Do you believe in souls?

Yes I do believe in souls. I just don't believe they're independent of our brains, and I don't believe they're immortal.

Really...who cares.

Fact is...questions that begin with "Do you believe in..." ...

...should probably be rewritten to reflect the reality of the question.

Observe: Do you GUESS that there are souls?

Now...since there is absolutely NO UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that there are souls....and absolutely NO UNAMBIGUOUS EVIDENCE that souls do not exist...

...essentially, every "Do you believe in..." question of this sort reduces to:

Toss a coin and tell me if it came up heads or tails...and if heads meant "yes" or "no."

Frank:

This is good if belief is simply guessing - as if evidence has nothing to do with belief.

I think the majority of the world uses evidence to support thier belief. If you are picking some concept where we have little evidence you could sell me on your coin analogy. But most of us use evidence. Look above and you will see a near death experience - I am sure he or she has no coin to determine these things - he or she looks to evidence.

TF

yeah really Frank, the problem with the "coin" analogy is that it omits "the edge" which is where "faith" comes in.

if there is no soul then what is carried on to the next incarnations....

Karma

so is it still "me"?

In these kinds of matters...there is no unambiguous evidence.




I think you are very wrong in that.





Show me any evidence FOR a soul....or any evidence that THERE ARE NO SOULS.

ReX, thanks for the reference. I'm not familiar with Talbot (a bit more with Bohm). Here's a description of the book from Amazon.com"

"Today nearly everyone is familiar with holograms, three-dimensional images projected into space with the aid of a laser. Now, two of the world's most eminent thinkers -- University of London physicists David Bohm, a former protege of Einstein's and one of the world's most respected quantum physicists, and Stanford neurophysiologist Karl Pribram, one of the architects of our modern understanding of the brain -- believe that the universe itself may be a giant hologram, quite literally a kind of image or construct created, at least in part, by the human mind. This remarkable new way of looking at the universe explains now only many of the unsolved puzzles of physics, but also such mysterious occurrences as telepathy, out-of-body and near death experiences, "lucid" dreams, and even religious and mystical experiences such as feelings of cosmic unity and miraculous healings."

I have a problem with accepting analogy models of the "spiritual" realm from science. While analogy models may be very exciting, they present the danger of being severely limited and artificial. I'm thinking of the use of the Darwinian biological model of evolution in characterizing the "evolution" of social systems (now univerally rejected for its lack of fit by anthropologists). Also the use of the computer model as an analogy for the workings of the brain. There are many more. I DO feel that the material world AS WE KNOW IT is a construction of the human mind, but I hesitate to equate it with the hologram as we have created it. I prefer to stay open and enjoy the mystery of the matter. The mystical sense of the unity of Reality does not seem to have any fit with the notion of the hologram.

Goldbars,

There is no me, nor thee. All illusory.

"What happens to the chairs deadmen sit on in your dreams when you awaken?" Henry Miller

so basically there is no reincarnation....? i dont get it, i think buddhists mean soul but something very different

GB, if by reincarnation you are thinking of a Christian-like soul passing from one body to another, forget it. That is not the Buddhist notion at all. If you ask me what the Buddhist notion IS, I would be very hesitant to even attempt a response. There are many levels of Buddhist thought, some of it as fantastical to me as that of the Abrahamic religions. I prefer the Zen notion of reincarnation. First, let me say that no zen master has ever laid out any notion for me of reincarnation, so I have to give you MY clumsy version (guesswork). You and I ARE the Cosmos (not a Buddhist term) and when we die we remain the Cosmos but in different forms. It was what we were before our births. I think that my life will leave some kind of residua (can't say what kind), and that means it will have affected future lives somehow; I do not think our presence will have had no effect at all. But the exact nature of our "impact" I cannot even begin to guess. Let me say that reincarnation is no big idea in zen buddhism. Indeed, no ideas are big in zen buddhism. They would say to you that if you encounter a big idea kill it.

Goldbars,

I've probably written over 50,000 words on this topic over the last year or two. JL Nobody is another frequent commenter on this and other Buddhist topics. At this site most are of the posts are on the Philosophy and Spiritual forms. You can look back in these forms for subjects that are either explicitly Buddhist, or otherwise on topic. Some of those are very lengthy, but with many interesting comments by a whole range of writers.

Click on my name, and review my many posts. I'm sure that will answer most of your questions. If not then address specifics to me and I'll try to answer them. It just seems so futile to keep answering the same basic questions over and over and over again. I've been doing this now for over forty years ... give me a break and first read what I've written on your topic that's readily available. O.K?

there's a couple of peeps here I would not tangle with re Buddhism, Asherman and JLNobody. enter at your own risk. wear armour!

the evolving soul
My house of cards is more related to the guestimates of the physical world but I do think that there may be some ways to fit a soul into the new paradigm. Lets say there are no souls. You die, your done, game over. Everything that you feel is you started from your inception and ends when you are gone. That is possible. But lets for a moment ponder what would happen if at the time of conception a third entity was involved. The mother, the father, and the energy life force that becomes you. I suppose that it is also possible. Like Frank's flip of a coin I'd say they are both just as likely because we really may never know.

Now lets say that coin flip lands on the edge, neither heads nor tails. Then I suppose we get an eternal resting place made by an omnipotent being. An infinite length of time existed until I was made and whether I am good or bad I get to spend infinity either peaceful or tortured. Lets flip 2 coins and if the first one lands on its edge then I flip the second one and it lands on its edge on top of the first coin and both coins stand one on top of the other then I'd even consider thinking about this option.

