Is there an infinite or a finite number of souls?

ReasonBear

The Force is Strong With This One
a living system/universe which always seeks progress and expansion over "time"
This idea was popularized by the church, and is commonly called the big-bang theory or the ever-expanding theory, but I ask you Carl - what part of the bovine kingdom is constantly expanding? Are elephants so prolific they threaten the viability of the entire planet? What about deer? Or antelope? Or tigers or trees? These populations remain in symbiosis with the natural world. All populations remain in balance with the natural world - all except ours.

Population, which is to say incarnation cannot be driven from 'the other side'. The disincarnate soul can't possibly cause incarnation to occur. This is not beyond us. We just need to think it through: Humans ovulate with a perfectly regular frequency. Our organs drive the process that results in a soul being drawn to Earth every 28 days. With every moon (every month) a new soul is drawn into each living vessel, and there are billions of organs carrying trillions of future vessels walking around at this point in 'time'.

Vessels within vessels - that's what we are. My mother was a vessel. Her ovary was a vessel, and my ova was/is the vessel this soul continues to occupy. Within me is another vessel containing hundreds more vessels which will depart with the frequency of a mechanical timepiece, but I am not a machine! There is something very wrong with this whole entire picture.

Which comes first, Carl - the race car or the driver? Mechanics and pit crews begin working at the track while the driver is still asleep at the hotel, for there's no need to summon an operator until the vehicle (vessel) is ready to roll. Once everything is primed and oiled, warmed up and ready to go - the driver and vessel merge to become one. The driver doesn't choose the timing, we merely respond to a greater power.

It seems to me that a new soul is drawn into flesh every time a new vehicle hits the fallopian track, but the soul doesn't become fully 'functional' or 'awake' unless touched by the masculine 'spark' or 'catalyst'. That doesn't make these 'sleeping souls' any less valuable or precious than souls who receive the spark of 'life'. If anything they are more so.

They represent the epitome of vulnerability. They have no way to return to celestia, which means they remain trapped 'here' somehow, and we have no idea how 'many' there are, but if we do the math it's easy to see that for every soul who's ever walked the Earth, dozens if not hundreds of times more became trapped by the monthly passage. You and I will live and die - and that's our ticket back to celestia or the other side or whatever you want to call it. The souls I speak of have no way to return. This imbues us with an inconceivable level of responsibility. If we don't speak and act on their behalf, who will?
 

flashgordonv

Jedi Council Member
FOTCM Member
This idea was popularized by the church, and is commonly called the big-bang theory or the ever-expanding theory, but I ask you Carl - what part of the bovine kingdom is constantly expanding? Are elephants so prolific they threaten the viability of the entire planet? What about deer? Or antelope? Or tigers or trees? These populations remain in symbiosis with the natural world. All populations remain in balance with the natural world - all except ours.

Population, which is to say incarnation cannot be driven from 'the other side'. The disincarnate soul can't possibly cause incarnation to occur. This is not beyond us. We just need to think it through: Humans ovulate with a perfectly regular frequency. Our organs drive the process that results in a soul being drawn to Earth every 28 days. With every moon (every month) a new soul is drawn into each living vessel, and there are billions of organs carrying trillions of future vessels walking around at this point in 'time'.

Vessels within vessels - that's what we are. My mother was a vessel. Her ovary was a vessel, and my ova was/is the vessel this soul continues to occupy. Within me is another vessel containing hundreds more vessels which will depart with the frequency of a mechanical timepiece, but I am not a machine! There is something very wrong with this whole entire picture.

Which comes first, Carl - the race car or the driver? Mechanics and pit crews begin working at the track while the driver is still asleep at the hotel, for there's no need to summon an operator until the vehicle (vessel) is ready to roll. Once everything is primed and oiled, warmed up and ready to go - the driver and vessel merge to become one. The driver doesn't choose the timing, we merely respond to a greater power.

