From: RADAMS@cerritos.edu (Roger Adams)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: No Soul
Date: 9 Sep 92 06:18:04 GMT
Organization: Cerritos College, Norwalk CA

In article <1992Sep8.183804.3336@cco.caltech.edu>, 
wong@rkna50.riken.go.jp (Wong Weng Fai) writes:

> 	I would like to take my shot at the topic of "soul". 

> 	We should begin with what we mean by a "soul". Intuitively, I
> would define a "soul" (no authority here but ...) as an entity that :
                                                          ^^^^^^
I would like to stop you right here because what follows in your definition are
attributes of the said "entity". Now what I would like to ask you at this
point is: does conservative Buddhism reject the idea that an "entity" of
any sort, regardless of what the attributes are, exists? If the conservative
Buddhist view is "no, there is no such thing as an entity of any sort, 
nothing at all exists" then there is no point arguing about the following
attributes (1 thru 6) that you came up with since you don't think that
any "entity" exists - regardless if its in a body or not or if its separate
from the senses or not or if its permanent or not etc. - anyhow.

> 
> 	1. Inhabit the body most of the time;
> 	2. Is separate from the physical body;
> 	3. Is separate from the senses;
> 	4. Controls the body most of the time;
> 	5. Is permanent or at least remains immutable after death;
> 	6. Is responsible for the behavior of the individual most of the
> 	   time;

Hindu scriptures say that the soul (Self) is Sat-Chit-Ananda (Yogananda 
translated this as "ever-existing, ever-conscious, ever-new joy) which is
what God (Self) is also defined as in scriptures. It appears that any
existence, therefore, inside some body is relative truth and not ultimate
truth and that false identification with the body, or ego-consciousness
is therefore responsible for behavior in individuals who are not free
or enlightened (in the fullest sense) as the soul is ever perfect.
Christian scriptures likewise describe the soul as being made in the image
of God. If God is perfect then so is the soul (although Christians do not
use the word 'soul' in this context - the scriptures say 'man' is made
in the image of God but I feel I am being consistent with the spirit
of the scriptures in comparing them in this way, according to my understanding
of Yogananda's interpretation of same).

> The motivation for the theory of a soul seems to be 

The concept of the soul is based on its actual existence.

> 	I think someone has countered the "permanence" feature (5) quite well.
> In fact, it goes counter to the motivation of reward/punishment - if its
> features are already permanent, what can anyone (including god) do about it 
> and what's the point ? 

I think you might be confusing the concepts of soul and of ego. Our ego or
sense of separate, limited, self is transitory. Soul (atman) is perfect and
therefore beyond reward/punishment. Our problem is with ego and *lack* of
realization of our true Self (soul, atman).

> 	Features (1), (2) and (3) - separateness is self-contradictory. To 
> begin with, it is not clear what is it apart from the physically functioning
> body that one can point to as a "soul". Suppose you can distinguish a set of
> characteristics which forms the soul. Take a particular characteristic, X say,
> and ask "what makes it part of the soul and not the body ?", "without this X,
> is the soul still a soul ?" The point of the argument is that while all the
> functionalities of the body can be viewed as separate (eg. sight is different
> from sound), no one characteristic can stand on its own (its nonsense to talk
> about "pure" sight "on its own"). They are all part of this vaguely defined 
> microcosm called "me". "Vaguely" because you can do away with certain features 
> and yet still consider "me" a being (eg. any of the five senses) but you can't 
> do away with "too much" of it (eg. all five senses). Therefore the notion of 
> an empty shell inhibited by a permanent soul is a naive one which crumbles 
> under such strict scrutiny.
> 

Find out what happens when the body is completely done away with and whether
or not a sens of 'I' or 'me' remains, before you characterize your analysis
as being a strict form of scrutiny.   :-)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
	Roger Adams
	radams@cerritos.edu               To those in whom love dwells,
	Cerritos College                  the whole world is one family.
	11110 Alondra Blvd                             A Hindu Proverb
        Norwalk, California 90650
	USA        		          292 Dwapara :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern