Aardvark

I am not familiar with anything that says specifically that there is no soul, but you are essentially correct. Buddhists believe in "mind" which is what most would describe as what they believe to be a soul.

Thanks Mitch.

Buddhists have a doctrine called "/anatta/" meaning no-self or no-soul ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soul#Buddhism) .

I agree when Buddhists say that we are not our thoughts or surface self, and that it does not survive death. I also agree when Buddhists say there is a deeper "self" that transcends ego and has compassion for others. The fact that it transcends ego is evidence to me that the deeper self is impersonal and also does not survive death.

Ever read Stephen Batchelor's book, Buddhism without Beliefs? I wrote a review: http://johnmiedema.ca/2008/07/27/buddhism-without-beliefs-by-stephen-batchelor-book-review/ .

I actually haven't, I will take a read. I actually belong to the Karma Kagyu (Diamond Way) Lineage, which doesn't focus heavily on beliefs.

Hi there, the reincarnation is not up to the soul or permanent self. These two things are very different. The self is not permanent this is true, but there is something called true self, and this is shared by the all existing creatures. When we die we get another form another mind but we carry our karma... so there is a continuation. I think you are Christian because I understand your point... Soul is Mind in Buddhism... and they think everything is created by mind. so I think is just different term... I hope it helps you.. you can try ask me and we share more

Hi Framore, but I wonder how many sense of self Buddhism requires. One, the surface self. Two, the true self that is shared. Three, the self that carries karma past death. It gets a bit unwieldy. Somehow I think the original Buddhism was much simpler.

Buddhism advocates the soul-less soul, the self-less self, it is and it isn't, and they're not the same but they are. Imagine this: a boot falls from the sky and lands in a bush. The bush makes a noise but nothing emerges. Where did the boot come from? And the bush? It's all perfect anyways. Are you confused yet? That's the point.

Hope that helps.

A koan, yes. I'm in rational mode right now.

How can you separate the two? There is no self, and yet the self is reborn. I think the idea is that what we consider "self" or "soul" is an illusion that we develop in our lifetimes, it is the very real and rational belief that I am me and not you, that there is something different about what I am, that maybe I deserve something more (or less) from others. It's this that gets reincarnated. The no-self remains always.

Before we can address the thing that extends beyond life, we must first consider what life is. The Buddha teaches that human beings are consisted of Five Aggregates, a combination of physical and mental energies. The five aggregates are Matter, Sensations, Perceptions, Mental Formations, and Consciousness. Each of these aggregates represents a part of a being, and together they are all the parts of that being. According to the Buddha, each of these parts is a different thing from moment to moment, yet somehow the pattern of our identity persists. In each moment of our lives these Aggregates arise, decay, and die. Within every moment we are born and die and continue. "If we can understand that in this life we can continue without a permanent, unchanging substance like Self or Soul, why can't we understand that those forces themselves can continue without a Self or Soul behind them after the non-functioning of the body?" (What the Buddha Taught, Rapola Wahula). Since a man of 60 is not the same as the child he was 50 years ago, but an entirely new entity within the same series, each life we experience is likewise just one more in the series. It is worth mentioning that the last thought experienced in death is the first thought experienced in the new birth, but it is not a continuous soul, but instead like a passing current: the series itself is only movement.

Thanks Mark. Your response directly addresses my question. Of course, our bodies do seem to be a vessel, an organizing principle for the five aggregates. So it seems likely that upon the death of the body, these aggregates would become ... disaggregated. I may read Wahula's book.

Buddhism is certainly a more complex system than it seems, but that particular book focuses on precisely what the original Buddha taught. (instead of the centuries of discussion since then) It really simplifies it for a good foundation of Buddhism.

They only conflict when your requirement for reincarnation is to have a permanent self. You can reincarnate having impermanent self. In fact, we have to reincarnate because of it. Once you release the believe of self, we can stop reincarnating and end suffering permanently.

"In fact, we have to reincarnate because of it." Good one! Fits with Mark's metaphor of a passing current. Thanks.

Please take a look here: http://buddhism.about.com/od/vajrayanabuddhism/a/dalailamarole.htm

And please take into consideration that there are many views in Buddhism, also on this reincarnation topic. One such a view says that the Buddha referred to reincarnation, it being a concept that his Hindu fellowmen would relate to, and not necessarily meaning it like in Hindu (let alone other religious) understanding.

As a meditator, I've experienced there is no Self: the "I" is just a powerful sensation of the mind. Moreover, I am "agnostic" about the reincarnation issue.

Does this help?