soul is immortal. And yet, it may cease to exist as a separate or relatively separate “individual” soul. But this is going to take some context to establish, because as usual what one can understand depends upon what one has as a platform from which to examine it. Just as the materialist has no platform from which to examine non-3D existence, so one who holds too firm a view of the nature and structure of non-3D existence will have no place to stand and change viewpoints. Both – standing in one place, and changing viewpoints. Both, not one or the other. Were you to do only the one, your views would harden inappropriately. Were you to do only the other, you would produce only a kaleidoscope, or a whirlwind.
F: I see my value to this process.
TGU: Of course. Your very limitations aid you in doing your job. Others with different limitations – hence with different abilities – will complement your efforts, if you all work together either simultaneously or in succession.
F: I think we’re pretty much done this morning.
TGU: There are other mornings, and as you have seen repeatedly, Yeats was quite right to say that achievement comes in sedentary little stitches.
F: Seems so. All right, you’ve whetted our appetites for more. I’ll be interested to see where this goes. Till next time, then.

25 thoughts on “Redefining soul and spirit

  1. Frank,
    If this was intended among other things to trigger thoughts, it has done it’s job. There are quite of lot of them, but I can sense I need more marination time and struggle to make them more understandable and put them in context. I will work on them and share, and am confident that others can help as well. The general themes I’m getting are: a) the gradual “losing” of self is natural and part of the mindset, b) this “absorption” into something greater is the way in which we actually affect the whole, and c) it is related to what we might call “moving on”. More later.

  2. “But this is going to take some context to establish, because as usual what one can understand depends upon what one has as a platform from which to examine it.”

    Can’t wait to see/hear what happens.

  3. This morning, triggered by Frank’s morning blog from his TGU, I was thinking about and getting input on Spirit and Soul. The following is a portion of my notes:

    “Consciousness can experience a human life.  More so, it can form as such a new soul, a new perspective, a new individuality.  The fusion of it back into the whole will change the whole.”  

    “Colors work.  Maybe.”  (Taking the perspective of spirit, and using with encouragement, but some reticence on my part, the color red) “I am many colors, but not red.  I have the potential to be red.  I experience a “red” life with the intent of forming a “red” mind, and I succeed. Eventually the red mind disappears into the whole, but now the whole is affected by the red.  The combined tint is different. The red is in one sense lost, but in another it is there and affecting.  It is in the whole, integral to the whole.“ 

    I ask myself, “Is that a good analogy? Does it work? Did I make it up, or did it come from elsewhere?” I had my trepidations, as I do with practically everything I “receive”.

    Last evening my wife and I were with some friends. One couple rode in our back seat, and the husband, Joe, left his coat which I promised to deliver to him this morning. Joe had an NDE not long ago, and while he does not recall any experiences during his “death”, he is admittedly a changed person. “More intuitive” his wife Dianne says.

    A short time after writing the words above in my notes, and the first reply to Frank’s posting, I arrive at Joe’s doorstep with his coat. We say hello, he looks at my baseball style hat with a red Northwest Indian symbol on it. Out of the blue he says to me: “I’ve read a very interesting book about the color red. It’s all about the dye that was discovered that allowed this sought-after color to be stabilized, to be used. I think you would find it interesting.” I was floored, thinking: “Where did that come from?” Joe couldn’t remember the name of the book and I went on to connect with another friend, as part of my 3D life. Joe calls my cell with the name of the book, “A Perfect Red” by Amy Butler Greenfield.

    As I drive away, I’m thinking I need to find out what really made Joe tell me about the color red and that book.

    An hour or so later I am driving back home, feeling very hungry for a late breakfast, and realize I am going to be driving right by a favorite local diner. I call my wife Carol and we agree to meet there. I arrive first, get a table and sit down. Even as the waitress is bringing me the standard coffee, in walks Dianne, Joe’s wife, followed shortly after by Carol and Joe, each arriving unbeknownst ahead of time to the other and from separate places.

    We talk about the “coincidence”, my input, the book. I get to ask Joe, “What made you bring that up?” Joe said it was the red in my hat. And then he added, “And about a half hour before you showed up I don’t know why but I was thinking about the color red!”

    Red is my favorite color, and I know there is more for me in this book. I can’t wait to download it and read it, from more than one perspective.

    1. That`s very interesting John.

      Yesterday I became very much aware of all the “Frequencies” in life. And each color has “A Frequency”. Crystals have all colors in them.

      MANY years ago when in the midst of my “alternative search”into The new age matters (or, into “the Unknown Territory”)I realized we are living “a colorful life.”

      A funny story to recall especially came to mind: EVERYBODY wanted to have lilac in their auras, because that was seen as the most “spiritual” color…next to lilac came the indigo blue color.

      As usual I went in the opposite direction, and went for all shades of the red (a long time was fond of orange as well back then).
      And all of my new-age friends looking suspiciously at me (laughs), and told me “they could not stand” the color orange (ha,ha).
      AND then, I soon found out about the Buddha, and the Buddhist-Monks used the colors of orange and the red in their clothes.

