What people often call the soul, or something, is to say an absolute entity, nine schools in humans, the invariant self in after the world phenomenon of constant variables. According to some religions, each has a separate soul like God by creation, and soul after death will live permanently or in hell or heaven. Its fate depends on the judgement of the creator whom created it. According to a couple of other religions, the soul undergoes multiple life, until it is completely clean and eventually become identical with God or Brahman, the universal soul or Atman, from there it was born. The soul or ego in humans think, feel, and get the payoff of all good and evil behavior. A concept like that called the idea of "intersection"
Buddhism is unique in the history of religion the religion of humanity denied existence of a soul, or Atman. According to the Buddha's teachings, ideas for Fall is a false belief, not in reality, and it arises the disastrous ideology of "I" and "my", the selfish desire, desire to bind, enmity, evil, arrogant, manjusha taste and the evil, the other problem with the defilement of trouble. It is the source of every tangled lace in my life, from personal disputes to war between peoples. In summary, all the work of in the hell on earth are due to misconceptions.
There are two ideas are ingrained in human psychology: self defence and self. Because self-defense, people have created God to count, to cover for himself, to be safe and secure, as a child refuge on his parents. Because the want to survive one has created the idea of an immortal soul or Atman, will live forever to endless. In foolish, weak, fear, desire, people need two things to itself. Therefore, they attach to it a fanatical and profound way.
Tenets of Buddhist Ethics don't support the foolish, fear, desire, which in essence makes the enlightenment by eliminate and destroy them, to make the root of them. According to Buddhism, the idea of God and the soul are misleading and empty, although the ideas he developed form these theories, all of which are the silhouette extremely subtle consciousness, is a theoretical way of language philosophy and metaphysical complexity. These ideas had eaten deep into the human psyche, intimacy and familiarity with them so that they do not expect to hear, nor want to understand a moral would fight with them.
The Buddha knew very clearly. Thus, He taught that his teachings "go back" (Patisotagàmi), despite the desire of human selfishness. Four weeks after the Enlightenment, sitting under an ancient root, he "has proven a really deep, hard to see, hard to understand ... just the location of the new fake understand ... Those who are passionate about the tame, being ignorance cannot fins would see this truth, because it's back, it's super high, deep, subtle and difficult to think ".
Think so, Buddha hesitated for a while, there are useless if we try for the world the truth that I have entered? Then you compare the world like a Lotus pond: he has many lotus flowers in the water, there are other flowers only just hung up on the water, but also the flowers rise up from the Lake and no longer tamper with the water. Also in this world, the level of human development. There are some people who will understand the truth. Hence, the Buddha decided to teach the truth.
The theory of Anatta or Egolessness is natural, or the result of the analysis system of the five aggregates and pratītyasamutpāda teachings (or Charm, Paticca-samuppàda). What we call the soul or the fish may be made by the five aggregates, and when we analyze and look at them, you can't see what's behind them that can be called as I, Atman, or Ego, or whatever a school would remain invariant. Ðấy is the method of analysis. I also have the same result when considering the technical theory of law of pratītyasamutpāda, synthetic methods, and according to this law, there is nothing in the world is absolute. All things (France) are relatively limited, and interdependence. This is the theory of Buddhist studies.
Before you actually go into the issue of Egolessness, we should have a concept about the law of pratītyasamutpāda. The principle of this theory is summarized in a formula that contains four items:
This one, then the other has (Imasmim idam sati hoti)
This is the other students (idam Imassuppàda uppajjati)
This is not available, then the other without (asati Imasmim idam na hoti)
This one kills the other, then kill (idam nirodhà Imassa nirujjhati)
On the principle about the condition, the relativistic and correlation correlated (interdependence) overall survival and continue being the same death the cessation of it are explained in a recipe called pratītyasamutpāda consists of 12 factors:
1-ignorance charm (born) (what activities do you like and the artifacts of industry) (Avijjàpaccayà samkhàvà).
2-Executive charm (Samkhàrapaccayà vinnànam)
3-charm Formula list (the psychological and physical phenomena (Vinnànapaccayà nàmarùpam).
4-enter the Green Coast-identity (sense 5 senses) (Nàmarùpapaccayà salàyatanam).
