Since I’ve already addressed the spirit world and metaphysics, this article will be more focused. It would probably be helpful, but not necessary, if you read those and my other phenomena articles first for a little background. However to address the spiritual soul, one can’t get overly specific so I'm limited to how focused I can be. After all, this is metaphysical phenomena we're talking about. It boils down to languages lacking the necessary descriptive terms (semantics) for metaphysics. In other words, something must first be described in a way everyone can relate to. Semantics can also lead us astray which the ancient mystics often complained about. They once posed… “Do languages assist or create understanding?” Something to ponder.

To get an idea what one’s spiritual soul might actually be (after death), the natural tendency is to first visualize being without a body. Well, that is obvious but it would also mean you could not see, hear, feel, taste or smell… that’s because these senses are brought to you courtesy of your body. Importantly, it also means that if you were still able to think and be aware of your existence, you wouldn’t be doing so in any ‘location’. In other words, in order to be in a location requires a physical presence therefore you couldn’t ‘be’ anywhere, only everywhere. Your existence would be as pervasive as the spirit world itself, which is, being everywhere at once. Of course, without sight, you wouldn’t know where you were anyway… also time would probably be meaningless. This assessment would seem true if one was stripped of all senses which a body provides and not provided with replacement capabilities. That scenario seems to be a possibility but let’s dig deeper… continuing with the assumption we do have a soul and it can survive death.

So, either the soul is provided with replacement sensing capabilities or it isn’t. If the soul isn't, but still has awareness, that would still have significant meanings. From that, one might think we would then ‘become’ part of the spirit world but I can’t quite say it that way if, as it seems, we already makeup the spirit world. It is not known how two ethereal existents can possibly join nor has it been established there is, or can be, more than one ethereal existent. If indeed there exists but one, then that relegates the matter of 'becoming' to an ‘already is’. That would mean the spirit world is, in effect, one. But hold on... if there are distinctions within the metaphysical realm, that would change everything, even though it wouldn't be physical differences. To make a distinction means to find a 'difference', any difference whatsoever. Within etherealness, differences might only exist mentally or psychologically, as in ideas, thoughts and dreams. It could also entail differences in intentions and modus operandi. Actually, between living entities, one could probably find just as many ethereal differences as physical differences... whether between humans or even between a dog and cat. Finding distinctions within the spirit world may not be a problem after all... that is, for someone already there.

To discover whether or not ethereal distinctions exist in order to determine whether all ethereal things represent the essence of God, a distinction needs to be made here as well. That is, in what manner do these things represent the essence of God... are they different representations? Well, that's a different subject and an age-old problem for philosophers, trying to find distinctions within the ethereal. It is one thing to create distinctions, as most do; it’s quite another to discover them. For now, let’s put that dusty old problem back on the shelf and concentrate on what senses, if any, we may receive after death. I think it is most likely that we, as souls after death, would acquire new sensing capabilities. I suspect that would be the case because it seems doubtful they would be the exact same senses a human body has. One might want to claim we have six senses if we included our intuitive nature. No problem, we can say six, however our sixth sense may not be a bodily possession but already a possession of our spiritual soul… as it seems so.

Not in 10,000 years could we ever imagine what other types of senses there could be. To imagine an unknown sense would be impossible for mortals. Consider this, of any of our current senses, if we lacked any one of these, they could not be otherwise imagined… and not even after they were explained. For example, even after having explained colors to someone blind, they still cannot fathom colors. At any rate, I don’t know if all our current senses would be necessary but wouldn’t we want eyesight? Or would we need eyeballs for that? It would seem so. I think the most likely scenario is that we would acquire a different set of senses, perhaps more magnificent than our current five (or six). While eyesight would be a sense we would rather not do without, there could be something better.

While we know how important our current senses are for existing on earth in the physical form, they may only be applicable to, or necessary in, the physical realm. At any rate, we may not need them elsewhere, not those particular ones. Since it is impossible to imagine what our new senses (if any) would be, we can’t follow this trail any further. It is to only expect we’d likely acquire a new set of senses if we got any at all. I suspect we would however, a precedent was established when we got those we have. As to how we acquire them is another question, an enormous question. If we knew that, it would tell us reams about the spirit world.

To exist without any sensing capabilities at all would seem a discouraging prospect if that were the case. What then would be the purpose for having awareness? What else could one do besides think and dream? Again our ability to understand fails us, much as it fails us to fathom an unknown sense. However we’re often given clues if we seek them, even dreaming tells us something... more-so than the dreams themselves. In addition to what science contends, I think occasionally we are also experiencing the activities of our spiritual soul in dreams, what it does when we’re asleep. This seems to occur only in some dreams however, those with more clarity and continuity, those which don't seem to rely on our memory banks. Those types of dreams may offer clues as to how our soul will conduct itself after our death. But not to get off on this tangent, for more on dreaming see our webpage Dreams, dreaming and afterlife dreamers.

If we are already the essence of the spirit world subconsciously, which Plotinus (205-270), the founder of Neoplatonism, effectively believed, it’s a matter how this is expressed. For one thing, he did not refer to the subconscious mind as such; rather it being the ‘intelligence’ (of the mind) I’m fairly certain, at least to the extent one can compare metaphysical concepts. At any rate, it has been my contention our subconscious mind has outside connections, all of us subconsciously connected to the same pool of ‘being’ and intelligence... and thus, to each other.

