Fundamentals of the Soul: Questioning my own nature.

Preface: Ok so i am not here to debate the existence of souls or any details pertaining to the existence of souls. I'm passed that part and am not concerned with changing anyone's mind on the subject. Just questioning the fundamentals of what defines souls and the possibilities left open afterwards.
 
 
Recently i've came across a few questions that i can't find any good definitive answers on in most theological, philosophical, theistic, religious, etc books or documents. After a talk i had with a friend about Chakras, Khundalini activation, and third eye awakening, and lastly enlightenment. After a few hours of explaining and bouncing questions a thought occurred to me since lately i've been slowly exploring and questioning what our soul constitutes and the inherent nature of our souls.

The two questions i have at the forefront of this topic/research deal with the soul itself and it's nature not focused on our incarnate life. So when enlightenment is reached we are allowed access to all our past memories of lives and other experiences and then get to remain conscious and sentient in the afterlife until we reset and return to incarnate life cycles until it's reached again. So logically that would imply that your soul is some kind of being (which is you) that is being incarnated to learn and grow. Now in many old religions and spiritual disciplines there are many different species of spirit. Some good, some bad, some neither. They do exist in the same spaces as us though. My question from here is : If our souls are the real form of our consciousness and are only incarnated into a body that would mean that there is a name for the species our soul would be. Now take it a step farther and i wonder could there be multiple species or races that share the incarnate plane on earth? Could the person next to me have a different kind of soul than i?

Now i'll go into the next question which this second question actually brought me to asking the first one but they don't make sense written in that order. Is it possible that there are different inherent types of souls? Some that are naturally positive/good in nature and others that are dark/evil in nature? If either were true that would imply there's intermediate species also. So if this idea was correct and there can be souls that are not by nature good/positive/peaceful that means there is the antithesis out there. A few religions say we are all inherently stained black by evil and others say we are born pure and acquire it later. That's one detail that can't be proven so it remains an inconclusive answer from the texts.

To throw one more twist and turn into this little theoretical theory. What is the definition of what's right and wrong, good and bad? Where was the original set of morals invented? Were we naturally made to have a conscience and know what's wrong and what's not? I don't believe that is the case considering sociopaths (although extreme example and rare) exist and there are quite a few disorders that have similar issues. Also taking a look at morals across the globe puts in perspective how subjective moral codes are.

^continuation-

Now i have done alot of research over the years and done alot of spiritual work. Meditation, lucid dreaming, astral projection, and so on. A good friend introduced me to the idea and methods and i was in love. One lesson i did learn is that entities that are non human or beyond our realm have a different view on morality. Right, wrong, justified, etc are not concepts they need or want. They are in no way concerned with good and bad atleast in the understanding we hold. It's the same idea as if aliens invaded earth what would they think? They may find wiping us all off this planet to be the right thing to do because they have a different perspective. Now that i got that out of the way the real question can be asked. By who's standards are we measuring and determining what's right and wrong, evil and good? Do you use ours? theirs? gods? noones? What constitutes these things. Is there a universal moral scale that is found in all forms of consciousness?

If in theory morality is subjective and invented by man and moral rules and boundaries were dependent on the observer what are the implications? If there is a universal undeniable moral code in this realm what happens when it is disobeyed or broken? Who enforces the laws? Also how would souls be screened or selected for life on earth?

It's frustrating to me because you have to take every religious or theistic text with a fist full of salt and spotting the technicalities that you need to get your answer is a developed skill. Even if it is an unbiased text you still have to work to find commonalities cross reference and so on to ensure it's a common theme found in different places. As far as i've found there is no information or text that discusses what our souls are exactly and how they are chosen for life here . Also no definition of morality is really given aside from religious law there's no underlying unbiased reference.

So i'll run a lil summary paragraph here for everyone or a TLDR: for you people with attention spans the size o...ff..... oo shiny ... of ... balloons!!

1st question: What are our souls? are we all one species or type of soul? or are there multiple species used on earth?