5-enter the charm in contact (tamper, exposure) (Salàyatanapaccayà phasso)
6-Contact yanshou (feeling) (Phassapaccayà vedanà)
7-charm Life AI (longing desire) (Vedanàpaccayà tanhà).
8-the Craving defensive charm (cling, cling to) (Tanhapaccayà upàdànam)
9-Its charm (the process of birth and become) (Upàdànapaccayà bhavo)
10-Huu Duyen (life, born) (Bhavapaccayà jàti)
11-Coast-born ... 12-Geriatric (old age), death (death), brain gauge bi pros (sad worry pain) (Jàtipaccayà jaràmaranam).
This is the process by which life arose, and continued existence. If we reverse the recipe again, I will go to the end of the process: ignorance kills the kill, kill, kill the removal form the SAC removal, color removal, the Mainland imported kill etc until birth, aging, death, brain gauge bi ... kill.
Need to remember one thing that each of the above elements are just as human as the fruit, it has just been decided by (paticca samuppanna), and just as conditions for (paticca samuppàda). So they are all relative, interdependent and relate to each other, there is something absolute or isolated, so that Buddhism is not recognized "first cause". Pratītyasamutpāda should look like a circle, not should see is a chain.
The issue of free will has occupied an important position in thought and Western philosophy, but according to the law of pratītyasamutpāda, this issue does not arise and cannot arise in Buddhist philosophy. If the entire existence is relatively limited, and dependent each other, how alone the will can be free? Italy wants, nor any other ideology, was also limited. What we call "freedom", itself a limited and relatively well. Can not be something physical or psychological, can absolutely freely, because all things are interrelated and comparatively. "Free" implies the meaning, a desire not to depend on the conditions, with cause and effect. How a wish or anything that belongs to the will, can arise without the condition, separate multiply and result-when the whole of the present are relatively limited and, in the law of cause and effect? Here, the idea of free will is also associated with the basic idea of God, the soul, fairness, reward and punishment. Not the so-called liberty was not freedom, that the main idea of even free will also not escape those conditions.
According to the theory of pratītyasamutpāda, as well as by human analysis into the five aggregates, the idea of a possible nine in the school or outside it, although called Atman, Me, soul, or something, is regarded as a false belief (TA), a shadow of the conscious mind. This is a Buddhist theory of egolessness or "no soul" (Anatta).
To avoid a mistake, here we should remind that there are two kinds of truth: truth estimate (sammuti-sacca) and ultimate truths (paramattha-sacca). When we use words such as "normal", "England", "spirit", "personal" etc. aren't we lie, because there is no ego or soul like that, but we're talking a true agreement under the Convention of the world. But the ultimate truth is: in fact, there is no "I" or "soul". As business Mahàyàna-Sutralãnkàra (the old Mausoleum) taught: "a human (pudgala) should be considered only in the assign (prajnapti) (that is, known as the Convention one or human), but not in reality (or in a can, dravya)."
By that, it was remarkable as recently few scholars (as Mrs. Rhys Davids and others) tried-hopelessly-xen idea of Falling into the Buddha's teachings, one thing is absolutely contrary to the spirit of Buddhism. The respected scholar, admirers and worshippers of upper the Buddha and the Catechism. They admired Buddhism. But they could not imagine that the Buddha, who they view as ideologically profound and most transparent countries, again was able to deny the existence of Atman, soul or ego that they sorely need. They don't know that they are looking for the support of the Buddha for this demand, demand an immortal existence-of course not in one felled fish with a small letter "n", which in the Fall with a letter "N".
Preferably, one should say that they believe in the one Atman or Ego, or one might say immediately that the Buddha completely wrong while denying existence of a Fork. But certainly no one should take on in the Buddhist Dao an idea that the Buddha never accept, as we can see from the original Pali.
The religions believe in God and the soul does not involve about two ideas, they also declared them out, repeated many times in the most eloquent terms. If the Buddha's idea of two accepted results, the two most important ideas in all religions, then surely he has publicly declared them out, as you were talking about other things, but did not let them be hidden one to which only discovered 25 centuries later when He died. People become hot bouncing when thought through the teachings of the Buddha, anatta I which they imagine themselves there, will be destroyed.