      I have a old book from 1993 about the colors and the frequencies in my book-shelters titled “Color-Energy.”

      EVERYTHING has vibrations and frequencies. Back then auras were very popular to investigate.
      What most folks did not take into consideration were that the colors about the auras (about people) changes all the time.

      As in the crystals, it depends upon which angle you are looking at it.
      — or else the coincidences are important in our lives, that`s for certain.
      Nowadays I am into all sorts of colors.
      The two youngest granddaughters favorite color at the time being is PINK.

      Love&Laughter,Inger Lise.

    2. Thanks for sharing this, John. Interesting about the color red. Recently, a close friend of ours (one of the very few, locally, I can feel at ease w/ discussing these “matters of Spirit”) said she could almost always “see” an aura about me; the primary color was red. She’s also mentioned the presence of St. Michael, rather comforting to me (she is of Catholic background).

      And, Inger Lise, I’d also run into the New Age-y idea that one wanted to strive for violet or indigo in their auras (or even the “more advanced soul” coloration, put forth in the work of a particular between-life hypnotherapist); red may have disturbed me 20 years ago, but I “sense” it as a “power color”. Now, I need to OWN that “power” (as we all, I believe, have)!


      1. Thanks Craig. My interest in color is heightened in general, and about red in particular. I’m imagining a review of at least some of my life while seeing all the colors of our auras and energies in play. That would be a sight!

  4. The part of the All, that is called Me, resonates very well with the part of the All, called You, AND the part of the All called TGU from your perspective; the Collective Soul that was told to Me, after I called them the Groupies. We are all the same but for uniquely different vantage points, purposely so, in order that We, You and Me can help in BEing the all of the All. So that the All of everything can experience “itself” as the ALL there is. Oof, so mind-blowing, yet also, empowering and exciting – and accessible in the Now to boot! xoxoxo

      1. Have you ever discussed, with TGU, the “necessity” of the dark side in this moment of Now? In particular, how the All cannot be so, without it? I have my understanding of it, but sometimes it’s hard to exlain to others, to try to assist them in alleviating their fear of it.

  5. I read the two posts after this one, and wanted to share this from the book I’m writing now.

    Angels have assisted with numerous healings. Some have had wings. I asked spirit, my guides, whether angels had wings, or was I seeing wings because humans/I believed angels had wings. They answered, “they do and they don’t. What you believe you create, but not everything you believe is created. It’s easier for you to communicate with and believe in a winged angel than a formless angel, or to communicate with the angel/the formless within. Angels have been communicating to and assisting humans for as long as humanity has existed. It’s as simple as asking an elder, a big brother for help.”

    Many believe angels save people. If they do, then why do so many humans die tragically? [a question I’d not consciously ask]

    “You choose to.”

    Countless mediums, psychics, new age/alternative practitioners and followers believe our souls choose a life plan, so I asked, “our souls choose?”

    “No. Life chooses. Souls experience life. For souls, the process of choosing is void, a non-process, unnecessary. Souls participate in and experience life. Let’s say, not a soul or souls, but soul experiences life.”

    That’s a new description and feels complex.

    “You asked a new question, an old question in a new way.
    Links in a universal chain. Attributes of all personality. Your best moments are when you’re not an entity, but an entirety. The sum of all beyond your concept of that. When you understand, or believe you do, then you’re not the entirety. You wish to grasp something from the position of experiencing something. Life is the position of experiencing, spirit is the record of experience and experiencing, soul is the non-dimensional accumulative force of experiencing and non-experiencing [observing], and the unfathomable is unfathomable [said with some humour].”

    1. Simon?
      It is the best I ever heard.
      Why is this so much easier to understand– at least to me?
      It FELT different to me, as it is a felling of (within) a much higher “octave”… Is it because I have “entered” angels in difficult times myself ? Or,maybe it is the part of US as in the Higher Self-Aspect (in the timelessness perspective) ?

      I recall an African Shaman once telling me: “As an Christian European, you have made another Frequency than ours.”
      I have always wondered what he have meant by it ?

      Later in life when staying in Bangkok(Thailand) during the Vietnam-war…and during a life-threatening situation…I was all alone on a path in the jungle, two men came behind me, one with a knife in his hand…And I “FROZE,” could not move.
      THEN, all of a sudden TWO AFRO-AMERICANS, dressed in U.S.Army Uniforms, identical TWINS (they were identical looking as twins) appearing “out-of-the-blue”…They were extremely TALL, above the average humans and BEAUTIFUL of the outlook. They were PERFECT.I cannot describe them otherwise.

      And then the two Asian men running away as the devil was hunting them.
      The TWO IDENTICAL TWINS (africans?) smiled and vanished as well “into the blue.”

      Edgar Cayce has a reading where he is telling us “to become angels.”
      And another reading where E.C. said we are “meeting” (entering is another word he is using), with Angels unaware all the time.
      I have heard countless stories about people’s own experiences with Angels (both with, and without wings).

      NOT that I am not appreciating all the other instructive materials (and education), by all means, but what you have told here resonates within another Frequency in me.

      I would have given you a big hug if you had been here face-to-face with me/us.
      Thank you by the heart from Inger Lise.

      1. Hi Inger, and I’d hug you back. Thank you!

        I love your story. Angels do appear to be taller and beautiful. Timeless and clean.
        I agree with the African Shaman. The beliefs, conversations and fears of billions of Christians has created a frequency unlike any Indigenous frequency.
        I see angels in many forms, and all the angels that attend healings advise we’re the angels. They look at us with such awe. It’s uplifting. Angels don’t want us to worship or fear them, they wish for us to see that we’re angels too.
        It’s a wonderful mystery.

  6. From Simon Hay: “Your best moments are when you’re not an entity, but an entirety.”

    That is worth absorbing. What would it look like to be an entirety on a day to day basis rather than merely in this or that moment?

    From Inger: “I recall an African Shaman once telling me: ‘As an Christian European, you have made another Frequency than ours.’I have always wondered what he have meant by it?”

    Oh, that is very good. I interpret or rather would translate his “frequency” as “knowledge.” There is definitely some slippage in the translation, but it gives a sense of what is actually at stake. The world or universe is not just one thing. Therefore there cannot be just one (correct) knowledge of it.

    Another way of thinking about what he meant by “frequency” is to translate it as world or way of life– or perhaps as understanding. Insofar as the world is multi-faceted (how multi-faceted we really don’t know) there will be many ways of life or understandings of it.

    1. I don’t think it’s knowledge; I think it is more like, the Christian European perceived and therefore reacted to a different world than the African shaman. And i think this would be true of all cultures, to greater or lesser degree.

    2. I think Frank might be onto something here. Reactionary forces shape life.
      I wonder when extremism was born. It seems to be the dominant driver and our undoing.

      1. Agree with Simon,Frank and Cat`s paw.
        Simon raised the question: What have formed Extremism ?
        I would give it a guess: It is souls when splitting up into “clusters”and became physical.
        F.inst.,nowadays extreme weather all around in the world.
        According to E.C. and the Readings. (Hmm, me and the E.C.Readings all the time) we influence weather conditions throughout all times with our thoughts, feelings, behavior and emotions. This reading repeatedly became quoted by Edgar Cayce: “MIND IS THE BUILDER.”
        E.C.says even Solar Flares are our doing. The volcano eruptions as well. The floods etc.etc.
        Quote: “You are given all power in Heaven and Earth.”
        The old Christians belief that it is only meant for Jesus Christ.
        It is meant for ALL of us without exception… BTW:I came to recall when sitting here right now as a matter of fact, ACIM telling the very same. ACIM have another “twist” or take on the world-view than E.C., even both “teachings” are VERY similar in many ways.

        What a very NICE forum this is comrades in arms!
        Bless you Frank.
        LOL,Inger Lise.

        I have thought a lot about it, AND then it must be meant as “in us creating” whatever it is, and have done it since “the beginning of time.”
        New worlds as well.

        Interesting with what Seth calls “The Mass-Consciousness.”

        IF it is true,then we are more powerful than we can imagine or realize.

        This is reminding me about what was told by many ancient “Masters”(as well as the new ones): “If MANY enough awaken from their sleep, you (mankind) are able to change the world within a twinkling of the eye.”

        It can go both ways of course.

        1. Morning Inger,

          On EC and the weather, I agree with him. I’ve been able to stop the wind, make it rain and make clouds disappear. In William Bengston’s, The Energy Cure, a book I recommend, he described meeting a psychic who was able to break up clouds. I tried it and was successful. If I can do that then Seth’s mass consciousness will influence weather. We are powerful, and now mostly distracted. 🙂

          1. Simon ? I have known a lady who is able “to rule the sky” likewise.
            Her name is Norma Milanovitch, and she wrote a book titled: “We, The Arcturians.”

            I met her a couple of times face-to-face, both when she visited Norway in 1987(I think in 1987/88), and on a tour with her and a group visiting Hawaii back in the 1989, or something, if I am not recalling it all wrong.

            What happened on that particular journey can fill a whole novel by its own.

            Gosh, when thinking it all over again—WHAT on earth have I done, and have been “Up to” in my life?

            The Adventures folks—it is THE ADVENTURES(laughs).

            Bliss and Blessings, Inger Lise.

  7. I have no problem with your spin on that, Frank. I think “perceived” is probably more literally accurate.

    However, consider what we are doing with this forum you’ve created. We are taking perceptions, thoughts, ideas, feelings and working with them, wrestling with them, trying to shape them into something coherent, like knowledge. In doing so we are conceivably tuning into a particular “frequency”; perhaps even creating one; albeit a very small one on an unimaginably large bandwidth–perhaps.

    Just so, the shaman in tuning into a different frequency is necessarily working with a different set of assumptions, presuppositions, and practices –that is, knowledge– than the “Christian European.” What is and is not possible for each of these types will likely be different. Not in all ways, of course, but many.

    And yes, I think it would true of all cultures as well. Which is why I personally am so interested in difference as a principle. Those differences usually mean differences in perception, knowledge, frequency, and world.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.