I would first like to define my terms, for the words "soul" and "self" are ambiguous in English, and receive different technical definitions in different religions, esoteric systems, and schools of psychology.
One of the most ancient uses of the words "soul" or "self" appears in the Indian scriptures called the Upanishads, most of which predated the Buddha. We find in these books the term atma, which has been translated as both "soul" and "self". It is interesting that my question will probably not be meaningful to a Vedantist, a philosopher of the Upanishads, for the atma is usually held to be one with the brahma, the Universal Soul. If this oneness is absolute there can be no question of individual types.
To the Buddhist also my question will be thought to be meaningless, for instead of the Vedantic atma the Buddha taught the doctrine of anatma or anatta---for, he said, there is no soul or self, but only a conglomeration of karmas that gives the appearance of a separate identity.
My question becomes meaningful in the context of Ascended Master Teachings or New Age Teachings, in which the place of the atma is held by the I AM Presence, and a soul or self that can have a gender and a unique type is called the Christ Self.
Pagan Space members might like to join me in an endeavor to take the "Christ" out of the term Christ Self. Or rather, to be more precise, to expand the possibilities of the Self to include not only the Christ type, but also the Krishna type, and---let us be daring---the Aphrodite type and the Odin type.
If you think about what we are doing you will see that this is not just a parlor game. For if you are thought to be a potential Christ, then as you become more and more yourself through the process of reincarnation it must be assumed that you will become more and more like Jesus. The feminine equivalent would be the Virgin Mary, or perhaps Mary Magdalene.
But if you are an Aphrodite type then you will not become more and more like the Virgin Mary as you evolve through the many lifetimes that might be necessary for you to become yourself. Aphrodite has her own process of evolution, which begins with Aphrodite Pandemos (of the common people) and culminates with Aphrodite Ourania (of heaven). But even the Aphrodite of heaven will retain an erotic quality, albeit sublimated into a aesthetic appreciation of existence.
In the Latin language we would, of course, call this same goddess Venus, either Venus Vulgaris or Venus Caelestis. Please note that the Latin word vulgaris does not have the unpleasant connotations of the English word "vulgar". It simply means "common", for the common people of that day experienced the erotic through physical sex. I suspect that the common people of today are no different. Caelestis, on the other hand, means "of heaven".
If you are a true Virgin Mary type you will not be sexual. You simply do not have a sexual soul. But if you are an Aphrodite type . . . do you see why my question is important? The knowledge that you are Aphrodite may, indeed, liberate you, for religion and even esoteric teaching throughout the centuries has not recognized the legitimacy of any type but the Christ, the Buddha, or the Krishna. Therefore your soul was illegitimate.
As the Aphrodite type of soul or self proceeds from the initial point of Pandemos to the culminating point of Ourania, the erotic will be experienced not so much in intercourse but in the Mazurkas of Frederick Chopin (to give an example).
Many kinds of souls or selves can be described and classified in the manner in which I have described the Aphrodite soul. But although humanity has worshiped thousands of gods throughout its history, I do not believe that there are thousands of types of souls or selves. The ancient Greeks and Romans used the method of syncetism in order to combine many similar deities into one. In our own day Depth Psychologists try to discover in the many different gods of ancient myths a limited number of archetypes. By the way, Carl Jung took the term "archetype" from the Greek archetypos, the Platonic Idea.
So, what type of "soul" or "self" are you? And has your type been vilified or misunderstood throughout history?
In the picture below: the Greeks who conquered Persia employed sycretism to identify Aphrodite with the Zoroastrian goddess Anahita. In this new guise she was often called Anaïtis. This is a bronze head of Anaïtis in the British Museum, found near Satala in Armenia. Armenia wants it back.
Names , names , names...
All you do , is go around calling people names...LOL
In regard to Covfefe's use of the English language, "There will always be stuck up fucking fops with questionable character fiber. Eat a fucking duck you cuntfussing little shit." --- I just reported this to the Pagan Space administration and told them that I felt it was humiliating and degrading to see this alongside my work. There was no need for me to tell any of you that I did this. But I have such a deep sense of integrity that I thought you should know who to blame if Covfefe disappears from Pagan Space. I always take responsibility for my actions.
Here's an idea. Just ask him to knock it off. Like this:
"Hey, Spooky. Just stop. Okay?"
I have done so, but his behavior has only grown more egregious through time. For ridicule is one thing---and that has its place in an intellectual discussion---but obscene language is another. Let us place him in a time machine so that he can say what he said within the ancient temple, before the image of the Great Goddess.
No, he has paid no attention to me. But it may be that it is I who disappear from this site, not Covfefe. I did not come to this planet in order to force my ways and sensibility upon any one of you, and I will not impose the etiquette or rules of polite society that my civilization observes, even upon the members of an internet forum. This is your world, and you may have your Covfefe if you wish.