The Buddha is not unknown to this. One day, a Bhikkhu stilts asked Him:
"The White World, Religious people were tormented and confused because no be something constant to survive in it?"
The Buddha answered:
— "Yes, stilts, when a Bhikkhu who this has following conception," the universe is Atman, we would be Atman after death, the school exists, permanent, immortal and we will exist as such in the endless time ".
He sounds like a hybrid or a disciple of Hybrid Theory As to destroy completely all the perspective thinking ... aims to kill off the Palm of longing (craving), aims to open, terminated, Nirvana. Then he thought: "I will become the nothingness, I shall be destroyed, I will not any more". By that it depressed, worried, weeping, beating on his chest, and became so freaking confused. As such, this case, stilts Bhikkhu people were tormented when found not to be a constant field in it something ". (Central)
In a different segment, the Buddha teaches that:
"Little Bhikkhu stilts, the idea that" we can no longer exists, nothing more, "the make those stupid fear".
Those who want to find a "Fork" in Buddhism argues as follows: indeed that the Buddha has analyzed humans out, tho, thought, consciousness (skandha), and that nothing in the things he is falling. But He did not say absolutely no Ego in man or anywhere else, in addition to the "aggregates". This stance does not stand because the two are probably:
-Perhaps the first is according to the Buddha's teachings, a person only by the five aggregates and what is not. Neither would the Buddha that has something other than the five aggregates in a human.
-The second is Probably the Buddha denied totally, in the words of transparency, the existence of Atman, soul or Fall in or outside, or anywhere in the universe.
Let's take a few examples:
In the Dhammapada (Dhammapada) there are three incredibly important and crucial in the Buddha's teachings, it is the 5, 6, 7, Chapter 20 (or the verse number 277, 278, 279). The two first verses says:
"All things are restricted (conditioned) are impermanent" (sabbe samkhàrà anicca) and
"All things restricted data is suffering (sabbe samkhàrà dukkhà)
The third sentence is:
"All France (dhammas) is anatta (sabbe dhammà anattà).
Need special attention here that the first two sentences in the word samkhàrà (), "those things are limited", was used. But in the third sentence instead of the word samkhàra, the word dhammà was used. Why the third verse has not used the word samkhàrà, "things were limited", as the previous two sentences, which again used the noun dhammà instead? The most important point is the principal of the matter.
Verb samkhàrà just skandha, of all things and the restricted status, interdependence, comparatively, all "legal" physical as well as psychological (French and French Centre of excellence). If the third verse says: "Every samkhàrà (things were limited) is the anatta", one might think that, all things being limited as anatta, however there may be a Fall outside those limited which, in addition to the five aggregates. The key is to avoid the misunderstanding that the noun dhammà (France) has been used in the third verse.
Noun dhamma, "France", has wider range samkhàra. There is no verb in the term for Buddhist studies have a wider scope of the word "France". It includes not only those things and conditional status, but also the unconditional, the absolute, Nirvana; nothing inside or outside the universe, good or bad, is conditional or not conditional, absolute or relative, that are not included in the list of words. So, it's too well that, according to the sentence: "all of France is anatta" then there is no Ego, no soul, not just in the five aggregates, but also any where in addition to the five aggregates or separately with the five aggregates.
According to the original teachings, Theravàda, this means that there is no Fork in the individual (puggala) or in France. Australian philosophy admit there is also an identical stance, there is a differences about that point, the emphasis on the egolessness of France as well as anatta in humans (dhamma-nairàtmya and pudgala-nairàtmya).
In the Alagaddùpama Sutta of the Ministry Majjhimà-nikàya (Central), the Buddha taught his disciples:
"Little Bhikkhu stilts, accept a theory of soul if accepting it will no longer arise the sad melancholy, injured, suffering, sorrow, pain pain. But the Bhikkhu stilts, he has found a theory of the soul would like it or not, the theory that when accepting it, will no longer arise sad melancholy, injured, suffering, sorrow, pain pain?.
— The White World, absolutely not.