It seems to me that a new soul is drawn into flesh every time a new vehicle hits the fallopian track, but the soul doesn't become fully 'functional' or 'awake' unless touched by the masculine 'spark' or 'catalyst'. That doesn't make these 'sleeping souls' any less valuable or precious than souls who receive the spark of 'life'. If anything they are more so.

They represent the epitome of vulnerability. They have no way to return to celestia, which means they remain trapped 'here' somehow, and we have no idea how 'many' there are, but if we do the math it's easy to see that for every soul who's ever walked the Earth, dozens if not hundreds of times more became trapped by the monthly passage. You and I will live and die - and that's our ticket back to celestia or the other side or whatever you want to call it. The souls I speak of have no way to return. This imbues us with an inconceivable level of responsibility. If we don't speak and act on their behalf, who will?
Wow. There are a bunch of assumptions in there, methinks. Who says incarnation cannot be driven from outside of 3D? What immense power you gift to the 3D world and its inhabitants. Who says a new soul is drawn into flesh every time an egg hits the fallopian tube? Who says there are millions of souls trapped when eggs are not fertilised? And lets not forget that the Cs talk about 50% of the population being OPs. Your response is passionate but I don't see any data to back it up other than your dissection of the reproductive cycle.
 

Nienna

SuperModerator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
This is what the Cs had to say about souls in Session 950107:

Q: (V) Okay, if we are getting off of personal
stuff here, and moving on to more
generalized... I would like to know... there is
a common knowledge kind of thing among
metaphysical people that when a soul is born
onto the planet, that soul, that little baby, has
infinite knowledge, and as we grow and
learn we were conditioned to lose our
knowledge, is this true?
A: No.
Q: (L) How could a baby have infinite
knowledge, it only has imprint of its past life
experiences. (V) You have heard that also...
A: That is nonsense.
Q: (V) That's fine... I was just... I'm sure
you've heard that...
A: Souls are not "born" into this planet.
Souls were never born! And, will never die!

Q: (V) I understand, my question was loose;
I'm sorry. (D) Are there any new souls being
created?
A: Just answered if you use your head. D***
does not know the real concept of "time."
 

ReasonBear

The Force is Strong With This One
I don't see any data to back it up other than your dissection of the reproductive cycle.
This is a perfectly clear articulation of the collective human mind. We've been conditioned to ignore what we see in favor of something else - something called data. Your use of the word 'dissection' brings to mind a cadaver laid open on a table, and I imagine you turning away from the Life I'm trying to describe, while demanding that I show you a book instead. I can totally empathize with you. Hopefully, I'll actually write one someday.

You agree that I've displayed life's most important subject, yet you disagree with my conclusions, which are more observation than anything else. Actually, you don't really disagree, you just challenge me, which is cool, too. It's the Reason I'm here, so please Bear with me:)

You asked: "Who says a new soul is drawn into flesh every time an egg hits the fallopian tube? Who says there are millions of souls trapped when eggs are not fertilised?", and I would answer "I do" despite the fact that nobody else will.

Conversely, I would ask you who says that somebody has to say anything in order for it to be True? Is this the meaning of the phrase "In the beginning was the word"? Are you implying that nothing can be unless somebody says so? Of course not. You're just saying that some internet Rando doesn't have any power to influence your beliefs, which is cool, too, because the lunar period is what it is and mankind will either come to see it or we won't. All I'm trying to do is help, and believe me it ain't easy, so I'll refer back to the church.

On All Souls Day in 451 AD Pope Leo made a public statement to enforce the church's authority over so-called heretics at the council of Chalcedon. In the act of refuting non-christian beliefs about divinity and mankind's true nature, the 'definitions of the faith' was published, which clearly asserted the church's position on human hyper-fertility: A coarse translation of one of the phrases reads: "The divinity is not passable".

Reading this statement 'backwards' or 'in a mirror' reveals what I believe to be the truth of All Souls' situation here on Earth. The divinity is indeed passable, but divinity is not the kind of 'thing' which ought to be wasted! Something else must be going on. Trapped seems more likely than passed (If every egg doesn't contain a soul, then which do and which don't? Why exit the ovary if not to begin the process of incarnation?)