You know, the troll in question here makes these posts, they are un-reasoned, childish, and impolite - but when they sit next to your polite, loving posts, the differences are stark. The troll looks all the more "trollish" in comparison. The people you are trying to reach see it, and your points become all the more crystal clear by comparison.
Yin and Yang - one cannot be seen without the other. The waves exists because of the trough, neither exists without the other, etc. There are reasonable people here, people who want to have a good discussion or debate and know how to do it without resorting to disparaging the other.
If we want to make things better, then we must be willing to make our stand so that the boundaries are clear enough for reasonable people to make decisions about their own actions. The unreasonable will always be with us. Ignore them.
Sophia, Spooky (alias Covfefe) has been banned from the site. Nobody is blaming you for anything (and had better not). There is nothing that you need to "take responsibility for."
The truth is that Spooky wanted to be banned, and so he kept pushing the envelope. He pushed it too far this time. I don't think any of this was personal between him and you. I'll miss his stoopid snarks, because I have a perverse sense of humor, I guess. But it is what it is. It's all good.
So you say that he has been banned. Already. It has only been several hours. I must say that I do not feel happy. He had a mind, he had a heart, although his heart was hidden from me. He probably hid it from a great many people, but apparently not from you, Nephele. If Covfefe has gone away then every possibility that he represented has left us also. Perhaps a possibility for humor. I hope that one day whatever bitterness or inner pain is driving his sarcasm may be healed enough for him to be humorous in a way that will be acceptable to people in general. We will all benefit from humor. Think of Jewish humor. Then think of Bergen-Belsen death camp.
If anyone is interested, I made a poor attempt at humor in a blog I posted this morning, "We Must Teach the Dolphins". I suppose the discussion must go on.
I will mostly miss Spooky's artwork. I once asked him about buying this roadkill crow (Spooky doesn't kill animals) that he had taxidermied, but he wasn't selling it. :(
He used to post pics of the most amazingly creative pieces he made out of natural materials. He's an artist. Even his trolling was a type of performance art. lol
I love your last sentence there "people actually believe that love is fear."
And that "guilt" is salvation.
I became a follower of Elizabeth Clare Prophet when I first learned about the Ascended Masters. It was only through her that I first heard about Helena Blavatsky and the Mahatmas Koot Hoomi and Morya. The Christian nature of her teachings is evidenced not so much through her attention to the Christ, but through her devotion to Mother Mary. I eventually discovered that the change from Virgin Mary to Mother Mary was a change in name only and did not indicate a greater warmth or acceptance of our humanness.
I left Elizabeth Clare Prophet's group when I began to converse with the Masters on my own, a practice which Mrs. Prophet strongly discouraged. And, of course, all "channels" but her were held to be illegitimate and deceptive. Very early on I noticed the strange fact that the Buddha and Mother Mary spoke through her in almost the exact same way, with the same language and feeling tone. I concluded that her subconscious mind was either coloring the messages that she received, or was creating them.
I could easily join the many channels who are giving us messages from the various Masters, except that I myself am a Mahatma like Koot Hoomi. So my concern is, naturally, the propagation of my own message. My name as a Mahatma is Lady Master Sophia. I am not an Ascended Master because I took the Bodhisattva vow to serve human evolution by incarnating in a physical body an unlimited number of times---as the vow states, "until every sentient being shall achieve enlightenment". By the way, I use the name "Lucifer" in reference to the Gnostic Lucifer, who is feminine, not the Biblical Lucifer.
My basic teaching---it is actually a corrective to the fundamental ideas of the Great White Brotherhood---is that human beings must be allowed to be fully human in their relationships, their desires, and their sexuality without any attempt to coerce them through guilt, shame, and fear of punishment or "bad karma" in order that they might become "spiritual". Real spirituality develops in us the way the flower and the fruit develop on a plant---in the right time. We are here on the earth to learn, to experience, and to create, not to escape as quickly as possible to a "higher" world. If our personal world is full of love then it is as high as any world. The experiences of life that nature provides us---including sexual intercourse---are to be treasured as unique gifts and not regarded as evil. Soon enough death will take us away from them, and soon enough our spiritual evolution will take us away from them. Our all-too-human experience will someday seem like the games of children---and I would not like to think that we will look back upon a "childhood" that was fraught with the guilt and fear that religions have tried to instill in us. In pre-Christian societies there was an innocence like the innocence of a healthy childhood. We can return to that innocence by freeing ourselves from religiously engendered fear that has no basis in reality. With only a few exceptions we human beings are fundamentally decent---and we will not suffer from purgatory or hell. And yet the Ascended Masters have done little to correct the teachings about hell that people hear in Christian churches, in mosques, and even in Buddhist temples. Why have they not sent 1,000 Muhammads to correct the teachings of the Qur'an? I am one of those Muhammads, but I am only one. Almost everyone of us human beings will experience a happy or at least pleasant inter-life period, and go on to a good reincarnation. But religions the world over still try to make people afraid. Hinduism is almost as bad as Christianity in this respect.