REBIRTH, NIRVANA AND NO-SOUL IN BUDDHISM:
Authors: Dr. Charu Das  
Published: October 2024

The whole teaching of Buddha is mainly dependent on the four noble truths. The doctrine of Dependent Origination, or Pratityasamutpada, which is the second noble truth of Buddhism, is of great importance. The doctrine of impermanence or the doctrine of pratityasamutpada is related to the concept of no-soul, rebirth, and Nirvana. Pratityasamutpada means that everything in the world is relative, conditional, dependent, and subject to birth and death, and it is, therefore, impermanent. Buddha gave importance only to how to remove suffering from our lives. Therefore, his main aim was to focus the attention of the common people on how they could come out of these sufferings. Human beings suffer in this world because of the lack of actual understanding of the everchanging nature of the world and its objects or ignorance. The doctrine of no-soul, rebirth, and Nirvana are all based on the doctrine of dependent origination or pratityasamutpada. Generally, we believe that the soul is a permanent substance, and it is not like a material body that changes continuously. But in this world, we have seen nothing permanent. Therefore, to accept the existence of a permanent self is nothing but an illusion for Buddha. Since everything is impermanent, there cannot be any permanent self, which is believed by the common people. For Buddha, we need to focus on the reasons for which we are suffering in this world and how we can come out of it. We should not give much importance to what always escapes from us. Since everything is relative and conditional, we cannot know the existence of anything as a permanent element. But if there is no permanent soul, how can rebirth be possible?
Rebirth is an important concept in the teachings of Buddhism. It is said in Buddhism that until one gets Nirvana, he has to take rebirth again and again. The circumstances into which one is reborn are dependent upon the karma performed in the previous life. In rebirth, the actions or karmas of a sentient being give rise to a new existence after death in an endless cycle called samsara. The endless death and rebirth stop only if Nirvana is achieved by insight. Though different schools of Buddhism have different views regarding rebirth, all the schools agree that rebirth depends upon the karma of the previous life. The critics of the Buddhist doctrine of rebirth say that if there is no soul, only a changing stream of mental energy, then there could be no identity, and to talk about rebirth for experiencing the results of good or bad actions done in the past would be meaningless. This is definitely the common question that arises in the minds of the common people. In the same way, the realization or attainment of Nirvana without a soul is also questionable from different perspectives. So, in my article, I would like to explain whether rebirth and Nirvana are possible without a soul. How does Buddhism explain it?
Buddhism does not deny the existence of the empirical soul, which is everchanging, but denies the existence of the permanent soul. His acceptance of the individual soul is clear from his declaration when he discussed the relation between the burden and the carrier: "he who holds that there is no soul is a man with false notions."1 But here my question is, since rebirth will take place till the attainment of Nirvana, then after attaining Nirvana, what would be the status of the soul? In my article, I will try to explain it since the soul can attain Nirvana only when the person (or soul) has nothing to experience in the world (good or bad results). Will the soul be destroyed after attaining Nirvana? Or What?
If the soul(empirical) will change forever, and in every moment soul(mind) is a new one, without identity, how can it realize Nirvana?
So, generally, questions come to the minds of people that-
Did Buddha not really believe in any reality which is permanent?
Is there really nothing permanent that we can think about and discuss except impermanence, which is everchanging?
How far is it justifiable to accept the Buddha's suggestion that we need not discuss these problems like the existence of any permanent reality?
Is it that Buddha gave an incomplete explanation of the reality to his disciples? If it is, then why? But before giving the answers to these questions, we must remember that the Buddha's teaching is strategic. Because of which, many misunderstandings and misinterpretations come out due to the lack of understanding on the main teaching of the Buddha, on which he gave emphasis.