Can someone please explain to me the "no soul" concept/teaching?

[BlueSky]

Originally Posted by sprinter

Quick question,, If I were an illusion like for instance a cartoon character(eg the dog in that show-family guy), , then how would I know it??
After all, I don't exist.

If I may..........
You are the awareness of what seems like is happening to you and until that realization happens (all by itself, although it seems otherwise) you are awareness unaware that what is happening is not happening to a you. It is happening in awareness..............it is happening regardless though, it is not an illusion because there is nothing to compare illusion against. It is as real as anything else.......if that makes sense.
James

Originally Posted by de.spin

... The soul is a concept of the mind. The mind hopes: "there must be a soul". Why? Because of the fear of death. The ego is scared to die. There must be a soul, then. A continuation. A continuation of what?

There is only one Soul. The separation is an illusion. The idea "I am", "I have a soul", it's territory of the ego. ...

You're Spot On that ‘separation is an illusion.’ That we are experiencing individuality isn’t problematic though. The ego is often demonized w/ ego being equated w/ egotism or being egotistical even though these are 2 separate things (the neural mechanism & the out of balance mechanism of self/ego). Ego/self is doing exactly what it is meant to do, to afford us the valuable learning experience of individuality. The mind (& the rest of the body) is an instrument of the soul to experience individuality for our excursion in physicality.

Ego Is OK, Even ➥➥➥Beloved↵↵↵- http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...829#post219829

Beliefs vary about an existence of a soul. Some believe it, some don’t. That we have a spirit that survives the physical body’s death abounds in many belief systems. This belief has existed for millennia & there are some very good reasons to support it metaphysically.

It is fallacy that everyone constructs the soul out of fear of death. This may apply to some, but doesn’t apply to many others. Some have moved past the fear & this includes the fear of death. Others just don’t get their undies in a twist about what happens after they die. This not being fearful about death can stem from various things such as just not caring about this What If, not being curious about metaphysical matters, having moved into a realization that they are an immortal soul that will have many such experiences, &/or being accepting that what will be will be & there’s probably nothing one can do to modify it. There is no question that some fear death, but this isn’t a factor for everyone.

Oneness isn’t about us being an undifferentiated energy w/ the rest of the Universe. We are all interconnected energies, but this doesn’t require that we are the same exact homogeneous energy. The Dali Lama addresses the false idea of Me vs We of our individuality & Oneness, noting that it isn’t Me or We, but Me + We in the following conversation.

Howard Cutler question, “How do we reconcile this conflict between cultivating this healthy sense of independence, a sense of Me, with a sense of connection with the group, a sense of We?”

“I see no conflict here,” the Dalai Lama stated flatly.”
...
“I think in discussing this topic we should first make something more clear. Now, I have noticed that sometimes people in the West have this tendency to see things in black and white terms, all or none. So here you are speaking of this Me Versus We, as if one needs to make a choice ... . We are saying you can think about both one’s own welfare and the welfare of others at the same time. ... There is no inherent opposition here.

... The difference between the Tibetan language and English might suggest a basic difference of perspectives. In tibetan, the word we use for ‘I’ and ‘me’ is ‘nga’ and the word we use for ‘us’ and ‘we’ is ‘ngatso’. So on the basic level of the words themselves there is, in the Tibetan language, an intimate connection between ‘I’ as an individual and ‘we’ as the collective. ... it’s like extending the individual sense of self, rather than losing it.

... And, in fact, this process of expanding your identity as being a part of a group can actually be a very natural process that occurs without losing your individual identity.

Basically, it is not a matter of Me or We, but rather Me and We.”

“The Art of Happiness in a Troubled World”, Dalai Lama and Howard Cutler, MD, pg. 38-43

Originally Posted by moke64916
Without a soul, we would not be hear to talk about this.

Originally Posted by pre-dawn

Are you saying that a tree or flowers do not 'hear' the weather and the seasons?

I didn't see the comment, 'Without a soul, we would not be hear to talk about this.' to mean that humans were the sole owners of life force energies, that other things such as trees & flowers were excluded from having their own unique vital life forces. We are an aspect of our extended energy field (spirit/soul) having an excursion in physicality.

‘We are not human beings having a spiritual experience, We are spiritual beings having a human experience.’ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Originally Posted by pre-dawn

... Take this text as quoted in "Buddhism of Wisdom & Faith"

"In secular western thought awareness of psychological projection as a source of supernatural being has served to demythologize demons, goblins, angels and saints and rob them of their power. ...

It is assumed that ‘them’ refers to the ‘demons, goblins, angels and saints,’ not those who are projecting them.

That certain beings can be thought projections isn’t solely secular. Some who write from a spiritual perspective about metaphysical issues have discussed how we can, individually or collectively create certain entities by our thoughts. There is allot that is just beginning to be explored about the nonphysical world & how powerful our mind is. Our thoughts (focused intent) is just as powerful when in fear or other negative thoughts as when in a positive mode. The Universe doesn’t edit in this respect.

That this quote uses the word ‘rob’ is meaningful. This tends to indicate that the author isn’t neutral. As if ‘secular western thought’ is inappropriately taking something that these beings own. If it had stated something such as, In secular western thought awareness of psychological projection as a source of supernatural being has served to demythologize demons, goblins, angels and saints, removing their power., this would be a more neutral position.

Many religions, both eastern & western (some more than others) have used fear of satan/demons to scare their followers, giving the disinformation that we are powerless to deal w/ them. They have also misrepresented the function of angels & other higher beings (deities) to be our protectors & saviors when guides, teachers, or wayshowers would be closer to their functions. Whether this misrepresentation was inadvertent or deliberate is another discussion!

Give your self the freedom to choose from any religion or belief system what works for you, declining what doesn’t make sense & the flexibility to amend these beliefs as desired.

If 99% of Buddhism works for you, but one concept doesn’t, that’s OK.

Originally Posted by WhiteShaman

If I may..........
You are the awareness of what seems like is happening to you and until that realization happens (all by itself, although it seems otherwise) you are awareness unaware that what is happening is not happening to a you. It is happening in awareness..............it is happening regardless though, it is not an illusion because there is nothing to compare illusion against. It is as real as anything else.......if that makes sense.
James

Thankyou James, I must admit it does not seem to make sense to me at this moment but I thank you for your interest/reply.

[declan]

In reply to your question about the no soul,teaching .It is simply that buddhism sees no evidence of a soul existing.The view is that we are a conglomerate of the senses,which in one form or another seeks reincarnation life after life.
what you felt and described as a soul ,was an emotion.

Word play definitely. Through curious exploration a lot of discoveries are made. We often struggle and search for the words to describe our personal experience. But as we journey on we hopefully lay down more than we take on.

Originally Posted by seeker89

Hi, I've been doing some reading about Buddhism lately and most of it is very appealing to me, but there's one thing I just don't get-That is the teaching that humans do not have souls. I don't know about you guys, but when I've had spiritual experiences I've connected with what felt like an ancient part of myself, that i feel could only be the soul...Can any buddhists here please explain this concept of no soul to me? To my unenlightened mind it makes little sense, unlike the rest of Buddhism which, from what I've read, makes a lot of sense...

Thanks,

seeker89

A soul would imply separateness when there is none.

Why must there be a soul for your actions to have consequences? Do you have to carry around this 'soul' and have it get darkened every time you do a bad deed for their to be feeling?

Where you are now, what you do, influences the area around you. Which in turn influences the area around it, which in turn influences the future. What you are made up of will eventually take another form. Eventually it will be life again. This can be considered rebirth. The idea of a soul is superfluous.

Hi seeker89

Hi, I've been doing some reading about Buddhism lately and most of it is very appealing to me, but there's one thing I just don't get-That is the teaching that humans do not have souls. I don't know about you guys, but when I've had spiritual experiences I've connected with what felt like an ancient part of myself, that i feel could only be the soul...Can any buddhists here please explain this concept of no soul to me? To my unenlightened mind it makes little sense, unlike the rest of Buddhism which, from what I've read, makes a lot of sense...

You posted this before I joined here. I don’t know if you still be around. By the way, here’s my response.
As far as I know this is the core teaching (and forever dispute) of Buddhism. No one, even the Buddha himself could convince someone who believed in otherwise. The enlightenment comes from within. The Buddha told the way, everyone has to walk the way by himself/herself. Until then, the answer will be appeared, but not before that. Besides, when it has something to do with other language (s), says, anatta, which was inevitably translated into something like “no-self” “not self” “no ego” “not ego” “so soul” “not soul” etc. we have to remind ourselves that this is not only the translation issue but also the practical issue (walk the way.) As for spiritual stuff, you are what you read/what you believe.
As for me I agree with a few friends in this thread. And I know that they do know about Buddhism. Though I don’t know that they know from their reading or practicing. But that’s not the point here.
To make the long short, your question, “that humans do not have souls” has to be clarified. “Soul” in the sense of Buddhism? Or in other sense/believe?
There is “no-self” “not self” “no ego” “not ego” probably sound “smooth” than there’s “no soul” because most of us know that self/ego bring trouble to us, but not the soul. But again, we have to keep in mind that this maybe just a smooth saying, to avoid saying something about the soul.