Perhaps feeling powerless in the past cultural leaders purposely distracted us from the awful truth of our collective reality by simply refuting that which was once commonly known and replacing it with mythologies which eventually grew so diversified they could banner the phrase 'food for the moon' right in our faces and we wouldn't even remember what it means.

Somewhere along the line they gave us the idea of a 'prison' called Hell, and a few hundred years later William Blake installed the fire and brimstone, which are clearly associated with heat and pressure, both of which Earth physically experiences as a result of the moon's presence.

There's a force which impels this planet through space around the sun, but we don't have a word for it. Does that mean this force doesn't exist? We call it inertia, but that description totally relies on the big-bang theory, which will forever remain an untestable theory. The fact is Earth ought to move at a certain speed, but she can't. She used to spin at a certain speed - one fast enough to reduce gravity enough to allow capillary action high enough to support gigantic organic and cellular structures from our past (dinosaurs, giant trees and giant people). So what happened? The moon arrived and slowed everything down.

It seems the moon exerts more pulling force against Earth's surface than the deep underground layers. We have no idea what's down there - again we have only theories. I have no idea in what state or condition 'all souls' are, or even 'where' they are, but what the moon is doing to Earth physically creates the type of conditions -heat and pressure - we've come to associate with Hell.

The following Nature article (Moon’s pull can trigger big earthquakes) provides a bit of authority and insight into what I'm saying about physical effects. They certainly can't corroborate all I've said, but they admit serious negative consequences of having the moon here, at least from the perspective of the whole Earth. After all, if one were to try empathize with the planet proper - we feel that it's no fun having your continents ripped apart through friction and your poles (where lush vegetation once thrived) frozen solid. Human flesh is 70% water after all. If we follow the water, we ought to find the source of the soul.

Earth isn't the kind of place I would choose to incarnate upon, which is how I came to the conclusion I didn't have a choice. You and I represent the luckiest group of Earthlings - with our internet and hot running water - while billions of people struggle daily just to survive. If any of us had a choice, we'd all choose to be born wealthy, but precious few of us are. As far back as thousands of years ago, Pythagoras, whos name means 'I am the snake' ran a secret school which studied and probably tried to manipulate what they called 'the transmigration of souls'. I don't know how successful they were, but I am interested in the after-life effects of immolation, because it seems to have been reserved for certain church figures with very close ties to those holding the torch. Just a little fire for thought. :)
 

ReasonBear

The Force is Strong With This One
This is what the Cs had to say about souls in Session 950107:
Thank you! I wasn't sure how to look this up.

You guys might be interested to know that human embryos are unique in that we never fully implant within the endometrium, so we share a less-than-perfect connection to our mother's blood supply during gestation, when compared with other mammals. Perhaps this has some negative effect on our collective memory
 

John G

The Living Force
(If every egg doesn't contain a soul, then which do and which don't? Why exit the ovary if not to begin the process of incarnation?)
Technically every particle could be thought of as a first density soul. I doubt an egg is quite ready to house a third density soul; it doesn't even have all its genetics yet to fit with.

Perhaps feeling powerless in the past cultural leaders purposely distracted us from the awful truth of our collective reality by simply refuting that which was once commonly known and replacing it with mythologies
Well for things like comets, the mythologies were actually recording what was commonly known in the the way they commonly knew it.

Somewhere along the line they gave us the idea of a 'prison' called Hell, and a few hundred years later William Blake installed the fire and brimstone, which are clearly associated with heat and pressure, both of which Earth physically experiences as a result of the moon's presence.
Comets are even more hellish and could be taken as a warning about paths leading back to a reboot as a first density soul.

