If the word "soul" simply refers to an incorporeal component in living things that can continue after death, then Buddhism does not deny the existence of the soul. Instead, Buddhism denies the existence of a permanent entity that remains constant behind the changing corporeal and incorporeal components of a living being.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul#Buddhism
Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Blimey! Some kind of soul theory is one thing, but a great undiscovered Khandha is something altogether more serious!
My reservations would be exactly the same, in that whatever this "factor X" is, it serves merely to link three bits of the Buddha's teaching together. In the absence of other characteristics, it doesn't seem to do any work at all.
Personally, I wouldn't be keen on inventing a new khandha to do this work, as I see them as attributes of normal experience rather than substances or things which could exist without our being aware of them. But whatever this factor is, if meditation is necessary to discover this thing, then it is likely that some accomplished meditator would have discovered it and "let the cat out of the bag", so to speak. There are no secret instructions to meditators who crack the code not to tell others. And there is always the Buddha's claim that:
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/ati/tip ... .vaji.htmlI have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back.
The person who is liberated learns something, however. We just don't know what!
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Greetings,
This is certainly true of anything which we might subjugate (i.e. believe "we have").
Metta,
Paul.
No. In the suttas, all things are described as not-self, ergo they are not a soul.
This is certainly true of anything which we might subjugate (i.e. believe "we have").
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
- equilibrium
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:07 am
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
cycle of rebirth.....under SN 22.87: notes on Consciousness (established or unestablished)…and it is not a self.
The Blessed One then addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Come, bhikkhus, let us go to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope, where the clansman Vakkali has used the knife.”
“Yes, venerable sir,” those bhikkhus replied. Then the Blessed One, together with a number of bhikkhus, went to the Black Rock on the Isigili Slope. The Blessed One saw in the distance the Venerable Vakkali lying on the bed with his shoulder turned.
Now on that occasion a cloud of smoke, a swirl of darkness, was moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters. The Blessed One then addressed the bhikkhus thus: “Do you see, bhikkhus, that cloud of smoke, that swirl of darkness, moving to the east, then to the west, to the north, to the south, upwards, downwards, and to the intermediate quarters?”
“Yes, venerable sir.”
“That, bhikkhus, is Mara the Evil One searching for the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali, wondering:
‘Where now has the consciousness of the clansman Vakkali been established?’
However, bhikkhus, with consciousness unestablished, the clansman Vakkali has attained final Nibbāna.”
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:23 pmall things are described as not-self, ergo they are not a soul.
Body isn't self, mind isn't self. And yet you have a body and mind.
Last edited by cappuccino on Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Greetings Cappuccino,
If you wish to put your eggs into the soul basket, then be my guest, but don't think you can twist the Buddha's teaching to accommodate your soul theories.
Metta,
Paul.
They are to be regarded as "not-self"... not as something "you have".cappuccino wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:10 pmBody isn't self, mind isn't self. And yet you have a body and mind.retrofuturist wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 10:23 pmall things are described as not-self, ergo they are not a soul.
If you wish to put your eggs into the soul basket, then be my guest, but don't think you can twist the Buddha's teaching to accommodate your soul theories.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
I'm pointing out the body is there. As is soul perhaps.
Try telling someone you don't have a body.
Try telling someone you don't have a body.
Last edited by cappuccino on Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Greetings Cappuccino,
Rather, it is about realizing the emptiness (sunnata) of anything that might possibly be regarded as "you" or "yours".
It goes against the grain, and isn't likely to win too many normie debates, but it is amenable to the winning of freedom and liberation.
Metta,
Paul.
The Noble Eightfold Path isn't about telling people such things.cappuccino wrote: ↑Tue Mar 27, 2018 11:13 pm I'm not twisting, I'm pointing out the body is there. As is soul.
Try telling someone you don't have a body.
Rather, it is about realizing the emptiness (sunnata) of anything that might possibly be regarded as "you" or "yours".
It goes against the grain, and isn't likely to win too many normie debates, but it is amenable to the winning of freedom and liberation.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Anyway, there is no place in the scriptures that denies soul.
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
If a soul existes until nibbana and then does not exist then that is text book case of annhilationism I think.
chownah
chownah
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
The word soul causes problem because one approaches it according to the religion one is born in. Even non-practising Christians cannot help but think of soul as something that enters heaven (or hell) after death. I am not speaking of soul from point of view of Christian eschatology.
Here in OP it means little more than life itself, call it a part of one that gets born and reborn. An embryo has no life (no vedana, sanna, phasso, vinnana). But after few weeks the fetus which develops from the embryo does. Something changed. That change is what I called soul.
We have something that causes us to be born repeatedly. At Nibbana it is uprooted.
Does this go against Buddhist teachings?
Here in OP it means little more than life itself, call it a part of one that gets born and reborn. An embryo has no life (no vedana, sanna, phasso, vinnana). But after few weeks the fetus which develops from the embryo does. Something changed. That change is what I called soul.
We have something that causes us to be born repeatedly. At Nibbana it is uprooted.
Does this go against Buddhist teachings?
"The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”― Albert Camus
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Buddhism doesn't have a position on the soul.
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Not soul.
My hypothesis written without the word soul -
We have something that causes us to be born repeatedly. At Nibbana it is uprooted.
Does this go against Buddhist teachings?
"The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”― Albert Camus
- cappuccino
- Posts: 12879
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
- Contact:
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
Desire to delight here, causes rebirth.
Nirvana is the end, of that.
Nirvana is the end, of that.
Re: Do we have a soul till Nibbana?
And what if we call desire to delight .. desire to be reborn .. as soul? Which persists life after life and ceases at Nibbana?cappuccino wrote: ↑Wed Mar 28, 2018 2:21 am Desire to delight here, causes rebirth.
Nirvana is the end, of that.
"The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy.”― Albert Camus