Oneness - True Faith
wizanda
Buddhist Have a Soul Posted on: 2016/8/14 16:24
Helper
Joined:
2004/3/26 7:04
From Nottingham, UK
Posts: 2803
Because atman (Sanskrit), psyche (Greek), nephesh (Hebrew) all mean self, soul, life; all stemming from the root breath.

It is ridiculous to say Buddhist don't have a soul, we all do; i know Buddha's soul from Heaven (Nirvana/Øneness).

If we check what Buddha said about it, he didn't deny or reject having a soul in any texts I've found...

Instead it seems he opposed both schools of Hindu thought of Atman Vs Anātman; thus to sit in the middle line, as with most of his teachings.

So when we look into it because the eternal character is like a melody, that is ever changing; it is equated with the word santāna, which is the continuity of our own consciousness.

Thus there is no difference between using the English word soul, and santāna; the problem comes when we use the term atman, psyche, and nephesh, as it means self as well.

A soul doesn't need a sense of self, it is just a melody, character, flavour, artistic splodge of colours, wave form etc; applying a 1 to it (self) or 0 (selfless), only changes the way it interacts in the surrounding environment.

So for instance, you can put your soul into a musical instrument; yet if you have to much sense of self, you spoil it by wondering what others think; whereas if you're selfless you can truly express your whole heart and soul through it, and literally place your soul into it, thus creating amazing music that touches other people's heart and soul.

By understanding our own character's unique traits, that are continuous (santāna) throughout life times, we can even find previous incarnations of ourselves, as the melody is the same.

It is like the whole idea of finding the reincarnated lamas, shows that the soul transmigrates, and yet then people deny having a soul, as maybe they want to oppose other religions or maybe they've just not looked into it.

Think when the word heart has been used by the Buddha, he was referring to the soul; as that is where we're connected to our soul...

He wasn't denying the metaphysical aspects, and being an atheist, that is people's own choice due to words being ambiguous, and thus the true meanings have been lost.

By recognizing our own character/soul, we can then learn to be more selfless, as we become one with our own identity, and can see when we're being full of self...

By denying our own character, and trying to be ambiguous, we can still be full of projected ego, whilst not realizing this is the case, as we've got no base to work from.

N B with U
Transfer Print PDF Bookmark Top
wizanda
Re: Buddhist Have a Soul Posted on: 2016/8/18 7:54
Helper
Joined:
2004/3/26 7:04
From Nottingham, UK
Posts: 2803
It is the eternal soul (santāna) we are to explore, the self is illusionary....

The core of Øneness (Brahman) has no self; in its lack of self it is the Source of the Dharma, it is all things.

Within us attaining Tathagatahood (gone from reality), there are levels of ascension, the lower levels are absorbed by their own self; the higher we ascend past the material plains, and into a realm of pure consciousness (Øneness), where unconditional love and wisdom are the ultimate truth, no-self is required.

The self (1) is like inward reflection.... No self (0) is an outwardly reflection... Both are concepts of existing.

When we attain unconditional love we are selfless; when we attain wisdom, we realize that we're just part of the whole.

If we stop to look at what we are, whilst enlightened, we become inwardly reflecting and have a self.

If we try to say we have no-self in a physical form, then clearly there are issues with this; as without a soul, and without Brahman (universal mind), then where does the no-self reside, and think within some the egoic mind is all that is left.

As if we truly had no-self, we wouldn't exist in a physical form, we would have transcended the need of it, as here (Maya) is all reflections.

We could be in a state of 'I Am not-the-self', which clearly starts with the word ego by the definitive 'I'; if we say, 'We're not-the-self', then we're back to saying we are Brahman (universal mind).

We're to use the self within this physical form, by accepting we're One: we exist within the universal mind (CPU/Brahman), and everything is part of it within the Matrix (Maya).

Then when we see everything is One, a part of the universal mind, we realize really everything in reality doesn't even exist; it is all part of the dream (Maya); thus in reality it all has no-self.

The more we live being none (Ø) within the universal mind (Øneness), the more we become a Bodhisattva, by helping everyone by our selfless being.

N B with U
Transfer Print PDF Bookmark Top
Top Previous Topic Next Topic
Register To Post