>>2671
>I think "the soul", "the spirit", et cetera are words masking the physical nature of the human body and can be easily replaced by "emotion", or more accurately, brain functions controlling emotion.
This is why you are ignorant, deluded, confused. You are a materialist and you don't even understand exactly why.

There are no physical little people talking through the radio when you break it open. The radio isn't imprisoning any little people inside itself. The body is physical, but the psyche isn't physical yet through primordial agnosis, uses the aether to puppet the body. There is no such a thing as a disembodied soul since the soul is a lower modality of the spirit "within" (but not physically extractable since the soul isn't physical to begin with). The false self is the psycho-physical vessel of the "imago dei", that false self only knows itself as the body, while the true self knows itself not as the body. The "image of God" is like the inverted image of the Absolute reflected upon the life giving water. The reflected visage upon the water is not perfect yet the source of the light before it is reflected is perfect. We are like one of infinite bubbles in the air illuminated by one source of light of which the many colors that is seen on the bubbles is the image of the light but the bubbles pop as the light that illuminated the bubble no longer prismatically split into many colors, the image returns to its true undisturbed state as true light which isn't illumination, for illumination is an attribute of light, it isn't light in and of itself which isn't what it does, so true light is invisible, unmanifest, nobody ever sees light, only its illumination. The expression of the illumination is dependent on the surface of the bubbles but it isn't the fault of the light source itself that the bubbles aren't perfectly white but are in a spectrum.

These are just analogies to get you to think nonlinearly, not to be taken so literally in physical terms. Even if I said this or that, the synthesis of the Knower with Knowledge cannot be achieved without first the negation of what the Knowledge isn't. I didn't post various books on here just for people like you to keep on asking the same questions. You just don't know so many things about ancient metaphysics, so any positive statements like saying X is Y are lost to you for you still hold on to many falsehoods that needs to be removed from the flawed line of reasoning. All I can do is to clarify where you are wrong, but I however, am not entitled to repeat myself over and over, I don't owe you anything to begin with.