2007-12-11 04:40:14 · 10 answers · asked by ian c 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No. The Buddha rejected the idea of a permanent, unchanging essence or soul.
2007-12-11 06:17:35 · answer #1 · answered by Sophrosyne 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The question you've asked is very confusing to many since the Buddha Shakyamuni taught there is no eternal self, no soul (anatman) in his teachings. You may wish to visit http://www.hinduwebsite.com/buddhism/anatta.asp to read a Hindu (which I am not) explanation of Buddhism (which I am) of atman versus anatman. Most Buddhists would say that an eternal soul (atman) does not exist.
Yet, in the Aggivaccagotta Sutta it is one of the ten (some say fourteen) unanswered questions. The Buddha essentially states it is futile to be concerned with certain questions pondered by various sects which created heated debates at the time. In a meeting with the wandering ascetic Vaccha, the Buddha explained the futility in attempting to determine the existence of a soul (atman). The following is a portion of the discourse.
"...no...the position that 'the soul and the body are the same' is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, and fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding...the position that 'the soul is one thing and the body another' is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, and fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."
("Majjhima Nikaya" : Sutta 72, The Aggivaccagotta Sutta from http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.072.than.html )
As I read the above, the Buddha is stating simply it is of no importance as to whether a soul exists except to ensnare the individual.
Guess you'll have to make up your own mind on this one.
May all be at peace.
John
2007-12-12 08:11:20 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Buddha said he could find no evidence for soul so he could neither endorse nor deny it's existence.
Soul has different meaning to different people. It seems best to consider it to be the individual experssion of universal spirit as molded by our earthly thoughts, emotions and esperience.
2007-12-11 12:46:37 · answer #3 · answered by steve what 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. The soul, as defined in Western cultures is a concept of the Self, which is rejected in Buddhism.
2007-12-11 12:44:21 · answer #4 · answered by Skalite 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If he believes in reincarnation, then yes, there is some sort of soul. It's called atman.
2007-12-11 12:47:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I would have to assume he does; it's the only thing that could be the catalyst for the Buddhist belief in reincarnation.
2007-12-11 12:43:28 · answer #6 · answered by 5th Watcher 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He proposes"the middle way", just as most Eastern Philosophies do.
2007-12-11 12:44:25 · answer #7 · answered by Big Bear 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
He endorses fashion, flexibility and obesity.
2007-12-11 12:44:35 · answer #8 · answered by ►solo 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
He prefers R & B.
2007-12-11 12:44:45 · answer #9 · answered by Birdy is my real name 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why not ask his statue, it will answer u.
2007-12-11 12:45:53 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