Enlightenment

I agree. Some report that each soul chooses the life it inhabits. Chooses as in assuming a role or creating a role? Also, what of the inbetween lives? Where are the memories and knowledge of existing as pure consciousness? Is that stored in the soul? Can we access that information while here on earth? Past life regression never seems to reveal that information, at least I haven’t heard of it.

Karpal tunnel , Wendy Darling : choice would not be possible if, birth and death would not result in a trait change, ( karmic and genetic) and the structural dynamic would not afford a choice- of roles. Although on the primary level. of intentions Your thoughts are arguably valid, but from the higher level of of goals it can not merge with it. Development is most probably goal oriented

Without that, knowledge between good and evil could not be revealed, because a necessary stasis would result, on account of typing if traits would remain at a structural stand still.

I know it has to begin somewhere, and where, is one of those hidden miracles.

It would be a waste to discern animal from man in absolute terms of a conscious manifestation of a role that a soul could make.(as opposed to a Soul)

This is arguing backwards from a given we all agreed to so far.(The givens are admission of soul, conscious sole, and a Super Soul) Given that even admittedly animals also have souls)

Or not? But the minute You admit duplicity into it, we are back at a primary level of a structureless dynamic of near absolute stasis.

Or not?

This encapsulates my opening of the promise to begin on some level, whwrein all three contributions bring forth the dynamics of how evolution of types does not conflict with Darwin or Huxley. They probably omitted the spiritual element on purpose.
,

Because of the complex nature of Your questions , they have to be taken up separately and more explicitly in my opinion.

Soul admitted. One soul. Are you referring to two or three types of souls per being? And what is the difference between the conscious soul and the Super Soul?

Good. Thanks.

The soul is One, true, but vegetable, animal and human soul, if the exist, operate on different levels.
They may have connections, but their operation as conscesniess per se, have different potentials for realization.

There are beliefs of soul travel intergenus, however that is less probable then otherwise.

There are many perspectives to the term ‘enlightenment’ since this is a R&S forum I will assume we are referring to ‘Spiritual Enlightenment’.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enlightenment_(spiritual

The root word of the term is;
Enlighten: give (someone) greater knowledge and understanding about a subject or situation.

I believe spiritual enlightenment covers the following aspects;

  1. Theoretical knowledge of enlightenment - ‘what’
  2. Practical knowledge of ‘how’
  3. Personal experiences

The Eastern religions and philosophies interpret ‘enlightenment’ in terms of liberation [moksha], detachment-nothingness [sunyata] and the likes.
But what are we to liberate and detach from?

Human beings evolved within a continuum of living things.
Non-humans living things are driven by its inherent nature and instincts without being able to consciously worry about threats in the future and other self-conscious & moral concerns. They go naked and f… whenever and wherever they are driven to.

Humans are the ONLY living beings that are endowed with strong self-awareness to worry about future threats and intrinsic moral obligations. The worse threat that effect human subconsciously is the ‘threat of mortality’ manifesting as an existential dilemma that generate Angst within humans. In addition there is the inherent moral drive within that will cause. mental conflicts. There are other conflicting impulses human beings has to deal with.

I believe spiritual enlightenment [of various degrees] is the cultivated competence [via theory, practice and experience] to face the inevitable existential threats and conflicting impulses with equanimity, act morally & wisely and live in all aspects of life optimally. Note ‘cultivated’ means achieving the right neural connections in correspondence to the level of competence.

For example an highly enlightened person will not be swayed by the various conscious manifestation of the existential threat of mortality. In contrast, an unenlightened person will not know the basis of the existential reactions and thus turned to an illusory God and even will kill to please God. This is merely one example, there are many within the full range of life.

I don’t think there is a rule about the in-between states. I think different individuals experience different things. I have experiences of the inbetween state, memories that is, and I did not find it pleasant. Like being in a washing machine. It’s not pure consciousnessness, per se, but a jumbled spiritual state. LIkely others experience more placid times there.

Could you perhaps reword these points; I really can’t understand what you are saying.