2nd question: Do souls have an inherent state of good or bad (in the broadest sense of the words) not by human moral standards btw?

3rd question: Who's right about the nature of our souls? are we marked from the start like the bible says or are we neutral and pick our own nature? On the farthest side of spectrum could only good or positive souls be allowed on earth? kind of like the bible but reversed.

4: If multiple kinds of souls exist and they all have different properties how are the types of soul expressed in physical life? If you have an evil soul does that mean you'll commit evil acts or could the evil nature of the soul not define the actions of the soul just the type?

5 question: In conclusion my last set of questions. Let's imagine there are multiple soul species, they are good and bad no inherent state, and the laws defining right and wrong are different from species to species. Could it be possible that some humans could be "in-human" or part human part something else? Most importantly does our soul start it's learning and training on earth or do they come here from somewhere else? If souls got transferred between incarnations from world to world what would be the result? If all souls that were going to live on earth started at birth here and stayed until their lesson was complete would they all be innocent by nature and only become corrupt through free will?

Sorry guys for the rambling i just wanted to type this down and see if anyone had some input since i know a few of my friends are into the spirituality and so on.

 

 
well see it's all philosophical and theoretical for me. I don't hold any of it to truth i'll find that out when i'm dead for the last time.
 
Everything you said just brings me back to a dilemma and long standing debate in psychology. Are we just machines or is there a "human" factor to us? Sure i understand that we are wired to believe we are special or different, allows us to supercede our emotions and act in favor of our species no matter what. Just like Classical Conditioning and other forms it brings up the debate of us being machines and nothing more or something unquantifiable at this time is a factor. Neither has been proven and it's really left up to personal preference and belief.
 
I do think we are more than machines. It's a personal belief and i don't expect anyone to change their ideas or beliefs based on my personal experiences as noone can experience them also. That's the curse and the beauty. In a more concrete way i do believe that we are more than machines, at minimum there are forces at play that we cannot understand or measure yet. Not saying we won't someday but there is definitely something strange about us.

 

 
That's true it's a personal choice on where you belief it begins and ends. The main reason i brought it up like that is because of how we discussed in class.
 
for me it's kinda one or the other. We are machines that can be manipulated, are predictable, and follow a set of rules and stipulations. I can't remember the doctor that proposed this but many reacted with hostility and resentment because of course we don't like to believe we can be simplified down and altered so easily. On the flipside we have people who believe there is a unknown factor and element in humans that puts above this rule and is hard to understand. Honestly i think you have to see it one way or the other the extent to which you believe it is up to you.
 
I'm stuck between us being something more and a theory that i came up with. I had the idea that the true master of our mind and body is the subconscious. We are wired to act without thinking. Our ego is built to lie to itself for protection and also to force our conscious mind to act or feel a certain way to ensure a better outcome. You see it all the time with people in treatment. They are slaves to the underlying workings of their subconscious. Honestly i think the sham we call sentience and self awareness is a ruse built by evolution to ensure our zealous drive to survive and dominate. It's the perfect tool to brainwash us into doing what's necessary to advance the species without the problems of conscious interference. If we are wired to believe that we are the only species that is on our level and also the same concept applies to other humans we will do anything without feeling bad or questioning it. Which in itself is kind of a scary thought.

 

 
I'll have to look up the Doctor's name. He made conditioning techniques work as behavior and thinking modifiers. It worked quite fantastically and worked on nearly everyone. Hell he even had the treatment done to himself. People said it's sick or wrong to modify people's minds and behavior with or without their knowledge. He replied by saying why is it a bad thing? If we found a system that can effectively modify someone's behavior permanently or for a long period of time why not use it to perfect the human race? It is ego that makes us resist the idea.
 
I was speaking on the subconscious vs ego being in control on a rudimentary level. Who at the basis is in control. Think about it. Is there any instance where you can truly command your subconscious and be aware of all of it's actions. Being self aware and educated goes a long way but in the end who's running the show. It was just a theory i ran through while thinking. Sadly it's not really provable at the moment either way.