A thread about souls

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
with regard to the human soul rather interestingly the scriptures use the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, nephesh chaiyah (living soul), it is applied to Adam, when, after God formed him out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, Genesis 2 verse 7 reads 'the man [b]came to be a living soul,' ...[text shortened]... conscious entity as envisioned by the ancient Greeks and taught in many churches.[/b][/b]

Nice post will ponder this.
Kelly

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
with regard to the human soul rather interestingly the scriptures use the same Hebrew phrase used of the animal creation, namely, nephesh chaiyah (living soul), it is applied to Adam, when, after God formed him out of dust from the ground and blew into his nostrils the breath of life, Genesis 2 verse 7 reads 'the man [b]came to be a living soul,' conscious entity as envisioned by the ancient Greeks and taught in many churches.[/b][/b]

Excellent posts, both of them.

After reading your first one, I was going to add a comment about ruach and neshama (which are generally treated in Jewish thought, along with nephesh, as differing levels or aspects or perhaps nuances of “soul” )—but you beat me to it! 🙂

Although I don’t think Judaism is univocal on the question, my sense is that you’re correct that any kind of soul-body dualism is generally rejected. [I'm not sure, for example, what various rabbinical understandings might be reflected in the Oral Torah.]

Again, good posts: they will inform my own further thinking on the subject, for sure.

EDIT: I have to correct myself: there is a fairly broad stream in Judaism that adheres to transmigration of souls. That's all I can say about it at this point, though.

Originally posted by vistesd
Excellent posts, both of them.

After reading your first one, I was going to add a comment about ruach and neshama (which are generally treated in Jewish thought, along with nephesh, as differing levels or aspects or perhaps nuances of “soul” )—but you beat me to it! 🙂

Although I don’t think Judaism is univocal on the question, my that adheres to transmigration of souls. That's all I can say about it at this point, though.

awe shucks! its very refreshing to have some positive comments on the spirituality forum and i thank you both for your kindness.

as regards Judaism and the influence of Hellenistic teaching, one can only surmise at present for having done little research, however that the large Jewish population at Alexandria must to some extent have been influenced by Hellenistic thought and i read that latterly the pharisees had also i adopted the idea of an immortal soul after the Greek model, but i cannot place the reference.

my favorite biblical commentator, Alfred Edersheim, has a wonderful commentary from his publication, the life and times of the messiah, my edition published way back in 1909, without a doubt the most accurate and detailed commentary i have ever read, with many references from the Mishna and the Talmud. he has a whole section dealing with Hellenistic influence on rabbinical teaching which will yield something, me hopes - regards robbie.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
awe shucks! its very refreshing to have some positive comments on the spirituality forum and i thank you both for your kindness.

as regards Judaism and the influence of Hellenistic teaching, one can only surmise at present for having done little research, however that the large Jewish population at Alexandria must to some extent have been influ ...[text shortened]... lenistic influence on rabbinical teaching which will yield something, me hopes - regards robbie.

as regards Judaism and the influence of Hellenistic teaching, one can only surmise at present for having done little research, however that the large Jewish population at Alexandria must to some extent have been influenced by Hellenistic thought and i read that latterly the pharisees had also i adopted the idea of an immortal soul after the Greek model, but i cannot place the reference.

That makes some sense. I, like you, have not done enough research there. Philo of Alexandria was very influenced by Greek thought.

Well, anything else I could say would just be speculating out loud at this point. There does seem to be a period of rich cross-fertilization of thought between Judaism(s) and Greek thought in the diaspora and Galilee especially, but also in Judea as well, around that general period.

This is all very helpful to me, Robbie, truly in my current deepening studies in rabbinical Judaism broadly. Thanks.

EDIT: It may take me awhile, but I'll look into Edersheim.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Hebrews 4:12 (New International Version)

12For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

I believe the two are different and here is why.
Kelly

That is a very good point, KJ. I shall have to change my position on that. 🙂

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
in original language terms, ' Hebrew nephesh and Greek psykhe. as used [b]in the Scriptures these show 'soul to be a person, an animal, or the life that a person or an animal enjoys.[/b]

I notice that you do not mention plants. Do you think they do not have souls? Do you think a soul is in any way tied to the ability to think or consciousness? I am just trying to establish where the line is drawn between living beings with souls and living beings without souls.

Originally posted by twhitehead
1. If a human being is divided into two separate conscious entities is the humans soul split into two? If yes then can the two resulting souls have different destinations after death?
2. If two human beings are combined into one (an organ transplant for example), then are their souls combined? If only one soul was previously 'saved' then will the other one now get a 'free ride'?

