Spirit, the Animating Force

The goal of this thread is to explore Spirit. This is also part of an effort to tease apart Spirit and Soul which get blured together in a materialist perspective.

First accept for a moment the idea that Spirit means the animating force. This sense of the word Spirit is not lost in the language. A lively conversation might be easily called a “spirited” conversation. A dedicated compeditor might be complimented by the observation, “She sure does have spirit!” Wild rambuncious activity is sometimes call, “High spirits.” A friend may seek to “life the spirit” of a languid, morose companion.

This animating force is metaphysical. It exists prior to and extends beyond physical existence.

Spirit infuses the physical body of a living organism but it is distinct from the body. Its is life itself. Spirit departs from the body at death. Bodies die, but Spirit is immortal.

Hi there Xanderman

I am curious to see if you include relativity as an aspect of the animating force. You may want to check out this link on “vibrations” on the initial post which has always been known to be the nature of animating force,

ilovephilosophy.com/phpbb/vi … p?t=144727

Hi xander,

Your post sort of hit me between the eyes, because I realized that I don’t have a clear picture of the western understanding of spirit distinct from the traditional understanding of soul. You’d of thunk I would have got that one, but I must have been standing behind the door…

In eastern philosophy, spirit, or the animating force arises contemporaneously with becoming in all living things. It is “self-so”, an integral part of being. In humanity, this force is called qi, which is expressed in yin and yang. qi can be nurtured or dissapated. It is finding the harmony within yin and yang that the optimum longevity of the human is found.

Spirit has no defined source. It is always a part of the field even when expressed as a particular focus (being) within the processual experiencing we call life. The concept of soul is ill-defined at best, but could be considered to be the sum of experiencing in a particular locus.

Nick,

That the physical manifestation of matter in the universe can be seen as vibrations is probably correct, but it adds nothing to the metaphysical understanding of spirit, or that which is the spark of animating force, which can only be described as God, or in eastern terms, the oneness.

Of course, all of this is conjecture and ultimately resides as opinion inside each individual’s perspective.

JT

JT

It adds everything to metaphysical understanding. It requires an appreciuation of scale and relativity which are not favorite concepts of yours. However, if one reverses this description from the article or begins to slow down vibration rather than speed them up, creation may take on a new meaning. I’ll be curious to see if Xander senses anything.

Hi Nick.

Actually, The vibration explanation has the greatest breadth of explanatory capability when attempting to explain the physical universe. It’s my ‘favorite’ concept and has been since I read “The Dancing Wu Lei Masters” back in the early 70’s.

That said, it does nothing to satisfy a metaphysical understanding of spirit, or the animating force in living things.

Of course, you could be right if you are suggesting that the physical universe is a mirror of the metaphysical realm. Again, once we enter the field of metaphysics, it is strictly opinion.

“This animating force is metaphysical. It exists prior to and extends beyond physical existence.”

This was xander’s original idea, I believe. I’m not sure how a description of the physical universe, no matter how encompassing, relates to this statement.

JT

JT

It does so because the universe is material. I know this is exactly the opposite of modern thought but if you consider the scale of vibration, it suggests a quality of materiality in which to vibrate. The fact that these material densities and vibratory frequencies are beyond our comprehension is not to deny their existence. As I understand it, they comprise a scale of “being.”

The unifying energy as a whole which joins the Trinity is “God’s Love” and blends within all these proportionately within creation. However, the animating force is the creative energies that stand below the unifying energy of God’s love. As the result of ONE initially involving into three for the purpose of creation, The three stand at the beginning of the levels of existence and already exist in matter. So, as I understand it, the animating force has physical existence but at such a rate that is beyond our comprehension so we just call it energy or force etc.

Saying the animating force exists prior to physical existence as we know it suggests to me at a level higher than ours and closer to God as ONE. It is still physical but of a different quality of physicality.

But I imagine soon we’ll read Hillman’s take on spirit and soul and naturally I’m curious to read how he describes it…

I almost cannot discuss this topic. On Friday, after I wrote the first post here, I experienced an energy buzz that lasted for several hours. I think that was an overabundance of Spirit.

There is a commonality to the force of life in all living things. It is this animating force moving and driving all that lives. It is the impulse, the spark, the vital breath. The same force the moves me to live, moves the tree, the eagle, and the earthworm.

A gap still exists between the most basic organic chemicals and a living organism, not matter how simple. This is a chasm which no laboratory has been able to traverse. We an line up the chemicals that make life, but we cannot get them to dance. This points toward the metaphysical qualities of the animating force. It is something that comes from outside of the physical system. It is as if Spirit were always looking for a way to enter into the physical universe and can most powerfully do this though organic systems.

The term Spirit also applies to those living entities that lack a physical body. This adds to the metaphysical quality of Spirit.

While the body may fail in the course of time, Spirit lives on. The force of life continues, no matter how many organisms stop functioning.

