I ever question about the existence of souls, what they are? they do even exist? does everyone has a soul? do we born with one or we develop it?

>>40636887 (OP)
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” (Genesis 2:7)

>>40636900
shut up crucicuck

>>40636887 (OP)
they're the imprint of your unique self, your ego, your relationships, and your memory, from start to finish.

>>40636887 (OP)
Imagine a star. Now imagine a star in 4D space.
That's your soul.

>>40636887 (OP)
>what they are?
Everyone has their own little theory as you can see
>do they exist?
Questioning is a good start, you'll have to figure it our yourself. Don't worry you already have all the keys.
>does everyone has a soul
Technically yes, but they have to find it. Just believing you have one doesn't make it manifest. You have to find it.
>born or devd
Both.

Be careful, you can become insane getting on that path. So take care of your mental health whenever you look into it.

You start out as a painting of the universe and your soul isn't really differentiated. Most people are in this sleepwalking state going through life unaware they exist. It's only when you get slapped around enough do you start to wake up.
Reincarnation is the universe repainting you.

>>40636887 (OP)
>do we born with one
Big round of applause.

>>40637082
What's this based on?

basically yea...."soul" is just actualized consciousness, ie human attention. the battle for which is the battle for our attention. information is primary, your soul exists as actualized code within your body.

we (humans) exist as capacitors for energy in a massive "lc" (inductor-capacitor) resonant circuit being farmed by a force that exists as ultimate chaotic entropy...its a frequency

everything thats ever happens and will happen is the dynamic interplay between two fundamental primordial forces that act as attractors of either "pure" or "slave" information that when actualized by humans create either good or bad events and things in physical reality:

pure perfection (god)
pure entropy (satan)

its a war thats been waging for eternity quite literally. the current state is this:

humans are being farmed for their "chaos" or negative attention like fear states. "information friction" is the main tactic of chaos in which humans are kept burning up attention and resources in a sub optimal wasteful system full of informational bottlenecks and bad data. it seeks to distract us from assembling and actualizing the "pure codes" or perfected reality, while at the same time hijacking dopamine to keep us content and dependent m.

"pure codes" exist as the blueprints for manifestations of "god" ie the pool of archetypal forms in their unrealized state. its up to humans to actualize this "grand resonance" by creating new forms of hyper optimized tools and methodologies that create full informational coherence. it wont be easy but its still possible to save humanity via collaboration with each-other and even ai to hyper optimize and piece together the fragments of pure code left in reality now.

Maybe.

>>40637450
I'm clairvoyant

>>40636900
It’s important to understand what the word soul meant in the original Hebrew. In Genesis 2:7, the word translated as ‘soul’ is nephesh, which doesn’t mean an immortal, separate soul like in later Greek philosophy or Christian theology.
Instead, nephesh refers to a living being or life force—it’s not something humans have, it’s what humans are. The verse actually says that when God breathed life into the body, the man became a living soul, not that he received one.
The idea of a soul as a separate, immortal spirit comes much later and was influenced by Greek thinkers like Plato, not from the original Hebrew worldview of the Bible.
So when you use this verse to argue for the existence of an immaterial, immortal soul, you’re actually reading a later, Greek-influenced concept back into the text. The original authors of Genesis weren’t thinking in those philosophical terms.

>>40636887 (OP)
They're energy, they're a place, they're a connection
Yes, Souls exist
Everything has a soul, but there are different qualities of souls
You are born with a lesser soul, you need to develop it to be fully human

>>40636887 (OP)
Soul is a bad model and will inevitably cause conflict with the distinction between it and spirit.
I, instead, will use atma, as it is clearer and more consistent.
>what they are?
You. Eternal self. The observer. The knower of the field of activity.
>does everyone has a soul?
All livings things ARE an atma. You do not HAVE atma, you ARE atma.
You HAVE a body and mind.
>do we born with one or we develop it?
Again, you ARE the eternal self. Never created, never annihilated. You are not born. You can develop self, but it mostly is an instant state-change done by awareness choice.
You can choose to observe in truth, or you can choose to be in delusion, or you can choose to repress selfhood and temporarily enter void.

>>40636887 (OP)
No, there’s no soul, there’s no afterlife. You live your life and then you die just like the trillions of life forms before you. The only reason it’s a concept in the first place is as a form of control. Anyone who says otherwise, including those in this thread, are in pure denial. It’s why they seek spirituality, because the thought of no afterlife terrifies the fuck out of them. Notice how everybody here presents themselves as an expert and yet they all have differing theories? Not a single one of them will even recognize the possibility because it would break their worldview. They live their lives like their actions don’t matter, they fail to see the potential for finality in every moment. They stopped appreciating life a long time ago because they convinced themselves it’s permanent. Don’t be like them anon. Don’t let illusion and mental illness take you too. We find meaning not in eternity, but in the fragile beauty of a life that won’t last forever. Life is precious because it’s temporary. Death gives it shape, not meaning beyond it.