— What, little Bhikkhu stilts. I, too, don't we, stilts, this the Bhikkhu seeing a novel about the soul which, if accepted, will no longer trigger depressed, injured, suffering, sorrow, pain pain ".
If there is a novel about the soul that the Buddha has accepted, then surely You have out here, because He said the Bhikkhu stilts accept a theory of the soul without incurring the suffering. But in view of the Buddha, there is a theory of the soul, and any theory of the soul, though subtle and subliminal lose anymore is pretending and imagining, born everything issues, arising under it the sad, dramatic, suffering, unhappiness , pains.
Then the Buddha taught the same in:
"Little Bhikkhu stilts, when that Ego or anything that belongs to Fall there, thinking this perspective:" the universe is spirit, we will be after death, the soul will exist, the nine schools, permanently, and we would like to present endless time ", her views have to be completely insane?"
Here the Buddha clearly states that an Atman, or soul, or Fork, then could not find where in reality, and it's crazy to believe that there is a story like that.
Those looking for a Fall in the Buddha's teachings cites an example that they translated wrong, and then explain how one mistake. One example is the renowned fishing Attà hi attano nàtho in the Dhammapada (verse 160 shelves), has been translated as "I am the Lord", and explained that it means the big Ego is Lord of the Fork.
First of all, her translations are incorrect. Attà this is not meant in the sense of soul. In Pali, the verb Attà is often used as a possessive noun-self (reflexive pronoun), except in a few cases it is used in a special sense and philosophy to refer to the theory of the soul as seen above.
But in common usage, such as in the Dhammapada, where exactly was found, and in many other places, it is used as a noun or noun An indeterminacy means: "I am," you "," it "," we "," our own people "etc.
Next, the word nàtho has no meaning "Lord", which is "helpless", "shelter", "help", "cover" ... By Attà hi attano really means "people are your help yourself" or "fulcrum". It's nothing to a metaphysical soul or ego at all. It just means you have to press that count on yourself not one tree Hill back on others.
Another example of trying to put the idea of falling into the Buddha's teachings is the sentence "attadìpà viharatha, attasarana anannasaranà", is drawn from the circuit writer in An original system of Nirvana Bowl (Nikaya). This verse means by Italian translation: "Let's just do the island (where the Myrtle trees) for you, do the main shelter for you, and don't see anyone other than as a dependable Lady." Those who want to find a self in Buddhist studies explained the words attadìpà and attasaranà are "taking the fall to do a lamp", "take the fall made a refuge"!
I can not understand the meaning of integrity of the word of the Buddha advises A-nan (Ananda), if one does not consider the context in which the text of the circuit and have been uttered.
At the time the Buddha resting in a village called Behuva, three months before He died, Bowl-Nirvana (parinirvàna). Now he was 80 years old, and the edifice, near death. But He thinks should not die without his retirement from the disciples of capital close to love Him. By that, courage, assertive, He suffered all the pain, wins the surfer, and patients recover. But there was poor health. Once recovered, one day He sat in the shade outside the place You stay. A-Nan, the Buddha's most devoted attendant, advanced to The Dao Master his endearing, sitting next to The Religious World and Bach:
"The World of Bach, having The healthcare World, having served Him while You sick. But when you see his condition, sky for become obscure, and the senses of your child is no longer wise. However the one thing this small solace: I think that The Religious World will not enter Nirvana without leaving the Catholic Church, referring to the mobile mass Increase old age ".
Then the Buddha is full of compassion and kindness, has told the Republic of fake a drill dedicated dear:
"A-Nan, unions increase the longer the old wait where are we again? I told (the truth) does not distinguish high low. In terms of truth, as the Future nothing like tight closed fist of a teacher (àcariya-mutthi). That, of course, little A-Nan, if one person would think that they would like to increase the elderly leaders, and increase the elderly must depend on them, then he put things off. But As a hybrid without the thought. So why As Lai must save these instructions belong to the Organization Increased? Now we're old, A-Nan, was 80 years old. Like an old car need repair run, too, As Lai's body now only continue operating thanks to repair. By this, the A-Nan, let's do the island (where the Myrtle trees) for you, get you to do the shelter and no one else, let's take France do Island (refuge), retrieved as shelter, and no one else can do for you "shelter.