There's a force which impels this planet through space around the sun, but we don't have a word for it. Does that mean this force doesn't exist? We call it inertia, but that description totally relies on the big-bang theory, which will forever remain an untestable theory. The fact is Earth ought to move at a certain speed, but she can't. She used to spin at a certain speed - one fast enough to reduce gravity enough to allow capillary action high enough to support gigantic organic and cellular structures from our past (dinosaurs, giant trees and giant people). So what happened? The moon arrived and slowed everything down.
Gravity could certainly be different but I tend to think the moon arriving as being too long ago for this. I certainly have favorite ideas for inertial mass and gravitational mass and yes I don't expect them to be verified any time soon. I wouldn't say inertia/gravity for the sun/moon/earth are overly directly a big-bang thing like the expansion of the universe and its relation to the cosmological constant/beginning entropy/dark energy.

It seems the moon exerts more pulling force against Earth's surface than the deep underground layers. We have no idea what's down there - again we have only theories. I have no idea in what state or condition 'all souls' are, or even 'where' they are, but what the moon is doing to Earth physically creates the type of conditions -heat and pressure - we've come to associate with Hell.

The following Nature article (Moon’s pull can trigger big earthquakes) provides a bit of authority and insight into what I'm saying about physical effects. They certainly can't corroborate all I've said, but they admit serious negative consequences of having the moon here, at least from the perspective of the whole Earth. After all, if one were to try empathize with the planet proper - we feel that it's no fun having your continents ripped apart through friction and your poles (where lush vegetation once thrived) frozen solid. Human flesh is 70% water after all. If we follow the water, we ought to find the source of the soul.

Earth isn't the kind of place I would choose to incarnate upon, which is how I came to the conclusion I didn't have a choice.
Well maybe you realized before coming here that we need more than fun and games to learn by.

after-life effects of immolation, because it seems to have been reserved for certain church figures with very close ties to those holding the torch. Just a little fire for thought. :)
Maybe our internal eternal phosphoric flames will burn brighter after some kind of change to our environment.
 

Bastian

Jedi Council Member
I doubt an egg is quite ready to house a third density soul; it doesn't even have all its genetics yet to fit with.
Indeed. According to different readings of mine (the last is : The big book of NDE), the souls would come into the foetus around 26 weeks (6 and a half months) after the conception.
 

ReasonBear

The Force is Strong With This One
Technically every particle could be thought of as a first density soul.
That would mean there's a soul in my ashtray. Or a collection of souls. I just don't see how that kind of thinking is useful. I know it's a popular point of view, but I just don't believe its helpful. What we experience while in this form is an ashtray - a tool and potentially a weapon. You can say it's full of molecules or calories or angels but it's still just a piece of glass. It embodies no divinity, unlike human ova, which aren't just common 'cells' or' molecules' - ova are the seed of future generations.

Wait, what? If we examine life in its most fundamental terms, we find the feminine form always carries the seeds of future generations - never the masculine. We can call them whatever we want - seeds, eggs, pits, stones or nuts - but the truth of the matter is that they are quite literally the seeds of life, and they reside within the female of each and every species.

Why then, do we say that men disseminate human seed? Is it because people are smart enough to put a man on the moon, but too stupid to understand the everyday miracle of procreation? I don't think so. I believe that each of us given the right circumstances would be able to see the world without words. This whole human egg-plus-seed debacle is a mindFu@% of the highest order, probably originating with the story of Oram in the bible. God smote him down for 'spilling seeds' he didn't even carry! The whole entire subject is 'cursed' - purposely designed/framed to invoke artificial emotions to distract our attention.

Regardless of species, She is the vessel for future generations. She carries the seeds/eggs/pits/stones/nuts/children. The masculine form of the species carries the spark of life, which is no less divine. Each male can potentially ignite thousands of new souls, while she is limited in how many she can carry, and is frequently born with a lifetime supply already formed within her.

