Author’s Note: The Hebrew term “Neshama” (נשמה) appears all the way throughout the Old Testament – and literally translates as “breath of life” – and nothing else. This is why the Greek term “psyche” (ψυχῇ) [or “breath of life”] as used by the authors of the New Testament to translate it – is precisely correct. This interface between Greek philosophy and Hebrew scripture persisted for the first four centuries CE – when Christianity manifested as various schools advocating a “gnostic path”. In this situation, the “breath of life” was the “breath of life”. The rise of Catholic theology, however, after the 4th century CE took this concept of “breath of life” (or that which animates a consciously aware existence) and added to it all kinds of further (and obscuring) metaphysical considerations designed to maintain the dominance of the Church over the individual. The Catholic Church further sullied the pond by projecting the entirely “new” (and alien) term of “soul” upon it. It is this “soul” which has entered the modern English language and which has permeated the study of ancient and classical Greek philosophy. Soul refers to the Catholic definiition of the term which deviates away from the original Hebrew and Greek definition. By using “soul” to replace “psyche” when assessing the non-Christian schools of Greek thought – gives the false impression that it is by pursuing the Catholic theological path (which denies the validity of all Pagan paths) that the Greek objectives are attained. This is an absurdity that is still seen in textbooks covering the subjects of Plato and Plotinus as issued by Oxford and Cambridge Universities. In a very real sense, this is a continuation of Christian-led imperialist forces that represents a form of internal colonisation. In many ways, Christian thought represents a great regression of the Western mind, and is not the progression that Christian apologists tend to think it is. Reducing an objective logic and reason to an inverted experiment in the management of the mind body – sets the evolution of humanity backwards. If we have to “render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s” – then when assessing non-Christian Greek philosophy – the terms of Greek philosophy must be used and applied. Conversely, when studying Catholic theology, then it is fully permissable to use the term “soul” within its proper functioning context. ACW (30.8.2026)
Ancient and Classical Greek thought existed prior to the advent of Christianity. This being the case, why does the British academic community insist on referring to the Greek term “Psyche” (ψυχή) by the Christian term “Soul”? When discussing the work of Plato or Plotinus – it makes no sense to use this Christian term – as it possesses no genuine meaning within that context (this holds true even if it is acknowledged that Plontinus lived in the 3rd century of the Christian-era). According to the William Tyndale (English) translation of the New Testament (1526), we read (Luke 21:19):
‘…with your patience / possesse youre soules.’
This is translated from the original Greek – which reads:
‘ἐν τῇ ὑπομονῇ ὑμῶν κτήσασθε τὰς ψυχὰς ὑμῶν’
Tyndale, however, was of the opinion that the authors of the New Testament, despite writing in Greek (to various standards of competency) must have understood “Hebrew” – and were referencing that language when they compiled these texts. Of course, there has been no “Hebrew” version of the New Testament discovered to date – not even in the finds associated with the Nag Hammidi Library or Dead Sea Scrolls (which record the gnostic manifestation of Christian belief between the 1st – 4th centuries CE). Perhaps the authors of the New Testament were ethnic Jews living within a Greek colony – and were subject to a Greek education (rather like “Philo”, “Josephus” – and others). Whatever the case, William Tyndale learned to read “Hebrew” so that whilst exiled in Europe – he was able to translate the New Testament afresh by referring each Greek term back into its Hebrew equivalent. This led to his “1536” English re-translation of the New Testament (together with six books of the Old Testament). In this rendering, the above “Luke” passage still reads:
‘With your patience possesse youre soules.’
There appears to be a slight adjustment of grammar. The term Tyndale translates as “soul” in English is the Greek term “psychas” (ψυχὰς) – is the “plural” the more familiar “psyche” (ψυχῇ) – which translates as “breath of life”, “to blow” and “to animate” (in Latin, the Greek term “psyche” is presented by the term “anima”). This probably represents the Hebrew term “Neshama” (נשמה) – meaning “breath”, “spirit”, or “essence” (inner self). The early Christians were radical Jews seeking to distinguish their thinking and practice from mainstream Judaism. The Gnostic Christians were content to use Greek philosophical terms and parallel many Greek paths of inner self-cultivation. Later, with the rise of the Catholic Church (empowered by the Roman State), the Gnostic Churches were suppressed and their scriptures outlawed. Catholic theologians, although continuing to use Greek terms (translated into Latin) – radically departed from the original philosophical meaning of those terms (the teaching and practice of Greek philosophy was banned). This process of moving away in meaning is particularly evident when it is understood that the Greek written form of “psyche” (ψυχῇ) has been replaced in translation by the Germanic (Pagan) term “soul”.
As the Catholic Church sort to forcibly spread its cult all-over the Roman Empire and into foreign parts – the missionaries often learned a name or two of the Pagan beliefs of the targeted community – and used this knowledge to mislead these populations into think that Catholicism was “no different” to their ancestral beliefs. This was the case with the Germani tribes that had successfully warred with Rome and had stayed more or less free of direct Roman subjugation. The Catholic missionaries, however, used a softly, softly approach – a cross between a friendly diplomacy and outright dishonesty. It was during this process that the Catholics encountered a very important religious term (known today as “soul”) which interested and motivated the German people. What is the etymology of this foreign term?
In Old English this term is rendered as “sāwol”
In Middle English this term is rendered as “soule”
In Proto-West German this term is rendered as “saiwalu”
In Proto-German this term is rendered as “saiwalō”
Whatever this Germanic term meant – the Catholic missionaries were not interested in recording. Learning this term was merely a means to an end – just as modern Christians learn this or that about Buddhism and Daoism as a means to separate the indigenous believers from their culture. Therefore, the true meaning of the Germanic term “soul” is not known. How, then does Catholic theology interpret this term “soul” – still written as the Greek “psyche” (ψυχῇ)?
‘The spiritual principle of human beings. The soul is the subject of human consciousness and freedom; soul and body together form one unique human nature. Each human soul is individual and immortal, immediately created by God. The soul does not die with the body, from which it is separated by death, and with which it will be reunited in the final resurrection. At the end of time, the immortal soul will be permanently reunited with a glorified, resurrected physical body.’
We see here a subtle entwining of Greek, Hebrew, and developed Christian theological thinking (Pagan and Abrahamic thinming). Around two-thirds of this definition has absolutely nothing to do with the ancient or classical Greek (philosophical) use of the term “psyche” (ψυχῇ). Given that this is the case, when assessing non-Christian Greek philosophical texts, the term “soul” should not be used (I suspect that the Gnostic Christian schools would have rejected the Catholic interpretation of “psyche” – as they were quite happy with the Greek original meaning). Secular academia in the UK has permitted Church dogma and propaganda to pollute and sully the thinking process. Each Greek philosopher logically presents his (non-Christian) path to self-cultivation – none of which involves the use of a Christian “soul”. Just because a manipulative and expansionist Church chose to co-opt this Germanic term – and project a bizarre set of incoherent beliefs upon its usage – does not mean that seccular academia should follow suite in a mindless manner.
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 