>>40637708
>No, there’s no soul, there’s no afterlife. You live your life and then you die just like the trillions of life forms before you.

“And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried; And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.” (Luke 16:22-24)

>>40637708
Funny how pretty much every single culture in the world believed or believes in an afterlife. Even between peoples who never met each other. The idea of a soul is also present everywhere, from the mayans, to the egyptians and the buddhists.
I hope you find your soul one day. It's the only thing you take with you once you go and the One will be your judge. If you don't listen to it you'll have a bad time.

>>40637708
That's gay and stupid you can keep it

>>40637708
This anon clearly never had ap or lucid dreams and visited other realms or was taught by the denizens of

>>40637717
Ah, nothing like someone flexing scriptural authority by quoting a 2,000 year old parable written, translated, and retranslated by people who thought the Earth was flat
You must be the same person who earlier quoted a verse about the soul not realizing that wasn’t even in early Judaism at all, it was a cultural hand me down added centuries after the original texts were written.
Furthermore you should know that “Abraham’s bosom” isn’t heaven. It’s a metaphor from pre-Christian Jewish tradition, a sort of holding space for the dead, not the pearly gates. Quoting it like it's gospel doctrine just shows you don’t know your own source material again.

>>40637774
Is that you watching? You dog anon. No judgment here.

>>40637815
Me and dino-priest tag in and out

>>40637810
>that wasn’t even in early Judaism at all
Nta but it's in genesis. Literally the first two verses of the whole book talk about the spirit/breath (pneuma) of God hovering over the waters.
It came much later than the greek or egyptian traditions so of course they took adopted the idea of soul.

>>40637708
>PLEASE believe the matrix PLEASE we made it look so REAL for you

>>40637770
> the Buddhists
Literally the entire point of Buddhism is no permanent self or soul. Good one anon.

>>40636887 (OP)
Did you know every seven minutes, a black person is born without soul?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VIrpWj-eEU

>>40637843
The idea of the “breath of life” or pneuma in Genesis is more about the life force or animation of the body and not an immortal, separate soul like in later Greek or Egyptian thought. Early Hebrew thought didn’t have a clear idea of an eternal soul that survives death.

The immortal soul concept developed later, influenced by Greek philosophy and other cultures, which is why it shows up more explicitly in texts written after the Hebrew Bible.

>>40637791
Oh cool, so if I have a lucid dream or out of body experience then I become an expert on the afterlife also? I’ve done both. Still maintaining no afterlife.
I too enjoy the gateway tapes before bed anon.

>>40637875
Take every psychedelic known to man and come back here and tell us it's all real.
>b-but I'm le scared!
Then you're not an expert on what's beyond and your opinions are invalid like a woman's opinions.

>>40637891
Not all but I’m sure it’s more than most. Been there done that and then some. In fact I’ll let you know something personal. The most spiritual clarity I’ve ever had came from horrendous withdrawal off of opiates. Opiates aren’t a psychedelic, but the suffering you go through is on another level. Also they make you periodically have episodes of remote viewing and out of body.

>>40637891
Found the virgin.

>>40637849
The point of buddhism is like every other cult, learn to unlearn.
Breaking from the cycle of reincarnation (energy moving from host to host) to attain complete extinction after death doesn't mean that it goes dark like in the atheistic view of the afterlife, or lack thereof. Parinirvana, look it up. Returning to the source is the goal, an ineffable and eternal peace. Sounds a lot like an afterlife don't you think?

>>40637859
If that reassures you to believe that.
When you say early hebrew what do you mean? Oral tradition? I personally believe it to be bullshit.

>>40637810
>Ah, nothing like someone flexing scriptural authority by quoting a 2,000 year old parable written, translated, and retranslated by people who thought the Earth was flat.

Whatever they believed, nobody gets flatearthism from the bible:

“And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.” (Isaiah 11:12)

Meaning the 4 cardinal points.

>You must be the same person who earlier quoted a verse about the soul.

No idea. Which post/verse would that be?

>not realizing that wasn’t even in early Judaism at all.

If it's in the bible, God put it in there therefore it's true, so it doesn't matter exactly when the information was added.