Plotinus was a firm believer in the soul; more-so that it was an integral part of his three tier ‘system’ consisting of (1) God, (2) intelligence and (3) the soul. I think he was right in trying to express those distinctions in such a way, especially how we commonly perceive these three apparent existents. It can’t be a literal interpretation however... that implies they are different and therefore a 'part' of etherealness and what can 'part' possibly mean in etherealness? Anyway, I don’t think there can be a distinction quite that clear. We should keep in mind they are only 'effective distinctions'.

Since only our conscious mind is unique, and if there is to be individuality (at all) in the afterlife, then the conscious mind must somehow contribute to the makeup of the individual soul. One way to explain this long-held belief (in the individual soul) is to first refer to the distinction between the subconscious mind, which is not unique, and our conscious mind which is. So what does consciousness and subconsciousness have to do with the soul? One way to describe it is to say the soul is the child of both since, it seems, both contribute. The concept of a 'subconscious mind' was a great scientific step forward and a great distinction but few such distinctions exist and why I keep relying on ‘in a sense’ and ‘effectively’. Until someone stumbles upon more good descriptions such as the 'subconscious mind', metaphysics can only be addressed in vague terms.

It is not ironic I am using the word ‘sense’ in two different ways, one when I refer to our five senses, the other when I state ‘in a sense’. While a different contextual meaning, when it comes to describing the essence of the spirit world, ‘in a sense’ can be taken literally. In other words, in a world without shapes and forms, of vagueness, whatever existents there may be, whatever transpires, can only be sensed. The result will not be a clear picture… no more than any analysis of a particular taste or smell. Therefore I suspect any new senses we may acquire will be somewhat similar to our current senses of taste and smell. I just don't think we'll get anything as vivid as what eyesight provides, but I hope I'm wrong.

There is a strange similarity, and perhaps a relationship, between the spirit world and the senses of taste and smell. That’s not to say we would necessarily taste or smell anything in the afterlife, they just seem to be in a category of senses that are similar. While human senses have never been looked upon as being classifiable but maybe they should be. For example, when smelling a rose, one can’t describe the unique sensation since words do not exist to explain it; conversely, most everything seen can be explained. In other words, vision may be an exclusive sense applicable only to the physical realm... and perhaps hearing. Taste and smell seem entirely different while touch seems somewhere in-between. Since the particular taste and smell of something is indescribable, as indescribable as anything metaphysical, this tells us something very important. It tells us that's the type of reality the spirit world consists of, which is, indescribable vagueness. That is why we can't pin it down, explain it in precise terms.

I once stated that we, as individuals, in someway (subconsciously) make up the spirit world because I didn’t believe it is divisible. I said 'subconsciously' because this is where our very existence dwells. Well, in a sense, and only while in human form. I'll need to work on clarifying that more I suppose. As to any afterlife existence, I believe it will then be demonstrated that existence itself can be a matter of degree, determined largely by worthiness and somewhat by knowledge. For example, to a very small degree, hardly noticeable, even humans seem to exist in varying degrees, not physically of course but mentally. As I said, this 'degree of existence' may not be really evident until later, expressed more in the afterlife. How one obtains this knowledge, that which empowers, concerns the Divine Intellect and as to one's worthiness... well I don't need to elaborate on that.

For all believers, the goal is an afterlife. However this is perceived, it seems evident that worthiness, desire, empowering knowledge and even faith, in conjunction with each other, are determinates. While religions maintain that faith alone will acquire a satisfying afterlife, I remain skeptical; it surely requires much more effort. This afterlife, however wide the gates, and whatever it turns out to be, I think empowering knowledge (specifically) could open up infinite other possibilities in the hereafter. Empowering (spiritual) knowledge, which we acquire before death, could have a bearing because of how Mother Nature operates. In this case, the survival of the fittest 'mentally'.

In trying to explain anything related to the metaphysical realm, it is hard to be more specific. The mystics were right; languages fail miserably in explaining anything metaphysical but that is also due to a lack of understanding. To develop descriptive terms for metaphysics has been, and will remain, quite a challenge. As it is, our language will only take us to the border, as if an alien language is spoken on the other side. Progress awaits these much needed distinctions.

If we are to become a distinguishable entity in the afterlife, an individual, albeit created through a process we know nothing about, even if we only existed in a dream state, and were not active participants, it would still be an existence... wouldn't it? If it's not to be active participation, will a dream state suffice? Well, if it was a dream state, we wouldn't be in a position to know so it wouldn't matter. Besides, I don't know anyone who clamors about not being a bird for example... you take what you get. And, depending on one's memory banks, it could be sweet dreams... or a nightmare. Who knows, perhaps worthiness and empowering knowledge determines if there is to be active participation. On the other hand, the spirit world may not need any extra help. After all, what could we possibly contribute? The spirit world certainly wouldn't need our 'judgment'. Some souls might even seek some sort of 'independence' but as to that possibility, I wouldn't hazard. At any rate, some or all of this spiritual information can be extracted yourself through the Divine Intellect but how much, if any, depends on you. Reading more articles within our Phenomena section should be, I believe, of some help finding your way. My two books further explain how to tap into the Divine Intellect, albeit in a roundabout way.

A.O. Kime

Resource Box: © A.O. Kime (2003) A.O. Kime is a retired farmer and author of two books plus 70+ articles on ancient history, spiritual phenomena, political issues, social issues and agriculture which can be seen at http://www.matrixbookstore.biz
email: allen@matrixbookstore.com