If we're going to talk about cells which we can't see, we need a good understanding of what they do, or what they are. The human ova is a single cell which divides all by itself into two cells, and then, four, sixteen, etc. until eventually the cells begin to specialize themselves into arms and legs and ova - all by themselves. The unseen force which directs this differentiation is likely the same force responsible for individual cell replacement/renewal later on in life, the malfunctioning of which is commonly known as cancer.

There are certain things we're not supposed to know because other people profit by helping us navigate our ignorance. I believe the sheer magnitude of this whole human seed/egg debacle constitutes literary misdirection. It was purposeful, and it was done to us for a Reason - because 'they' don't want us to 'see' all the souls.
 

A Jay

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
That would mean there's a soul in my ashtray. Or a collection of souls. I just don't see how that kind of thinking is useful. I know it's a popular point of view, but I just don't believe its helpful. What we experience while in this form is an ashtray - a tool and potentially a weapon. You can say it's full of molecules or calories or angels but it's still just a piece of glass. It embodies no divinity, unlike human ova, which aren't just common 'cells' or' molecules' - ova are the seed of future generations.
Not a soul or souls proper, obviously. But according to Whitehead, Dembski, and others the only way for us to explain how humans and animals can have any awareness at all is if there is awareness, of some kind, all the way down at the most basic and fundamental units of matter.

As to how this kind of thinking is useful, you could use it to support your own position that human ova are sacred but your ashtray is not.

If all things have some level of awareness and some have more than others, then there is a hierarchy of awareness wherein those things with a higher level of awareness have a deeper and richer inner experience than those below it and thus have a higher the intrinsic value. If human ova have the potential of becoming something with great intrinsic value, then they are of a higher value than an ashtray which has only the most minimal intrinsic value and cannot attain anything higher.

Additionally, if all matter has some level of awareness, then there is no such thing as dead matter. Which is useful in its ability to defend your position of the sacredness of life against those rabid materialists who would argue that you are a biological machine whose internal experience is a wholly illusory byproduct of chemical reactions and thus there is no special or significant difference between you and an ashtray.
 

ReasonBear

The Force is Strong With This One
Additionally, if all matter has some level of awareness, then there is no such thing as dead matter.
Sorry if I'm not using this quote/response thing correctly. I'm hoping this views as a reply to A Jay because that was the most articulate and insightful presentation of the subject I've ever seen. I don't agree with it, but it was beautiful!

You see there is such a thing as dead matter, at least with regard to our common living experience, and this provides an elegant intro to a difficult subject. I believe, perhaps because I was taught, that we ought to be able to expand our fundamental beliefs to the greatest possible application - the maxim - and the more widely applicable a belief was the more likely it was to be 'true'. It's also a slippery slope because we tend to fall victim to things like generalization, cognitive bias, heuristics, etc., to the extent where we might apply characteristics to the environment which aren't actually 'true'.

Anyway the magic wand falls into this dead category. It was formerly living. It wouldn't exist without it's prior fluid form, yet now that the water supply is disconnected it remains forever static, yet it's not just another 'thing' created by the hands of man (like a statue)- it's naturally-occurring. Not like a stone, which always was and always will be a stone as far as our own perceptual experience is concerned, but something else. Some other category of life, each one an imaginary box to contain our thoughts, created by a magic spell, for words and their spelling influence our thoughts very much.

During the course of my Reasoning, I found many examples of how mere beliefs that we hold in our minds (often in the form of even lesser theories) could influence each other. The greatest example of this resides among the mini-moons of Mars and the minds of Charles Darwin and Edwin D. Babbit - two great thinkers of the late 19th century - when Mars' so-called moons were discovered.

They were given the Latin names Fear and Dread, despite the fact that neither of them is bigger than Nantucket (15 miles). The classification of these orbiting asteroids as 'moons' (Earth's is 2,000 miles) is akin to lacking a linguistic distinction between kayaks and battleships, but neither Darwin nor Babbit were able to put them into context, relying instead upon the word of those who specialized in the subject. Which specialist? Or witch specialist?