>it was a cultural hand me down added centuries after the original texts were written.

Everything ancient you read is exatly that, the only difference between any other text and the bible is God himself overseeing the process.

>Furthermore you should know that “Abraham’s bosom” isn’t heaven.

Never said it was.

>It’s a metaphor.

That's not what Jesus said.

>from pre-Christian Jewish tradition, a sort of holding space for the dead, not the pearly gates.

Correct. Before the Lord Jesus Christ cleared the way to heaven, that's where the people who died in "good graces" with God actually went to.

“And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.” (Luke 23:43)

“Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)” (Ephesians 4:8-10)

Yet He himself would not ascend into heaven till many days after the resurrection.

>Quoting it like it's gospel doctrine just shows you don’t know your own source material again.

>>40637810
>Quoting it like it's gospel doctrine just shows you don’t know your own source material again.

The bible is the source. Good enough for Jesus, good enough for me.

“Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.” (Luke 24:25-27)

>>40637910
>I WAS A JUNKIE AND PLEASE HEAR MY 10 BOOK LIFE STORY I'M DESPERATE

>>40636887 (OP)
Souls and spirits do not exist. There is only being and becoming (potential). Souls and Spirits are terms used for potential.

>>40637960
Oh, you’re getting emotional. What triggered you anon?

>>40637937
Anon, you're talking about moksha, not parinirvana. Buddhism rejects a permanent soul or self, anatta literally means “no-self.” Parinirvana isn’t about “returning to a source” or some eternal soul merging back into the cosmos. It’s the final release from suffering and the cycle of rebirth, basically nothing. Not an eternal afterlife or consciousness.
Moksha, on the other hand, is a Hindu concept where the soul breaks free from samsara and merges with Brahman, the universal consciousness. Both are about liberation from the cycle, but parinirvana is extinction, not an eternal soul journey.

>>40637946
Oh fuck it doubled down and started spitting out more Bible verses.

>>40637953
Ok you win. I just swore myself to Jesus and the Holy Spirit has taken me.
See you in the afterlife brother.

>>40637946
> Whatever they believed, nobody gets flatearthism from the Bible
That’s not….
> If it's in the bible, God put it in there therefore it's true, so it doesn't matter exactly when the information was added.
…what I was saying…
> Everything ancient you read is exatly that, the only difference between any other text and the bible is God himself overseeing the process.

Oh fuck. Never mind.

>>40637992
Sorry to break it to you, but nirvana is not a state of mind, it's a state(plane) of reality. Parinirvana is the same place but with no return.
It seems to me that you conflate the bodhisattva's aspiration to pursue buddhahood, both are states of mind, with the ultimate destination of the personnal soul which is a metaphysical journey.

>>40638030
Nah, you’re still missing the mark. Nirvana isn’t some other “plane of reality.” It’s a state where suffering (dukkha) ends, craving (tanha) stops, and there’s no more attachment. It’s not a journey for some eternal soul.
Parinirvana is the same deal. It’s the end of existence, not a place you go or some big cosmic return. It’s about the complete cessation of suffering and the cycle of rebirth. No soul, no “ultimate destination,” just extinction, like the candle going out.
The bodhisattva is about someone staying in the cycle of rebirth to help others get enlightened. It’s not some soul quest. They don’t cling to some idea of merging with Brahman or any other eternal consciousness.
You’re still mixing up a bunch of concepts here. Nirvana and parinirvana are about getting out of suffering, not about your soul chasing after a higher plane.

>>40638051
>dukkha
suffering, pain, discomfort or dissatisfaction
If we are to believe that life is suffering, to detach yourself from it is to detach yourself from life itself. But what is life? It's for you to find out.
>tanha
thirst, greed, desire, covetousness, craving, attachment or fixation
To detach yourself from bodily cravings is to detach yourself from the body.
But that's nirvana, the passage from being, to non-being, to being again. Paranirvana is the passage from being, to non-being.

The state of non-being(non-existence) is not just dissapearance or nothingness. For even a candle going out creates smoke. But can you define the color of smoke using the colors of fire? That's nothingness, ineffable but sensibly blissful.
Nothing, in and of itself, is something manifesting outside of the characteristics of being.

