Soulmate Twinflames according to Buddhism

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Gem

So the word 'anatta' does mean no self

Yes true. It's the Buddhist term, Citta Santana, that refers to consciousness or what would be the "soul" in Western philosophy.

For example, the Dalai Lama teaches he is the 14th reincarnation of the same consciousness. He announced recently that he will no longer reincarnate in a political role ending his centuries-old linage. He has stated it would be best to have no more Lama's and how he may choose to come back as a female in a Western country or choose to stop incarnating all together.

https://boingboing.net/2014/10/24/th...ot-return.html

Amazingly, the Buddhist book The Bardo Thodol, states we may incarnate as an insect, a dog, a pig, an ant, a grub, etc. Very similar to Hindu belief. The book, Journey of Souls, states "human" consciousness cannot incarnate as lower forms as it has a special quality suited to the human body.

upon emerging from the womb and opening
its eyes it may find itself transformed into a young dóg. Formerly it
had been a human being, but now if it have become a dog it findeth
itself undergoing sufferings in a dog’s kennel; or [perhaps] as a young
pig in a pigsty, or as an ant in an ant—hill, or as an insect, or a grub in
a hole, or as a calf, or a kid, or a lamb,1
from which shape there is no
[immediate] returning. Dumbness, stupidity, and miserable intellectual
obscurity are suffered, and a variety of sufferings experienced. In like
manner, one may wander into hell, or into the world of unhappy ghosts,
Bardo Thodol

http://padmasambhavagururinpoche.com...the-dead_4.pdf

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Imzadi

That is interesting, Gem. Based on what you said, one might conclude that reincarnation is essentially the rebirth of causal events or phenomena rather than that of a self moving along a process.

Yes. So we can say in a sense that 'volition' (which is kamma) is cause, and that produces an effect. In the teaching they say 'good kamma' is the pure intent of love and kindness, manifests 'good results', where as ill-will: hatred greed and so forth, brings about bad results. In short, you can't plant bitter lemon seeds and harvest sweet mangoes.

What someone might remember as multiple lives is merely an illusion of attachment to a dream constantly changing due to the causation (kamma). Is that what you mean?

Well, the past lives are like the immediate past in essence, and there is no self in any of that, but the illusion of self, of a being who is the subject experience, is perpetuated by much psychological reactivity (it is 'I' who reacts). IOW the ego is fueled by mental reactivity and cannot withstand equanimity of mind. The meditation is therefore founded on two principles: conscious awareness with mindful equanimity, which is the same as conscious awareness without any reactivity, which is the same as awareness without volition, which is the same as the cessation of generating kamma.


The old kamma, or the past volitions, have still produced potentials (called sankaras), so when we stop producing new kamma (stop reacting), these old potentials continue to manifest and dissolve in conscious awareness which is equanimous, or non-reactive, or calm and still. Thus the old 'impurities' or 'defilements' are eradicated and the mind/body purified.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Yes true. It's the Buddhist term, Citta Santana, that refers to consciousness or what would be the "soul" in Western philosophy.

Yes the Santana is perpetuated moment to moment, but has no continuity of duration. It is destroyed in this moment but its characteristic re-manifest in the next - so it is entirely 'new' - but being generated in the previous moment, its old and destroyed 'personality' is carried into the new manifestation.

For example, the Dalai Lama teaches he is the 14th reincarnation of the same consciousness. He announced recently that he will no longer reincarnate in a political role ending his centuries-old linage. He has stated it would be best to have no more Lama's and how he may choose to come back as a female in a Western country or choose to stop incarnating all together.

https://boingboing.net/2014/10/24/th...ot-return.html

Interesting.

Amazingly, the Buddhist book The Bardo Thodol, states we may incarnate as an insect, a dog, a pig, an ant, a grub, etc. Very similar to Hindu belief. The book, Journey of Souls, states "human" consciousness cannot incarnate as lower forms as it has a special quality suited to the human body.

Well, I'm not sure about reincarnation because I can't recall any past lives. However the Buddhist teachings contain stories of animal incarnations, which I have no reason to believe, and also stories of incarnation on different 'planes', which might be more 'heavenly' or 'hellish' or 'ghostly'. I find that credible considering the astral planes and various spirit beings, which to me, is just an inkling.

upon emerging from the womb and opening
its eyes it may find itself transformed into a young dóg. Formerly it
had been a human being, but now if it have become a dog it findeth
itself undergoing sufferings in a dog’s kennel; or [perhaps] as a young
pig in a pigsty, or as an ant in an ant—hill, or as an insect, or a grub in
a hole, or as a calf, or a kid, or a lamb,1
from which shape there is no
[immediate] returning. Dumbness, stupidity, and miserable intellectual
obscurity are suffered, and a variety of sufferings experienced. In like
manner, one may wander into hell, or into the world of unhappy ghosts,

Bardo Thodol

http://padmasambhavagururinpoche.com...the-dead_4.pdf

Yes, that seems consistent with the teachings I am familiar with.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Gem

I don't think true self is part of the Buddhist teaching either, and it's not easy to understand how no self fits in with the concept of rebirth. Rebirth is to perpetuate a self from moment to moment where in actual fact everything of experience, body, mind is annihilated in each moment to be regenerated in the next by the process of kamma. Kamma is the volition, and the volition creates the potential which has to manifest when all the conditions for it to arise come together. Liberation from the cycle of rebirth is the cessation of volition. The volition is the desire and the aversion (or 'craving') which are reactions to the experience arising from the potentials of the volitions of the past, so in this sense kamma drives itself from reaction to reaction to sustain the delusion of a self (I react) that is continually reborn.