Would you explain more what you mean by “relativity”?

I believe that vibration alone is insufficent to explain Spirit. Perhaps the physical universe is the strings, and Spirit is the hand plucking the strings, keeping everything in motion.

Xander, it sounds like you are equating spirit with the great Tao.

Look, it cannot be seen - it is beyond form.
Listen, it cannot be heard - it is beyond sound.
Grasp, it cannot be held - it is intangible.
These three are indefinable;
Therefore they are joined in one.
From above it is not bright;
From below it is not dark:
An unbroken thread beyond description.
It returns to nothingness.
The form of the formless, the image of the imageless, it is called indefinable and beyond imagination.
Stand before it and there is no beginning.
Follow it and there is no end.
Stay with the ancient Tao, move with the present.
Knowing the ancient beginning is the essence of Tao.

• Tao Te Ching, Chapter 14

Mighty fine idea.

A

Hi Xanderman,

Looking at the Bible, the word used for the animating force is “soul” and stands for Greek:
ψυχή
psuchē - Soul
psoo-khay’
breath, that is, (by implication) spirit, abstractly or concretely (the animal sentient principle only; thus distinguished on the one hand from the rational and immortal soul; and on the other from mere vitality, even of plants.

And Hebrew:
נפשׁ
Nephesh - Soul
neh’-fesh
From naphash; properly a breathing creature, that is, animal or (abstractly) vitality; used very widely in a literal, accommodated or figurative sense (bodily or mental): - any, appetite, beast, body, breath, creature, X dead (-ly), desire, X [dis-] contented, X fish, ghost, + greedy, he, heart (-y), (hath, X jeopardy of) life (X in jeopardy), lust, man, me, mind, mortality, one, own, person, pleasure, (her-, him-, my-, thy-) self, them (your) -selves, + slay, soul, + tablet, they, thing, (X she) will, X would have it.

The word “spirit” on the other hand stands for:
πνεῦμα
pneuma - Spirit
pnyoo’-mah
a current of air, that is, breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively a spirit, that is, (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, daemon, or (divine) God, Christ’s spirit, the Holy spirit: - ghost, life, spirit (-ual, -ually), mind.

רוּח
rûach - Spirit
roo’-akh
wind; by resemblance breath, that is, a sensible (or even violent) exhalation; figuratively life, anger, unsubstantiality; by extension a region of the sky; by resemblance spirit, but only of a rational being (including its expression and functions): - air, anger, blast, breath, X cool, courage, mind, X quarter, X side, spirit ([-ual]), tempest, X vain, ([whirl-]) wind (-y).

Spirit or “ruach” is the contact point to the “Holy or Sacred Spirit” (ruach ha kodesh) whereas the soul is in vitality you meant.

Shalom
Bob

Dear Bob,

I don’t know if the word-makers of the Traditions you address here have it right. Or it could be that this current effort at clarifying Spirit and Soul is a mere modern concoction.

Now you have presented 4 definitions.

This Soul definition 1, Spirit definition 1, and Spirit definition 2 are all highly similar. They all point to either some form of breath or air.

Soul defintion 2 stand out from as a reference to breathing. I would stretch this further to: That which has a capacity to breathe. Since Soul defintion one is not clearly distinct from either of the spirit defintions, lets ignore that for a moment.

So we could take these terms as Soul pinting towards that which has the capacity to breathe, and Spirit pointing towards the breath itself. Going from that ideas I still see it as possible to consider Spirit as the animating force. It is the breath itself. This is important because breath is life.

What’s your take?

Dear Xanderman,

Well, I just looked at Strong’s reference and found the quotes I made. In addition to that, I discovered that the Greek was always used to translate the Hebrew that followed. I don’t think that it is a concoction, but that our language seems to have lost contact with the original. I would have agreed with you but for the linguists, and on thinking about it, it did make sense in the end.

The Bible seems to be saying that there is a causal “Spirit” that gave us our “Spirit” making us into a concious being, being apart from animals, and that the human spirit communicates with the causal Spirit without language. Consciousness and awareness or sentience as a distinguishing attribute of mankind seems to fit into this frame of thinking.

The Bible then seems to say, that at the “centre” of my being, there is a vitality that we call our soul. A vitality that is extremely volatile and easily influenced - what we call the psyche or mind - the center of thought, emotion, and behavior and consciously or unconsciously adjusting or mediating the body’s responses to the social and physical environment.

Yes, mankind as a “breather” seems to be a the centre of many exercises that we would deem as being profitable for the psychology (or soul) of man. But in Spirituality, the fact that we breathe reminds us of the Causal Breath from whence we have our concious lives.

I can understand too, why the two are just a breath away from each other (excuse the pun) and why in our modern language the two are almost synonyms. I feel personally that the fine differences that there seems to be could actually help us in a world that seems to be running too fast towards an unknown goal.

Shalom
Bob