Do you believe in souls?

JLNobody

public/empirical/logical paradigm = private/intuitive paradigm


When we look (deep) inside (our self) we find the outside.

There's no one home,

Frank,
"I asked you how you were able to state with such certainty that there are no souls."

Goldbars has obsessively queried about what happens to the self after death. My responses to his questioning apparently didn't satisfy him, so I quoted directly from early Pali texts, and referred him to a number of authoritative books on the subject of Buddhism. I explained that to you in the post that you've so carefully dissected here. My response to Goldbars, and to you in regard to the lack of souls is based primarily on the study of Buddhist texts and scholarly study of Buddhism at the graduate level. Specifically my response was that fundamental Buddhist doctrine denies the existence of souls. I think the following quote from my earlier posting addressed to you is clear: In that conversation (in re. no souls doctrine) with Goldbars, I'm not speaking from personal experience/knowledge, because that isn't I think what he's asking for. Buddhist religious texts are the source of my comments, a few of which (in acknowledged good translation from Pali and Sanskrit texts) I've posted for Goldbars edification.

"...please explain how you KNOW for certain that the "experience" is not simply self delusion?"

I do acknowledge that my Awakening Experience might be "delusional", and have done so on many occasions in this thread. Here are just a few of many statements where the possibility of the experience being invalid.

, or

or

"We believe that we know on the basis of personal experience. Absolute honesty, does require that we acknowledge the possibility that our experience (whatever it is/was), might not be all that it seemed."

Actually, it was you who set us off on being more careful in how we tend to "know" things. My knowledge, like everyone else, is derived from many sources, and all of them to some extent "cook down" to belief, or as you would have it, "guesses". When I talk about Buddhist doctrine and history the sources are Buddhist texts, course curriculum (lectures and scholarly texts), and independent readings from authoritative works on Buddhism. Some, or all of that knowledge may be faulty and mistaken by either myself, or those who wrote the texts from which my "knowing" came. When I talk about the nature of Ultimate Reality, the sources of "knowing" are the same as those from which my "knowledge" of Buddhist doctrines and history are drawn, plus my personal experience. The level of belief in the "knowledge" derived from textbooks, etc. can be evaluated by anyone willing to do the studies, and they will determine for themselves how much faith to put in the validity of the materials. No one can evaluate how valid my personal experience(s) are, so they may believe or disbelieve based on my reputation for honesty and objectivity. My experience is "known" to me, it isn't a guess. I believe the experience is valid, but must doubt it even as I am forced to hold some doubts about such mundane things as the laws of physics, or my wife's birthday. Believing that the perceptual world is illusory makes the doubting of one's experiences and perceptions the norm, and all "knowing" open to some question.

I defy you to find any substantiation for this anywhere in the over 5000 postings I have made here (that "You (Frank) are the one who began talking about knowing as a degree, or level of belief"

Sept 13, "Now...since there is absolutely NO UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that there are souls....and absolutely NO UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that souls do not exist..." " In these kinds of matters...there is no unambiguous evidence."
Sept 17, "It is my personal contention that I do not know if there is a god or gods....and I do not know if there are no gods...and I see absolutely NO UNAMBIGUOUS evidence upon which to base a meaningful guess in either direction."

"The difference between what scientist do with their handling of evidence and what theists and the religious do with theirs is such a world apart...I won't bother taking time to lay it out. Anyone who does not see it easily without help...probably wouldn't see it with help.", and "In some instances, Jason, there simply IS NO unambiguous evidence."

Actually, this should be enough, though you've repeated the refrain often in this thread. I'm pretty sure that you'll point out that in each of these cases you are referring only to the assertions about the existence of God, or "personal revelation". On the other hand, you've no "unambiguous evidence" for anything else either. You cited your birth certificate, military serial number, and the names of you family. Perhaps all of those are fraudulent, the mere legend constructed to mask a whole different person. Perhaps you are mistaken and your spouse has a very different name, or that you've transliterated a number in the documents that "prove" your existence. Perhaps you are dreaming the whole thing, or, as some have suggested, you are only a bit to dream yourself. There is no "unambiguous evidence" to anything. You choose to belief that your guess that your personal memories and experiences are valid, but there is no more proof of that than there is that my "Awakening Experience" is valid, or invalid.

You seemed to agree with this when you wrote in reference to Christians, "They completely ignore the fact that although they are correct that proof of anything is almost impossible to come by and "guessing" of a sort is necessary simply to live life... " and "For the record...almost all belief systems maintain that portions of their belief system is NOT belief...but experience or observation." Isn't your "knowing" also a belief system? "...HOW DO YOU KNOW YOU ARE NOT DELUDING YOURSELF WITH THIS PERSONAL EXPERIENCE?"
"If someone tells me they "experienced" having a cup of coffee in the morning...it is not a guess nor is it a belief. It is the experience of having a cup of coffee." And how is it different if someone tells you that this morning they had a transcendental experience? It is no more guessing than the recollection of the coffee, though truly the person's recollection is still more a matter of believing than "knowing" and no "unambiguous evidence" is available for either.