You see by the mere act of naming (spelling) something we cast an impression upon everyone else. Remember the beginning of the John Carter movie? The narrator says something like "Mars...you think you know something just because you've named it...". I'm certain Burroughs was really talking about moons, because Carter's exploration company was called Two Moons, and they played a part in the story itself.

Where Burroughs was able to see them for what they are and quite literally keep them in perspective, both Darwin and Babbit allowed the belief that 'Mars has moon(s), too' to influence their understanding of Earth. They concluded that moon(s) must be a natural occurrence. Wherever there is a living planet, there must be a moon(s). Mars must have been alive at some point in the past. All of these would be perfectly Reasonable conclusions if Mars had anything that even closely resembled 'the moon', but it doesn't. Not even close. Such is the power of words.

If we examine the entire solar system we find that everything flies around the sun in the same direction and on the same plane, which is called the ecliptic. The planets also spin around their own center, again all in the same direction. Now, the orientation of each planet's equator to the ecliptic is very telling because Earth, the only wet, living planet that we know of, is tilted very much. The Obliquity of the Ecliptic made a brief appearance in an episode of Sherlock - the one which sympathized with menopause-aged women murdering their scientist husbands, if I'm not mistaken - The Abominable Bride.

I believe we need to draw the line somewhere in order to truly understand living experience, and I believe that line ought to be as close to perceptual reality as possible. We can't reasonably say that all the planets are alive to some degree, just because all of them have a slightly skewed ecliptic alignment, because we aren't finding different degrees of life or different amounts of life, we're finding no life, which is exactly the case with the moon, yet even though it carries no life, it seems to exhibit celestial behavior. A benign rock simply floating in space would eventually rotate around on some direction or other, but it never does. None of them do, which I believe demonstrates a relationship very much like parasites feeding off a 'host planet' (the term scientists actually use).

My own theory is more heliocentric - It seems to me the moon is actually consuming the sun (Sol) some crazy how by accelerating process of incarnation of (either new or smaller) souls here on Earth, with the expectation that not all of us will be able to actually incarnate, and so many of us will end up getting caught in the trap/weir/well/hell. If Hollywood is any place to look for clues, the sound of their screams (or other emotional emissions) would be its equivalent of nourishment. Yes, dear friends, if you Google the word 'lunatic' you'll find my picture. That doesn't mean I'm wrong.

I really appreciate your comment, A Jay. There's a form of photonic light which resides within us (Fritz Albert-Popp), and it likely resides within other animals and plants, too. I believe the sun is the ultimate source of this Light - that we are one-and-the-same. Perhaps light or fire/metabolism could be our litmus-paper for life.
 

gdpetti

Jedi Council Member
If free will or individuality is just a concept for the Unknown to know Itself, then 'soul' is merely a tool for this desire to 'know', right? That's the way I think of it... .as Ra would put it as the unmanifest becoming manifest.... others would add in split as half remained conscious and the other half go 'asleep'.... in order to allow the other half to 'play' with the sleepy half... male/female or yin/yang dynamic.... It's really all just The One, right? so what is 'soul' anyway, but a tool to 'know thyself'? Time and space are in the same category of tools of this knowing.... how many times to know thyself? in what ways etc.... at which level of awareness etc..... which is simultaneous as it's all the same 'soul' from the center axis of the Tree of Life position.... which is all unified consciousness at the very top.... keeping knowledge of all the experiences of this knowing by their puppet or soul selves... sent out to build a mirror and then look at itself in any and every way possible....

How many 'souls'? as many as are deemed necessary at the moment, which is eternally the same moment really.... from unified's point of view.... wouldn't these 'souls' be like our body's cells? they come and go as needed, as engineered for the moment or s/t - t/s situational experience that had to be setup and engineered into existence as well... as in the end, it's really just the 'creator' playing with itself....as creation... awake and asleep...

