Buddhisim at a Glance....

[harishkumar09]

How can a system that denies the existence of the soul claim itself to be a spiritual tradition ?

How can one even attempt to speak about that which cannot be spoken about? The ideas pertaining to any particular religious tradition can be looked at as symbols for the transcendent, but they are more or less truer than the others only relatively, not absolutely.

Why not ? What makes you think the soul cannot be spoken about ? I am a soul typing this and I am conscious of it. Even though I do not know everything about myself(my soul), I know enough parts of it. I know the soul is self-conscious, can think, can get my body to perform actions..etc ... etc.

No. It is not symbolism. As per Buddism , the soul does not exist at all. The soul or we do not experience nirvana. What we experience in nirvana is merely the extinguishing of the illusion that a soul was present. The soul was never present !

If a tradition delivers or attempts to deliver chitta-shuddhi by any means, rituals, or mental practice, I think of it as a spiritual tradition.

But this presupposes the existence of the soul ! If the soul itself does not exist , what are you cleaning (shuddhi) ?

If instead it mires and confuses the mind, it is not. The subject who is involved in the practice also matters.

Yes. Thats what Buddhism does. It confuses. And the subject does not exist as per Buddhism.



Love and Light.