"I HAVE NEVER SAID THAT GOD...SHOULD A GOD EXISTS...IS UNKNOWABLE. In fact, I have commented on this point in dozens upon dozens of threads. " No, but you have said that no one can proffer "unambiguous evidence", and that personal experiences are almost always invalid. The "almost always", I take to mean that you do accept the possibility that some personal revelations, or Awakening Experiences ARE valid, though not provable to you.

Gotta go now. Just told my wife blew out a knee and is in emergency room.

Ash, best wishes for your wife.

Asherman, Hope all turns out well. Best wishes and blessings, c.i.

Twyvel, regarding my working distinction between the publlic/empirical/logical "vs" the private/intuitive paradigm, it is only offered as an analytical distinction for the purpose of interacting with Frank. You are, of course, right to note that ultimately there is no ontologically valid distinction.

You say that "When we look (deep) inside (our self) we find the outside.
There's no one home."
That's true, but is it not also true that everywhere we look, inside AND outside (which are also ultimate one) we find ourselves.?

and if there are no souls or self or any kind of identity and only live one single life...then what the hell is "awakened"....

We find ourselves not because we are located inside and outside; we ARE all that is the one.

Goldbarz, remember that awakening is realizing there is no agent of our actions and experiences; there are only actions and experiences.
Oops. I answered a question you did not ask. I thought you asked "who" is awakened. Let me just say in an attempt to answer your WHAT is "awakened"...and this is not intended to be coy. When you experience awakening--and if you keep up this struggle you may very will do so one day--you will not find the question answerable. It (awakening) is an experience/perspective referred to as ineffable. From this side of moksha, awakening, or satori, your question makes sense and demands an answer. From the other side (metaphoriccally speaking, of course) it is seen as "not even wrong." It belongs in a different paradigm altogether. It can't and won't be answered.

i really thought that you believed that there would be future lives coming up

I believe that when I bite off the tongue of the devil while in the throes of death I shall break the cycle of life and exist no more.

Great strategy, Edgar. If I end up there, I'll try that.

Dark is the night; 0000000000 is the death.

well, i still believe in rebirth.....

We always believe finally in what makes us feel good. Me too!

I don't expect to feel anything.

EB, I know; me neither. I was referring to GoldBarz' tenacity regarding his belief in rebirth.

Would someone give me Cliff Notes on the 36 page topic! I am entirely too lazy to read all this!

I will go to the topic question. Do I believe in a soul? That depends on how you wish to define it. I don't believe this is a real thing that we cannot see, like a molequle or an atom, for example. I don't buy that my soul, after death, is going anywere, like reincarnation, heaven, or Hell.

Dumb question, but why is heaven a non-capitolization word, when used as a place, but Hell is capitolized? Is there hidden meaning in this or am I incorrect in grammar?

If I have a soul, it is the in the memory of loved ones. They may love me or feel that I gave them something of value, while living. The sole of my existance is now with them to pass on, with memory of my thoughts, ideas, beliefs, or anything that actually meant something to someone, while I was living. I belive that all of us have something to pass on to others and can define soul. It may not be in the dictionary, in that sort of term. I believe it to be true.

Learn to read, Twyvel...then come back and join the disucssion.

I specifically excluded using word games or sophism in this area...and I have already conceded that I could make a sophists argument that argues for the stuff I called "knowing" not to be truly knowing.


But as I said earlier...if you think that because I say I can "know" my name and "know" that 2 + 2 = 4....

...then it makes sense for you to say you KNOW the nature of Ultimate REALITY...

...then you probably need psychiatric help...and that is outside the areas we are covering here.

But I do appreciate the laughs.

You people who have set up elaborate belief systems...which essentially offer your based-on-nothing guesses as facts....are a gas.

I love to watch you folks try to rationalize the unrationalizeable.

How do you manage to work up the silly ego necessary to assert you KNOW the Ultimate REALITY?

"Graduate level"!!!

What does that have to do with the price of eggs?

In any case, you are essentially saying that the reason you are INSISTING there are no souls...is that you are guessing that the Buddhists guesses about whether or not there are souls...are correct.

That is guessing twice removed, so to speak.




Right.

Buddhists guess there are no souls...and you are parroting the Buddhists guesses in this thread...and you are doing so in a way that certainly looks like you are offering a revelation of truth...rather than a guess about other guesses.

That is what I took exception to...and since you apparently agree with me...why are we having this discussion?




Sorry about your wife. Hope all is well.

well i dont think reincarnation/rebirth is just a belief, there are some pretty good convincing evidence that we live numerous lives, i dont think that buddhists DONT believe in past and future lives because if they truly did then they would have changed "rebirth" to something else, Buddha makes it clear that he believed in rebirth when he said something about his many births, wandering through samsara, not finding the housebuilder in the Dhammadapa, how can anybody still believe that buddhists dont believe in past and future lives (i think maybe only the Zen do because they dont really think rebirth is important, they want to realize Nirvana in THIS lifetime)