[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 665 KB, 750x537, 1611337308197.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17998290 No.17998290 [Reply] [Original]

Where does the Buddha teach that there is no soul

>> No.17998300

>>17998290
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatt%C4%81

>> No.17998400

>>17998300
it doesn't say

>> No.17998486

>>17998290
Wouldn't the concept of the self count as the soul though?

>> No.17998506

>>17998400
It's one of the first things dude
"Anattā is a composite Pali word consisting of an (not, without) and attā (soul).[6] The term refers to the central Buddhist doctrine that "there is in humans no permanent, underlying substance that can be called the soul."

>> No.17998542

>>17998290
This
>>17998300
Appears only twice in the Pali Canon as a noun; it denotes insubstantiality, nearly always an adjective — vis-a-vis Vedanta, the particularity of your participation in the ocean of Brahma has nothing discrete about it to delimit or strive on behalf of — after Taoism: the Atman that can be spoken is no Atman, and that is what thou art

>> No.17998608

>>17998506
that doesn't answer the question

>> No.17998804

>>17998290
Retracted penis sutra

>> No.17998881

>>17998290
the buddha says that people who talk about soul or self always refer to one of the aggregate and those are not self

>> No.17998894

>>17998290
Buddhists teach that nothing that's impermanent can be real so it's kind of bullshit. They call this world unreal so the soul could be just as real as this world and they would still say it's unreal because it's impermanent

>> No.17999005

>>17998804
What?