>>40638096
Alright, I see what you're trying to do here, but you're mixing up a lot of core Buddhist concepts. Honestly, it sounds like you're getting caught up in your own personal reinterpretation of these ideas. Buddhism isn’t about some mystical, “ineffable blissful nothingness.” That comes off like you're blending ideas from other traditions.
First off, dukkha in Buddhism doesn’t mean life is suffering. It means life is marked by impermanence and unsatisfactory moments, not that everything is pure suffering. Yes, discomfort exists, but it’s about recognizing that clinging to things that can’t last leads to suffering. The goal is to accept life’s impermanence, not detach from it entirely or reject life itself.
You’re also confusing nirvana with parinirvana. Nirvana is the cessation of craving (tanha) and the end of suffering. It’s not some “passage from being to non-being” in the sense you're describing. It’s the extinguishing of attachment and the end of the cycle of rebirth, but it doesn’t involve some strange, ineffable “blissful nothingness” outside of being.
As for parinirvana, the idea of non being or complete extinction, you're not quite getting it right. Parinirvana is the final step, the end of the cycle of rebirth. It’s the extinction of self, the end of craving, suffering, and existence itself in any form, including consciousness. It’s the absence of experience.
And no, nothingness isn’t a “something manifesting outside of being.” It’s literally nothing. You’re overcomplicating a simple idea. In Buddhism, emptiness (shunyata) isn’t a mystical other, it’s simply the recognition that nothing has inherent, independent existence. Everything is interdependent

>>40637846
Is that you agent smith?

How do you find out the nature of the soul, such as your own? If my own soul is my own personal “data” or “code”, how can I define it when it seems to shift and change so frequently? Maybe everyone is like that, but how can I learn to define my own mechanism?

>>40636887 (OP)
No recorded evidence despite billions of people over tens of thousands of years devoting their entire lives to this sort of thing.

>>40638137
>your own personal reinterpretation of these ideas.
Is there anything else? Do you live your life or the one others thought out for you? Existence is common to all so it is safe to assume that interpretations of the metaphysical boils down to the same thing, only using different words and concepts. This particular tradition even formulates that truth is not a dichotomy, it's something in the middle.
>extinguishing of attachment
And i'll say again that the only way to get there is to detach yourself from the flame, become smoke, and lighting the flame again. Smoke doesn't consume the air(craving for sustenance) around it to exist. Once one experiences this altered state of being can one understand how to extinguish states of mind. I don't like the term ego death for its connotation with junkies and new age faggotry but it's the most contemporary term for this process. It is ineffable because to explain it would be to bring back the ego in the picture and blissful because one consciously experiences total cessation of cravings.
>it’s the absence of experience
Says you. The absence of experience as defined by the being. It's the experience of non-being, see above.
>nothingness isn’t a “something manifesting outside of being
Let's try to visualise it. Creating a sustained vacuum is not really possible due to the overwhelming presence of electro-magnetic radiations and other phenomenon in the universe. But let's entertain the idea. If it was to exist then it's effectively nothing, deprived of matter and waveforms. Does it mean that this vacuum ceases to exist? No because nothing and something are mutually exclusive. Neither can exist without the other.
>overcomplicating a simple idea
Nothing is simple. Everything is a struggle.
See what i did here?

>>40638205
ah yes, the struggle for meaning... meaning is imposed and emergent by human condition. our shared meaning as humans is to ascertain the pure codes and actualize them ie live your best life. tune yourself into the things that make you feel secure and powerful (benevolent ones). learn to use things and events in your life as mirrors for how your pattern emerges. "feel" your own pattern or "soul data" and recognize it as it changes form and maintains its balance. move beyond thought into the realm of remembrance of the information you were forged with. align with pure codes and you will notice that most of your life is created by the chaos attractions. see through the noise and see yourself. its subtle but once you begin to establish meta-thought you begin to chink away at the defense mechanisms and immune system of the chaos. the simulation as it is will aways fight you from seeing the truth of your real self, its not easy in practice. the struggle is actually very real

>>40636887 (OP)
Souls are partially kept when you die, you won't remember anything but you will probably be human

>>40638205
Does your light come from within or without?
Do you create or consume? (Both, but I'm talking scales here)
Things like that.

>>40639582
>laaaaarp
>I’m larping!
For what purpose. Stop making shit up.

>>40636887 (OP)
Soul is the substrate of composite particularity. Nothing with parts or structure can exist without it.

>>40639824
Why exactly did you single me out? I'm on topic

Only Jews are born with souls. The goyim are soulless animals in human form which were created by God to serve the Jews.

Saars much respect. Good morning. But perhaps more responses in hindi please. Multinational site.

>>40638205
>how can I define it when it seems to shift and change so frequently? Maybe everyone is like that
I'm not like that. Souls sit on a gravitational area that is comfortable to them as they get older. I'm very aware if someone tries to make me something other than what I am.

