In suttas like that the Buddha was talking about the pointlessness of certain questions, which did not help in realising the Dhamma. So, even if he didn't categorically DENY a soul (or a flying spaghetti monster) that fact that he didn't talk about it suggests that the concept of a soul is unimportant and irrelevant to Dhamma.binocular wrote:There is no fallacy on my part.mikenz66 wrote:I can't think of the fancy name for this particular fallacy you are applying.
So?The Buddha didn't mention Flying Spaghetti monsters either...
And yet most people seem to operate from the conviction that all questions must be thought of and answered in a categorical manner."There are these four ways of answering questions. Which four?
There are questions that should be answered categorically [straightforwardly yes, no, this, that].
There are questions that should be answered with an analytical (qualified) answer [defining or redefining the terms].
There are questions that should be answered with a counter-question.
There are questions that should be put aside. These are the four ways of answering questions."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html