2 depends where the souls is archived. if it is spread among organs i would say corruption of data occurs. my guess is that the soul resides within the brain.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
2 depends where the souls is archived. if it is spread among organs i would say corruption of data occurs. my guess is that the soul resides within the brain.

So when you say "THE soul", you are saying you feel there is for sure a soul?
If so, are humans the only ones on earth with souls?

Originally posted by sonhouse
So when you say "THE soul", you are saying you feel there is for sure a soul?
If so, are humans the only ones on earth with souls?

i am guessing that in order to be an afterlife, something must survive, which we call soul. souls should be the sum of psychic traits and experiences accumulated, developed in the time spent on earth(or any other planet in the universe for the aliens). if so, i see no reason why souls should be restricted to humans. at the very least each being capable of free will should have one.

i am thinking that Hindus might have a good idea. a soul accumulates knowledge and understanding in order to prepare for eternity. for this matter i would say every living organism on earth has a soul, even a tree. so each soul get several chances at life until it achieves that understanding or wastes his chances at which point some kind of hell is in store. it doesn't seem relevant to damn or save a soul for eternity based on just one lifetime. also it isn't fair that a soul is damned for eating pork on fridays or being born in a remote island and not receiving jesus(Praise Jesus) into their hearts. also standards for redemption change.

who knows what kind of operation is god running. i have spoken about what i would find desirable.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
2 depends where the souls is archived. if it is spread among organs i would say corruption of data occurs. my guess is that the soul resides within the brain.

As far as I know there is nothing that rules out the possibility of doing a half brain transplant. The question then is whether the new consciousness thus created have a new soul?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
i am guessing that in order to be an afterlife, something must survive, which we call soul. souls should be the sum of psychic traits and experiences accumulated, developed in the time spent on earth(or any other planet in the universe for the aliens). if so, i see no reason why souls should be restricted to humans. at the very least each being capable of free will should have one.

But where is that information being stored? Clearly not in the brain as it is supposedly not lost even when the brain looses all its memory. Does it mean that after we die we then remember everything that has happened to us throughout our lives? Wouldn't that make me a rather different being than I am now? Would I really be interested in getting such a being (that is not me) into heaven?

.... even a tree.
So a soul doesn't reside in the brain. Once we let plants have souls then we run into all sorts of problems surrounding my questions regarding divisibility etc. I mean a plant that reproduces vegetatively could easily have a soul which is thousands of years old and covers whole continents!

Originally posted by twhitehead
As far as I know there is nothing that rules out the possibility of doing a half brain transplant. The question then is whether the new consciousness thus created have a new soul?

depends. where is our personality stored? will we have memories of the previous brain? if we get a full brain transplant without transferring all of the previous brain data, do we still get to live, or is the new brain living?


anyway, i doubt the soul would be divisible or that is attached to any physical part of the body.

Originally posted by twhitehead
But where is that information being stored? Clearly not in the brain as it is supposedly not lost even when the brain looses all its memory. Does it mean that after we die we then remember everything that has happened to us throughout our lives? Wouldn't that make me a rather different being than I am now? Would I really be interested in getting such a be ...[text shortened]... tatively could easily have a soul which is thousands of years old and covers whole continents!

each living organism would have it's own soul once it comes into existence in my theory.

"Does it mean that after we die we then remember everything that has happened to us throughout our lives? Wouldn't that make me a rather different being than I am now? Would I really be interested in getting such a being (that is not me) into heaven?"
my theory works as this: you accumulate knowledge throughout your lives. it is important that you don't remember anything from past lives while alive. once in the train station towards the next life you get to sort through all your baggage and decide if you are ready for the next level of existence. now you are indeed a different person that you would be in the train station. but the real you is that one, not this one. this is just a temporary condition.

hmm this might become a standalone discussion, matrix style. it is turning out to be complex.

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
each living organism would have it's own soul once it comes into existence in my theory.

But what constitutes a 'living organism'? We are all made up of cells and those cells are perfectly capable of living independently of the whole. Plants and fungi demonstrate this ability so dramatically that any such concept would collapse completely. Are you saying that every event of sexual reproduction results in a new soul, or if I break the leaf of a plant and it grows into a new plant is a new soul created? Is a new soul created every time a leaf falls off a tree?

In the case of humans, identical twins start off as a single organism with presumably a single soul. So when they divide, do they continue to share a soul? If one twins soul commits sin, is the others soul equally punished?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
2 depends where the souls is archived. if it is spread among organs i would say corruption of data occurs. my guess is that the soul resides within the brain.

i must amend my post😀

"my guess is that the soul resides within the brain." must be modified to read "my guess is that the soul resides within the brain if the souls had to reside anywhere"

probably the soul is an attachment that doesn't depend on an organ. as long as the organism is considered alive, the soul should remain in place.