Isn't 'soul' just a concept? a thought form for knowing? That was my understanding or take on the various statements I've encountered.... the fractal soul is just a continuation of the same, right? It's all One..... the experiences or 'gifts' as individuated 'soul' units maintained as memories... you never know what might be useful in the past/present/future... and which might keep this spark of desire to know itself alive and continuing to spread... within, without... all the same, right? Didn't the C's have something to say on this in regards to L's question once... .they used the slide carousel concept for soul unit experiences, right?... all a memory of experience for 7d.... which is itself just the first step out of unity.. as free will started... in thought... later into form as we know it.

Something like that... all of which is an ungoing attempt to know thyself, right? Isn't this where our questions and answers come from? blame it all on Gravity... even the EU theory folks haven't gotten that far down the rabbit hole yet... they need more 'time'.;-)
 

Breo

Jedi Master
FOTCM Member
As a not being a native speaker in English this has really deepened my understanding on the thought - word relationship:

Some other category of life, each one an imaginary box to contain our thoughts, created by a magic spell, for words and their spelling influence our thoughts very much
[...]
You see by the mere act of naming (spelling) something we cast an impression upon everyone else[...]
Like: Beware of your thoughts. If you spell them carelessly they will turn into spells.

My thoughts then were: This act of in - formation is shaping. This can stem from knowledge sticking as close as possible to perceptual reality. Or from wishfulness. One way or the other and all shades inbetween has consequences in in-forming our trans/personal world.

I believe we need to draw the line somewhere in order to truly understand living experience, and I believe that line ought to be as close to perceptual reality as possible.
Indeed.
And it seems we have to train to apply here what has already been given to us by nature's law. If I got that right referring to what the C's say about souls never are born or die and that souls in-form through our unconscious this could be the line that we have to learn to cross again and again to develop an antenna to receive the stream of information for to be able to evaluate cause and effect of our thought process that shapes/creates reality.


A benign rock simply floating in space would eventually rotate around on some direction or other, but it never does. None of them do, which I believe demonstrates a relationship very much like parasites feeding off a 'host planet' (the term scientists actually use).
Could you elaborate on that. I don't understand the connection between a free floating rock in space and a parasitic relationship?
 

Luks

Dagobah Resident
FOTCM Member
The C's say about 7th Density, as the highest density, which is the place with Union with The One, is infinite, is "everything" what exists.

The 7th Density is the final destiny of all beings when they finish their lessons on the lower level of the densities.

I would propose, seeing the 7th Density as the One Big Soul, which can be imagined as the cloud expand through the all possible form of the existence. The cloud is forming by soul substance. This substance is used to create individual souls.

The number of souls may be, in advance, defined by Creator of how many souls may get involved in the Grand Cycle between 1st and 7th or... as C's say time doesn't exist and the permeation of the souls with the 7th Density may constantly going, some souls, as the time doesn't exist, actually advanced to the 7th Density, some maybe are now extracting from the 7th Density and are released to the lower Densities.

We can add more and complicate. C's say about that soul could be smashed. C's say about the there are animal soul pools where there is not an individuated soul. On the other hand, also say about soul groups, and even the same C's say they live in the state of the union between them where the individuality blurred and they make choices and act in unison.

The question is difficult because of what we think about what is the soul our imagination about the ideas about the soul implanted in us at the time of the first religious and spiritual life experiences can be entirely different to what the soul or souls are.

I would say the number of "souls" is changeable. This what we can call the soul can be some "soul's energy" connected to the consciousness. This soul's energy transforming between different shape, and what we call the "individual soul" could be one of the ways of how the "soul's energy" can be formed. The consciousness (as the most primary "thing") can "be placed" in the "soul energy form," but this form can be different, and something like "individual soul" is only one of the form.

Going in such direction, it could be possible to, in certain conditions and "time," exclude some collectivity of beings and count one by one all the souls of that collectivity. However, the whole picture is probably more complex, and we need to be on the much higher level of the density to be able to see how it is.

Then, finally: "Is there an infinity or a finite number of souls?"