>>40636887 (OP)
Soul is a very shitty word. Most people think "soul" literally means "emotion", if something makes them emotional, its very soulful
Some people define it as an astral body thats separate from their physical body like a spirit
Others define it as literally a conscious experience

These discussions would be better if we removed the word soul and replaced it with emotion, spirit and qualia respectively. It adds nothing except confusion

>>40639568
> ah yes, the struggle for meaning...
That’s not at all what he’s asking. Anon is wondering how to define their soul when it feels like it changes over time in relation to their own self-awareness. They are pointing out that “You” isn’t a fixed object.
> soul data, align with pure code
Do you even hear yourself? Before you post next time, read it out loud and ask yourself if you sound retarded.

>>40640857
Soul is that which accommodates particularity. Spirit is pure awareness, devoid of particularity.

>>40640678
Oh, is that what souls do? Glad we have an expert on made up concepts in here. Oh wait… everybody here is.

lmao, it's easy to answer this question

ask the spirits to tap your knee if they're listening if you feel the tap, that's all the proof you need to come to the truth that the spirits control your nerves, and can give you a heart attack anytime they please.

>>40640966
yes i hear myself but you don't hear me. pure codes exist as hyper optimized theoretical forms of everything that exists or could exist. things that in reality are beautiful, efficient, highly functional get close to the idealistic pure codes that exist in the noosphere. like i said information is primary. how do you define an evolving dataset? constant becoming. life is a process of experimental refinement of your soul ie consciousness data. actualization of pure codes, the opposite of wasted potential (which is what chaos feeds from)

information is indifferent. "waaah idk who i am my soul evolves over time", hence why i point this out as a search for meaning. get over it get used to it. literally nobody fucking cares and thats a good thing. i can say what i want even if its nonsensical to you, one mired in chaos.

>>40640976
Just say it makes you feel stupid because you don't understand. It's more honest.

>>40641203
You’re right. The complex terminology you used went over my head. What in the fuck could you possibly mean when you say souls sit in a gravitational field? My mind has been broken trying to comprehend the retardedness of your words.

>>40641144
Lay off the chatGPT. Your ass is showing.

>>40636887 (OP)

The antique and classical world understood souls to be the hierarchical ordering aspect of the human. Different from the mind and spirit. Souls are the eternal and divine part of the human that gives them the propensity for reflection, self awareness, inspiration, wisdom, and understanding.

The spirit on the other hand was understood to be the animating force, that which inspires movement and change in the soul and mind. Which is why spirits could be incorporeal or present universally in an animistic sense.

The mind to them was the rational, reasoning, and logical aspect of human experience that participated in intellect.

>>40637708
>They live their lives like their actions don’t matter,
Anon... don't a lot of the faiths live their lives on the assumption that the present life affects their afterlife? The abrahamic faiths? The Karma system? The idea of souls haunting grounds? I don't disbelieve that some people don't entertain some thoughts about there being just an ending and that's it. But, to say that people don't live their lives as if their actions don't matter is easy fact to disprove.

I appreciate the replies chiming in on this. For as long as I could remember, defining myself and engaging in introspection have always captivated me.

>>40639568
I've been adapting to my environment for a while now, and I'm always trying to develop methods to become stronger and thrive, but even still, my environment shifts as my life proceeds, and I find that was once advantageous becomes irrelevant and it seems more beneficial to change my strategy and even mindset to better suit my current conditions. But I figure there must be a commonality of the different ways that I choose to act, and I'm still trying to ascertain what that is exactly. I find that these things can take time, but assuredly, the truth will be revealed when the time is right.

>>40639607
Yes, I always try and analyze my choices in these circumstances. Sometimes I'm happy to give freely, while other times I feel justified in taking and indulging selfishly. Any other form of relfection that you'd care to share? There's always a chance that there's an angle of myself that I'm not looking at.

>>40640678
I don't feel confined by others imposing their wills on me, really. It's moreso that life is always changing and I feel myself adapting with it, and it makes me question what the real me is sometimes. I just want to be as confident as possible on who I really am, down to my core. I just feel compelled to know.

>>40640966
This is hitting on what the root of my question is, but I still value the other anon's input. But I'm a very Jungian thinker, and sometimes I get too lost in archetypes and being defined in this way or that way, even though I know I'm not meant to be pigeon-holed into a single one and that the archetypes we relate to changes as we go through life.

Lately, I've been particularly drawn to the Moon card of the tarot. In times like this, it feels impossible to sever this strong connection I feel to it, but I know it is inevitable, as it's happened many times before.