skydog Posted February 23, 2013 Is this really new age or extremely wise? All the shamanistic traditions emphasise the importance of getting in touch with the soul, eg playing music, dancing etc Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan Posted February 23, 2013 the soul, having no imbalance, would be physically expressed as an androgynous immortal in perpetual active-meditation with no though of itself or its experiences, yet ever mindful... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seeker of Wisdom Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) There is no soul, if by soul you mean some kind of essence to an individual. We are composed of the always shifting aggregates: form, sensation, conception, volition and consciousness. All is empty of a fundamental nature, save the essence of 'suchness' itself. If by 'soul', you mean something of a person that continues after bodily death then reincarnates, I do believe in that. But there is no separate 'I' to get in touch with it, nor is it an 'I'. It's just the substrate consciousness and a temporary chi body. Instead of 'I think, therefore I am', 'thinking happens'. Edited February 23, 2013 by Seeker of the Self 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted February 23, 2013 Getting in touch with your soul may be one of the most important things you ever do in my opinion. A large proportion of people never do so and they spend the majority of their lives living someone elses life or trying to live up to some sort of image of what they think they should be. Some Buddhists say there is no soul but then what keeps things together from life to life? why are your karmic tendencies transferred from one person to another rather than spread out between many different people upon death? 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johndoe2012 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) . Edited August 18, 2013 by chris d Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oildrops Posted February 23, 2013 I have been reading and connecting with the elimination of Body/Soul duality as opposed to expressing ones soul with the body. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johndoe2012 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) . Edited August 18, 2013 by chris d Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 If you are just empty/ timeless, bodiless/thoughtless what about intuition and going with the flow/wu wei You dont just sit in the corner of your room in your emptiness for your whole life on earth So the soul is part of who one is? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 So one is not even the soul..past/future life memories Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 or soul is part of everything and everything is who you are...hmm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 So Tao is what one should operate from, the intelligence of everything instead of the intelligence of the "soul" (past/future life memories) So trying to express the intelligence of the soul (past/future life memories) is still egoic.. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
johndoe2012 Posted February 23, 2013 (edited) . Edited August 18, 2013 by chris d 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 So the thoughts "I want to express the soul" "I want to do that", "I want to do that" is part of the universe, part of everything... But If form is void and void is form then ... well hmm Is it even possible to express the universe and not the soul, the soul is the vehicle right? arhhh brain freeze lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 How can you differentiate between expressing from god/tao/universe and expressing from the soul? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydog Posted February 23, 2013 Spoontaneous movements is that the soul or the tao Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Seeker of Wisdom Posted February 23, 2013 Some Buddhists say there is no soul but then what keeps things together from life to life? why are your karmic tendencies transferred from one person to another rather than spread out between many different people upon death? The tendencies are carried over in the substrate consciousness. What is meant by anatman, is that there are all these aspects to a person, but no fundamental 'I' that owns them. There is mind, memories, personality, etc, but not any essence/soul that owns these things. There isn't a soul that the other parts of a person are based on, just interrelated processes. A soul would be like the nucleus to an atom. Now imagine that there's no nucleus, but each electron in the atom orbits each other electron. And see how all atoms rest in space - although each atom lacks a nucleus, everything is based in the Self. I hope that makes my view a bit clearer. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted February 23, 2013 Getting in touch with your soul may be one of the most important things you ever do in my opinion. A large proportion of people never do so and they spend the majority of their lives living someone elses life or trying to live up to some sort of image of what they think they should be. Some Buddhists say there is no soul but then what keeps things together from life to life? why are your karmic tendencies transferred from one person to another rather than spread out between many different people upon death? I think everything is spread out, in an impersonal consciousness kind of a way. I maintain that being able to transfer them between lives (either in 'succession' or in parallel, or across worlds) counts as a strong ability. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jetsun Posted February 23, 2013 The tendencies are carried over in the substrate consciousness. What is meant by anatman, is that there are all these aspects to a person, but no fundamental 'I' that owns them. There is mind, memories, personality, etc, but not any essence/soul that owns these things. There isn't a soul that the other parts of a person are based on, just interrelated processes. A soul would be like the nucleus to an atom. Now imagine that there's no nucleus, but each electron in the atom orbits each other electron. And see how all atoms rest in space - although each atom lacks a nucleus, everything is based in the Self. I hope that makes my view a bit clearer. I tried to understand the Buddhist view of things but different schools have different interpretations and I kept slipping towards nihilism, so that map of things wasn't working for me so I put it aside for now. Having a conception of a soul which is not eternal works a lot better for me at the moment, or rather I lean towards the dual soul map or Binary Soul Doctrine, so you have the Hun and the Po, animus and anima or the left and right brain which search for union, which I think is also what the legend of Merlin and King Arthur alludes to. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silas Posted February 23, 2013 In classical Taoism, there is Te (mystical Te) as the soul. Afterlife And The Non-Being Self Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RongzomFan Posted February 24, 2013 Is this really new age or extremely wise? All the shamanistic traditions emphasise the importance of getting in touch with the soul, eg playing music, dancing etc What soul? You are a bundle of 5 skandha, which are not established either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oildrops Posted February 24, 2013 Could you explain more? There is no separation of body and soul, you mean? I can't explain more, that is just the idea that I have been attaching to lately. The body is a part of the soul operating in this universe. Souls, like the universes are infinitely complex and unfathomable to our mind. If we try to rationalize the soul, we won't get anywhere, we will always be stuck somewhere in the middle of an infinitely complex and simple model. No one knows what happens when we die. No one ever has, and no one ever will. I think it's okay to adopt a comfortable belief system for ourselves to feel happy if not knowing is too frightening to continue to enjoy life, but I find it interesting that the major religions have used this unknowable idea as a point of leverage to control those who need to latch onto a soul identity. What if your soul was the same soul as every other living thing in the universe? Could you let go of your individualism at that level? Would that bring peace? Just some ideas.. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
silas Posted February 24, 2013 >>What if your soul was the same soul as every other living thing in the universe? Is this a Buddhist idea? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted February 24, 2013 I have a tough time separating the body from the rest of everything in 'absolute' terms too but in 'relative' ordinary terms it seems like that's what it is. I mean in those terms it clearly is. The body is an incredible store of consciousness/information itself. You can get things out of mind but if they're 'in' the body they're not going anywhere. I'm basing this idea on body-scanning meditations I've done (notably BK Frantzis Water technique) ---opinion alert-- 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oildrops Posted February 24, 2013 Are you saying that through those meditations, you have accessed specific memories in your body that are clearly separate from the mind? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted February 24, 2013 Are you saying that through those meditations, you have accessed specific memories in your body that are clearly separate from the mind? 'Separate' wouldn't perhaps be the best term, 'previously unconscious' or 'forgotten' might suit what I'm getting at more. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