What the Buddha taught A-Nan wants truth too obvious. A-Nan are sad melancholy pain he thought he would be totally alone, without the help of non refuge, not the instructor, after The great Professor of ethics. By that the Buddha gave him the words comforted, advised him courage, trust, teach that should slash the slash and Director on "France" he has transmitted, not relying on anyone else, into something else. In this issue about a metaphysical Atman, or ego, is absolutely not aimed at the spot.
After that, the Buddha explains to A-Nan how to can the island or shelter for yourself: this is thanks to the work of the consciousness, of body, mind, feelings and the French Center — 4 France contemplation. Nothing here says about an Atman or soul.
Another very commonly extracted was used by those who want to search in the Buddha's teachings. A Buddha day sit under in a forest on the way from Benares (Three dollars) to Uruvelà. On that day have 30 young princes are going to banned camp along with their younger wives in the same forest. A Czar yet my wife bring a girlhood. While other people are laughing, then she steals a few precious items and fled. While finding her in the forest, they find the Buddha sat under a tree and ask have you seen a woman go through no. He asked what happened and after hearing the explanation the Buddha asked them: "you think, o young people? Should do better for you? Look for a woman, or go find you own? " (Out of use)
This is also a very simple question and nature, there is no reason to include in it the idea of distant search about a self or soul. They answered that the better they should search themselves. The Buddha associated they sit down and preach to them. The document also left, in original about what he was preaching to them, no one would talk about the Atman.
He has written much on the subject "the Buddha's silence" when there was a man named Vacchagotta qifu mumo asked Him to have a soul or not. The story is as follows:
Vacchagotta went to the Buddha and the ladies and asked:
— Sir Ðàm Limited, has a soul or not?
The Buddha silence.
— Well, Sir, there is no soul?
The Buddha back to silence.
Vacchagotta stood up to leave.
After qifu guoren (parivràjaka) leave, A-Nan asked Buddha why He did not answer the question of Vacchagotta. The Buddha explains his attitude as follows:
"This A-Nan, when qifu gangui, who Vacchagota her doctor asked:" Has a soul or not?, if answered: "Yes," then means I've sided with the hermits and Brahmin theory advocates (sassata-vàda).
"And this A-Nan, when qifu gangui's doctor who asked:" have no soul?, if answered "no", we were standing on the the recluse and la advocates the removal phase theory (uccheda-vàda).
"Again, this A-Nan, when qifu gangui's doctor who asked:" Has the soul? "to which I answered" Yes "then like there are consistent with the notice of that great wall France egolessness or not?"
— The White World Religion, probably not.
— "This again A-Nan, when qifu gangui's doctor who asked:" have no soul? "to which I answered" no ", then it will make more confusion were Vacchagotta confusion further. Because y will think: before we truly have a soul (Ego) but now we don't have any more ". (Samyutta, IV)
Now we have to understand why the Buddha was silent. But we will also better understand if we consider the whole context and the way the Buddha handled on those questions and who to ask-this does matter to people absolutely do not mention.
The Buddha is not a computer, flush solution to any of these questions, by anyone, without discretion. He was a real Master, full of compassion and wisdom. He does not answer questions to showcase his knowledge and intelligence, but to help people asking to evidence. When speaking with someone who You always interested in their development, their tendencies, the texture of their consciousness, they and their ability to interpret a certain problem.
According to the Buddha, there are four ways of meeting these questions:
-Have the sentence should answer directly,
-Other questions should Be answered by the analysis,
-Have the sentences should be answered by asking, retort
-and finally, there's the question should squash the back side. (Increased)
There may be many ways to squash the issue over to the side. One way is to say that a question is not answered or explained, such as the way the Buddha has more than once with the same person then Vacchagotta, when he put the question about the universe fame school exists or not etc. (Samyutta, IV; Central Longitude). Also with the way he has answers for Màlunkyaputta and others. But you can't say that about the problem have fallen, the soul or not, because he has always discussed and explains it. You can't say: "having soul" because it contradicted the comments of Sir prize that had the French "egolessness". And he also does not like to say that "no soul", as this is trying to do for the guy. Vacchagotta has puzzled about a similar problem as confusion more, as he has acknowledged in previous (Central, I). He's not enough to understand the basic idea of egolessness. So in this case, the question aside by silence; is wise.