Why don’t you think there is a rule about in between states? At any rate, I never thought that all planes of pure consciousness are the same so not all will experience the same. I would however relish hearing or reading more about purely conscious places. Mind sharing more of what you mean by in between? What does a jumbled spiritual state look like, feel like?

  1. I hear different experiences from different people. 2) I don’t see why there would be sudden enlightenment or purity or sameness after death. That person has gone through its particular life and carries its particular confusions, desires, needs, etc.

The Tibetan Book of the Dead has one version of in-between.

I googled memories between lives and got…earth-association.org/artic … tomlinson/

You could find a regression person and ask to focus on the in-between states.

In-between as in in between incarnations.

Could you perhaps reword these points; I really can’t understand what you are saying.[u

The traits, we are born with are the result of an accumulation of so calledvinherited ones. Darwin limits these to physical traits, and omits 'spiritual-cognitive traits. Being a materialist, and I am guessing here, he may not want to delve into spiritual traits, but if he were to do so, he would most certainly be a reductionist, by treating spiritual, (in the broad sense),types as a psychologism, as did Jung, for instance.
But he was not a psychologist, and ideas such as those which consist of Karmic Laws, do not interest him.
This is why , even in the minimal sense, he would take up Wendy’s idea of Roles, not as an inherited trait, but a phenomenal structural one, and he would assert the clean slate of every newly born human. He would arguably be unprepared to deal with the psyche in any other way, other then a determinist would, as a product of measurable cause and effect.

At the primal level, this cause and effect is binary, and evolutionary theory for him does. It include a natural plan by design, toward which evolution is progressing, but simply the product of natural selection,with choice limited by various factors, but usually choosing a course of and through the most adaptive lineage.

If a conscious Being can arguably have some psychic imprint from previous lives, then the theory of psychic types makes sense. On that level, and from that level, an ex-post facto argument can support the idea of past lives as basis from which psychic evolution makes sense

Karpel, will you share your in between experiences? I’m gonna check out your link.

Any specific recommendations?

Meno wrote

What is a psychic imprint? What is this psychic evolution?

What I found interesting about astral projecting to the plane of peace is that when I asked if I had lived a life as a human, my life was revealed in a black and white montage without any emotional context, very matter-o-factly without my biases or beliefs. Very strange indeed to view one’s life from such a detached vantage point. When you have no human body, no human needs to be satisfied or experienced, I arrived on that plane without any emotional baggage, lacking all memories of my life until I asked for proof.

sorry my answer ended up in the wrong place
I hope Kerpel doesent mind my interjection.at times, and I offer the idea that aspects of this theme convoluted relevance at this level.

I believe that answers to that question is effected by the primal perceptive logic of the beginning state, this is why, at the animal stage, very few animals can think except in nominal, binary affects. as most thought is occupied and imprinted from the fight or flight basic existential threat.

I don’t understand any of what is above. What is a beginning state? Do you think souls evolve?

I’ve been asking a lot of questions hoping for you to fill in the blanks with your opinions, learned or otherwise, but am missing your responses.

Sure, ill retrace and respond accordingly, as I can .

Wendy, I retraced the whole forum and found that I answered. most questions, except some addresses to Karpal.

Basically the word " imprint’ comes to mind, and although I adapted that word from a class I attended on imprint of behavior upon chickens in a pay h class , where f newly born exposed to a human being beofe to the mother hen, will follow. the person, as of they were their mother
)

This sense of am imprint is behavior cognitive, whereas imprints on the soul follow cognitive ideas through death and the Bardo state to rebirth.

This question remained less undefined, because it’s not provable by the similar bit not identical behaviorist model
It is proof by analogy, and You are questioning the appropriateness of using that analogy, if i understand You. Correctly.

Ideas in the form of four virtues imprinted on each person’s soul as written in the Bible some where courtesy of Pilgrim Tom’s knowledge. I think they are justice, prudence, temperance, and fortitude, but I’m not certain since I located it under Catholicism.