The meditation is a practice without volition, without any action/reaction element as one 'just observes'. That is, to observe without any reactions, without volition, to halt the kammic wheel. Then the experience continues to arise due to the stored potentials of the kamma of the past, but no new kamma is being generated. As the old potentials (called sankaras) arise in conscious awareness and dissolve away without any new potentials being generated, the old 'stockpile' of sankaras begins to dwindle, and hence the purification of meditation.


In the rhetoric of the Buddhist philosophy there is no self involved in the process because there is no enduring 'true nature', no substance to anything, or anatta: no self, or 'emptiness'.


So the word 'anatta' does mean no self in the context of 'emptiness', not identity, no fundamental substance, and it means not-self in context of any experience, mind, body having 'no self/me', or enduring substance.

Buddha Nature ( Mahayana) or Luminous Mind ( Theravada ) is taught in Buddhism.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Imzadi

So the "True Self" as you described could be synonymous with how someone might think of as "Soul." From my understanding, that is how I perceive the terminology of the Soul; just as your eloquent definition of "True Self" that is beyond the aggregates. The path to awakening is the process of uncovering and realizing the True Self unfettered, free, and pure.

When I think of a Soul the Christian teachings come to mind therefore these ideas I have would never fit into Buddhism. A Soul is explained in Christianity as something we have, Buddha Nature is what we are. I personally can't see these differences coming together but thats just me

[Rain95]

Question: What is the nature of the mindstream that reincarnates from lifetime to lifetime?

Dalai Lama: If one understands the term "soul" as a continuum of individuality from moment to moment, from lifetime to lifetime, then one can say that Buddhism also accepts a concept of soul. Buddhism does not deny the continuum of consciousness. Because of this, we find some Tibetan scholars, such as the Sakya master Rendawa, who accept that there is such a thing as self or soul. However, the same word, the "kangsak ki dak," is at the same time denied by many other scholars.

We find diverse opinions, even among Buddhist scholars, as to what exactly the nature of self is, what exactly that thing or entity is that continues from one moment to the next moment, from one lifetime to the next lifetime. One of the divisions of [the "Mind-Only"] school maintains there is a special continuum of consciousness called alayavijnana which is the fundamental consciousness.

http://viewonbuddhism.org/dharma-quo...mindstream.htm

[Rain95]

God had brought me to my knees and made me acknowledge my own nothingness, and out of that knowledge I had been reborn. I was no longer the centre of my life and therefore I could see God in everything.”

The one thing which you have to abandon unconditionally is your self.

― Father Bede Griffiths - Catholic Priest

Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy
and vain deceit, after the tradition of men,
after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
St. Paul (Christianity)

They become rooted in false philosophy,
Tenacious and unyielding, Self-sufficient and self-inflated,
Such hear not the name of Buddha, Nor ever learn of the truth.
Dhammapada (Buddhism)

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by sky123

A Soul is explained in Christianity as something we have, Buddha Nature is what we are. I personally can't see these differences coming together but thats just me

It's a little more complicated than that:

Soul in the Bible

The traditional concept of an immaterial and immortal soul distinct from the body was not found in Judaism before the Babylonian exile,[1] but developed as a result of interaction with Persian and Hellenistic philosophies.[2] Accordingly, the Hebrew word נֶ֫פֶשׁ‬, nephesh, although translated as "soul" in some older English Bibles, actually has a meaning closer to "living being". Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul_in_the_Bible

In other words, we are the soul in the bible. Nephesh = A Living Being = Us

The Bible does make a distinction between us soul/consciousness and body/ego though.

Thinking we "have a soul" vs "we are the soul" is really about having a perfected image of "soul." Since a "soul" is perfect and I am not, I would not call myself the "soul." It's similar to "enlightenment." One may say, "I will someday reach "enlightenment." Well no the term "enlightenment" means the "you" has changed and is fundamentally different. So the "you/ego" that seeks it cannot find it or embody/realize it. But we still think this way. Both "I have a soul" and "I will someday become enlightened" are false. I am the soul, just one that has identified with ego. When I am no longer identified with ego, I am enlightened. That "I" is egoless. Soul or consciousness is present in ego and no-ego.

The more subtle the level of consciousness, the more independent of the physical sphere (ego), and hence the more likely that it's (qualities) remain from one life to the next. But in general, whether more subtle or more gross, all levels of consciousness are of the same nature. Dalai Lama

Consciousnesses or "souls" or whatever you call yourself, can be identified with ego or not. It's possible you know yourself as ego and do not know your actual qualities or attributes. One may not know what they are.

[Baile]

Originally Posted by sky123

A Soul is explained in Christianity as something we have, Buddha Nature is what we are. I personally can't see these differences coming together but thats just me

The perfect example of the "parable of the blind men and an elephant." It is both (and much more) when all perspectives are taken into account. And it is but one or the other depending upon which part of the elephant the human being has chosen to gravitate to. Belief paths are choices: choosing to see, understand and live life from one specific belief perspective only.

So much of we discuss here -- and in these religious forums in particular -- can be easily understood by taking into account the universal laws that rule existence. Truth is both relative and absolute. What is described above is also a perfect example of one religion's belief-tenets and truths gravitating more towards relative truth, and the other's towards absolute truth.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

Buddha Nature ( Mahayana) or Luminous Mind ( Theravada ) is taught in Buddhism.

And......?