We also do not forget that the Buddha has clearly knew Vacchagotta long ago. This is not the first occasion that qifu gangui's wonders to visit doctor the Buddha ascended into Ethics Lawyer and entertainment. compassion has more attention to mind people looking bewildered. There are many sections comes to Vacchaghtta guy who qifu gangui, in Pali, he was ever found to the Buddha and his disciples to him quite a lot of times, repeated many times also the questions, obviously he's very disturbed almost obsessed by the issue. The Buddha's silence probably was effective for Vacchogatta than for an answer or eloquent discussion.
A few people watching the falling means what is often called the "mind" or "consciousness". But the Buddha taught that no one should rather see his physical body as "intersection" longer than the mind, or consciousness (citta, mano, vinnàna) because the mind, or consciousness, the transformation of non-stop days as well as nightly, besides also quickly over body (kàva). (Samyutta, II)
The vague feeling itself "I" has arisen the idea of Ego, which has something equivalent in reality; and see the truth then that is evidence Nirvana, one thing is not easy. In the Samyutta-nikàya (Samyutta), had a conversation quite clear this point problems between Mr. Bhikkhu Khemaka name stilts and a Bhikkhu Group on stilts. This the question found in the skandha Khemaka a "fall" or anything that belongs to the "intersection" is not. Khemaka answered "no". Ðoạn the Bhikkhu stilts that, then he must be a La Han got rid of all the dirty work. But the real fun Khemaka that although he does not find in the five aggregates a fall or anything belonging to Fall, "I'm still not a A La Han (Arahant) got rid of all the structures, UE, impure. Hey folks, for the five aggregates, I have a feeling that "I have", but not clearly "this is Me". Then Khemaka explained that what he called the "I" is not good, not longevity, not ideas, not issued, nor knowledge, nor anything outside them. But he still has a sense of "I" for the five aggregates, though he could not see clearly the "this is Me".
He said that just as the fragrance of a flower: it is not the fragrance of the petals, not of the color of flowers, not the United States, but is the fragrance of flowers.
Khemaka explained, adding that even a person who has reached the first stage of the evidence still has the feeling of "I". But later, when he was advanced further, her feeling completely disappeared, like the smell of a new shirt dry fly will take some time after the out of the box it.
This discussion benefits and unravel problems for them so that later, as a business, everyone, including the certified results, both Khemaka A La Han, get rid of any dirt, and like they have finally repel the feeling "I have".
According to the Buddha's teachings, accept that "I have no ego" (i.e. novel fragment removal) also accepted that "mistakes as I fall" (usually theory exist), because both are concept the shackles, because both arise from the false idea of "I". The proper attitude toward the issue of anatta is not a viewpoint or "opinion", which tries to look at things objectively, look at them as the truth, not the launch of the conscious mind, to see that what we call "I" or "soul", is just a combination of the aggregates (the Group) Physics and spirituality , activity correlated with each other in a line of constant transformation exists in the law of causality, and not to have something constant, usually schools exist, and permanently in the whole existence.
Here a natural question arises: If no Fall or Atman, then who receives the consequences of karma (action)? No one can answer this question than the Buddha. When a Bhikkhu stilts asked him that question, the Buddha said: "I was on stilts, little Bhikkhu teach you clearly see computer conditions in all things". (Central, III; Samyutta, III)
The Buddha's teachings of Anatta (no soul, or anatta) should not be viewed as negative or destructive. As well as Nirvana, it is the truth, the reality, and the reality may not be negative. The false belief itself into a falling fantasy is not real, is negative. The Catechism egolessness dispel the darkness of deviant beliefs, and the light of the position. It's not negative, as Mr. Asanga (Asanga) has said is very true: "there is a reality as Anatta" (nairàtmyàstità).  END=NAM MO SHAKYAMOUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).VIETNAMESE TRANSLATE ENGLISH BY=THICH CHAN TANH.THE MIND OF ENLIGHTENMENT.VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.19/8/2017.