Safely, I would say that there is no correct and clear answer to this. And this is open until we will know much more. Important will be to define what the soul is?
 

Kay Kim

Dagobah Resident
I understand that in this 3D Earth’s population is balanced by Souled beings VS OP.
When souled beings dies from any planet, they goes to 5D. But when non-souled beings die, they goes to their Soul Pools.
So, maybe 5D VS Soul Pools? Thus balanced.

And the Universe is balanced by Souled beings and Non-Souled beings,

Q: (L) Is it, in fact, that exactly half of all that exists, is moving into imbalance, while the other half is moving into balance?
A: Close.
Q: (L) All the cosmos? All that exists?
A: Yes.
Session 22 June 1996

The above session was talking about STO vs STS existence in Universe.
But I think it also can apply to the Souled beings and Non-Souled beings that existence in the whole Universe.
And non-souled beings come from natural organic beings that can say evolve/create from eons of times.
But Souled beings are different.

A: Souls are already created.
Q: (L) You mean from the first instant of time?
A: Yes.
Session 16, November 1994


Q: (V) ...are our souls born from different archangel realms?
A: No. The soul was never created. Was/Is/Always will be.
Q:(V) Well, I can’t grasp that...I mean, creation...(L) There is no creation, All just IS.
(V) Well, where does the substance come from.
(L) Doesn’t come from anywhere. Just thoughts in the mind of god. I mean, what else does God have to do for eternity but dream? We are the dream.
(V) Can you comment on my struggle to understand this?
A: What is the struggle? It will come.
Session 28, December 1996

I learned one thing is sure from this research, the Universe is constantly balances by counterpart, even existence balance by non-existence!

Well, something is not quite clear at this time, but I am patiently waiting for more information and more understand, when I go to next Higher density, and so on...
So, I pray to Cosmic Mind, ‘Help me grow in knowledge of All Creation’ .
 

Approaching Infinity

Administrator
Administrator
Moderator
FOTCM Member
This is what the Cs had to say about souls in Session 950107:
A: Souls are not "born" into this planet.
Souls were never born! And, will never die!

Q: (V) I understand, my question was loose;
I'm sorry. (D) Are there any new souls being
created?
A: Just answered if you use your head. D***
does not know the real concept of "time."
This quote, and the references to the big bang here, reminded me of this one:
Q: (L) Is there only one ultimate creator of the universe

A: All is one. And one is all.

Q: (L) From the one what was the first division?

A: Mass division and disbursement.

Q: (L) Was this simultaneous?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Was this what we refer to as the "Big Bang?"

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Is there any reference to this event in terms of time?

A: Always.

Q: (L) Can we say that all that exists in the material universe is, say, "x" number of years old?

A: No. It is the eternal now. Not only did happen, is happening and going to happen. The expanded presence.
And this from an old article by Laura, which quotes the above:


In the sense of universal Oneness, this is a deep truth. But at this level of experience, there is Manyness and different focus due to perspective. More than that, they are telling us that what we perceive to be structures in space are defining the focus points of the endlessly cycling and disbursing Wave of Creation. That Prime Creator has many parts and aspects and that the entire Cosmos is the Body of God.
That first 'mass division and disbursement' comment can be read in reference to the Big Bang, as the 'mass division and disbursement' of matter/energy. But there's way more to it than that, as L went into in the article. Perhaps it can be applied to 'souls' as well as 'matter', which is only 'sleeping consciousness'. In other words, there is a constant cycling, a constant/eternal mass division and disbursement of consciousness into consciousness units, from the most basic and simple, to the most complex and all-encompassing. At the most basic level, this is seen in the material world as the creation and expansion of matter (quarks, electrons). But it applies always and to all levels of creation, up to 6th density unified thought forms, social memory complexes, humans, animal soul pools, etc. So is there a finite or infinite number of souls? Maybe it is variable, depending on your time reference. The universal mind is constantly cycling, dividing and disbursing. From our vantage point, we just see that process 'at an instant'.
 
Top Bottom