Self or Soul and Buddhism

Interesting topic - I love the Human Nature paper, which brought up the conversation about the view of soul in Buddhism between me and my friends.

---

Something may or may not interest you. Remember last time I told you that in Buddhism doctrine there is no personal identity and no individual soul? I’ve done more readings on this and to confirm it. According to what Nagasena (十八羅漢的第十二位 -- 那伽犀那) said, that one’s Kamma (業) is transferred from one body to another, but there is no separately existing being which is transferred. Hence one is not committed to belief in a substantial soul (the idea of “not-self”, or anatta (無我)). Soul-as-separable-substance view of reincarnation is from the Hinduism doctrine, or from Plato.

More on this, Theravada Buddhists do not use the terms “transmigration” or “reincarnation” because both of these expressions imply the existence of a permanent soul or self, which is contrary to the Buddha’s teaching of anatta (not-self). “Rebirth” is the idea instead – which is simply a process of cause and effect.

“Light a candle with a match, or visualise doing it. Hold the wick directly above the lighted match, but not actually touching the flame. Watch carefully. The wick will begin to smoke, and will then burst into flame. Does the flame jump from the match to the candle? Is the candle flame the same as the flame on the match, or is it a different one? If we describe the process scientifically we will say that the heat from the flame on the match vaporised some paraffin wax from the candle, and the paraffin vapour ignited, producing a new flame. The two flames are separate and burn from different fuels, but are causally related.

Likewise, kamma done in one existence is like the heat. The candle is like the physical basis provided by the parents. The candle flame is like the newly born being that arises dependent upon previous causes and present supporting conditions. One important difference between rebirth and the two flames is that the last conscious moment of the previous existence ceases totally, then rebirth consciousness arises immediately afterwards. No mental or physical phenomena “transmigrate” or pass between the two existences. Rebirth is simple a process of cause and effect. Whatever potential a being has accumulated throughout many existences is preserved to give its results whenever and wherever conditions are ripe. No good or evil deeds that a being does are destroyed at death. Some may be too weak to give any effect, but any significant kammas retain their potential to give results at some point in the future, as the seeds of desert plants await the coming of rain. Powerful kammas give their results immediately, while weaker kammas may have to wait for aeons to mature.”

You can read the debate of King Milinda and Nagasena for some higher level ideas.

I always think Buddhism is cool, and I like some of the ideas and thoughts. However, I doubt that many people who claimed they believe in Buddhism these days don’t really know what they are believing or even are believing in something they thought it was in the Buddhism doctrine. This of course happen in a lot of Christians these days too, who create their own set of doctrines and claimed to be what God thinks. If we believe in something, some religion, no matter what it is, we have to have the motivation to understand what we really believe. It’s no point for us sitting there just presume that what we’ve received from some seniors are all correct. We have to find out why and what to accept and not to.

So, now you know, actually Buddhism don’t care about “Self”, you won’t have “next-life” according to Nagasena. Shocked? :D