So what makes sense to me. How do I fit the soul into my house of cards. Lets for a second say that there is the possibility that people like Uri Gellar, Nostradamus, Jesus Christ, Moses, and others had some type of powers over and above the normal person. Powers that will most likely become common place in our evolutionary chain in a few million years. Well they had to get these powers (if they had them) from somewhere so why not a soul. Why not release the energy in our neural pathways and cells as a self contained conscious entity? It is just as plausible as nothing being released and our energy dissipating as the cells die off over the week or so following our demise.

Lets take those souls, from all living creatures, not just humans but plants and animals as well from every habitable planet in our universe and take the sum of the limit of this energy. Expand this to the entire infinite Universe and take the limit of the sum of all energy and maybe we have something that I might correlate to God if it exists.

One little tidbit. If a soul does exist and does pass the life force from one physical form to another then my personal opinion is that the physical forms can not be too different from one another. I don't think a spider or a fly could next become a tree or a monkey. I do think that the soul may very well evolve just like the physical form so a rabbit soul may become a raccoon soul and a spider could become a fly but instinctively if there is such a thing as a soul and reincarnation I'd be more inclined to think that when I pass I am coming back as another human. Maybe a high order mammal, maybe not. We may never know.

With that said then heaven and hell take on a new meaning. This planet is our heaven and our hell. It is only by the collective global actions of humanity that dictate if we end up in an eternal heaven or eternal hell. We may let our species perish or we may fail to be well spread out amongst the stars by the time our sun goes nova. But each year that passes that we do not seek to improve the global median quality of life the larger the chance then when we pass, we go to hell no matter how good we were in this life. (unless you believe in karma). Only by seeking to improve the global median quality of life for every living creature on this planet could we hope to go to heaven. Funny thing is by actually doing this because we believe in reincarnation if by chance the double standing coin flip does happen then we probably improve our odds of going upstairs anyway.

If a body decays in nature and on that grave beautiful flowers emerge, biologically explainable because that body (of let's say a human) was a good fertilizer. Does that person not live on (in a very real and physical sense) in those flowers? And in the creatures which live of carrion. But that might seem less romantic. Even within this little ecosystem, it could be stated: we remain. To that which we were before we were born. Matter, energy, life. All the same, different forms.

My teacher(sensei) is currently hung up on the concept of water being formless yet remaining to be the same. Without going into detail we can use this analogy on a very cosmic scale. You can put water in a plastic cup, or in a round cup, or a triangular cup. The form changes but the essence (in this case water) remains.

We remain, to say that we are in essence souls (absolute values, your individual self, ego) which live on (but somehow are, or in a more plausible scheme, are not created, nor grow during lifespan) would not find a lot of support in buddhists like JLN or Asherman (as I suspect one can find in his previous posts).

For all those who would like a deep and comprehensive understanding of buddhist views, I suggest reading Ashermans posts. All of them.

If you want direct, 'practical' understanding (like alikamier often does) on the matter (relating to reality being an illusion) ask JLN.

Nipok, don't take this the wrong way, and if pm would have worked, I would have used it but I must ask this, forgive me. Why forgo the use of apostrophes on so many occasions?
As for content, it is my understanding that Moses parting the sea is really the Red Sea (historically explained as) drying up. It's merely symbolicism.
Jesus walking over water is a metaphor; water is evil, Jesus is above it and doesn't eg. drown in it. I see no reason to leave that option open in your deck of cards, scepticism can deal with them, in my personal opinion. But perhaps, I am misguided on the matter.

To my understanding, we can still build ideas like the holographic universe (and letting them go afterwards, they're only points of view and all are equally valid yet remain mere mental constructions and cannot possibly be True) and such without having to deal with 'pananormal' phenomena such as telekineses (it COULD of course fit into the paradigm) or 'superhumans' in any shape or form.

But this was about souls. Let's stick with that. Do you Believe in them?
Frank, keep quiet, we've been through this. Let's just say that believing here means, best guess, until you convince me otherwise with 'evidence' or very plausible models given what we think we know.

No disrespect meant to anyone

Really.

No disrespect???

So you are telling me that because you and I have been through this...I have to be quiet...and I must accept that you do not mean to diss me with that thought!!!

You people make me laugh.

Best guess, indeed!

You are pulling your guesses out of the air...and pretending they are something other than blind guesses.

The soul could be unaware, blind, and senseless without the brain of a body. The soul would be in eternal peace. So when you die, you'll either know or you wont know jack.

Where would your soul go next after your death? The scariest thing would be that you're still aware as a soul and you only drift away forever. That would be a state of hell for you. Hopefully your soul will reincarnate. If your soul reincarnates: Would it turn out to be paradise for you next? Or would it turn out to be that you're back here on earth again?

i think reincarnation is real

Frank:

Ask a believer why thebelieve and they will not give you 'because I just do' (that would be a faith based answer) they give you reasons.

I do not understand your claim that all evidence for belief is non-arbitrary. If I am in pain for hours (like I was two months ago) and I pray to God to make it stop - and suddenly it does - are you saying that this is arbitrary?

I agree that it is non-verifiable and perhaps not repeatable but arbitrary. It was directly apperant to my senses. Like when I put 50 cents into a machine - push A6 for some Cheesy Poofs and they fall down. I suppose you could argue against cause and effect here and say that the Cheesy Poofs for some other reason fell (perhaps due to error) - but William of Ockham would say otherwise.

Asherman,

You stated above that Karma is the only thing to survive the transmigration from one livetime to the next. I thought there was allusion to the impression of one soul to the next (like a signet ring in wax). Am I wrong? Can you clarify?

TTF