Those who believe in the existence of a soul are not in a position to explain what and where it is. The Buddha's advice is not to waste our time over this unnecessary speculation and devote our time to strive for our salvation. When we have attained perfection then we will be able to realize whether there is a soul or not. A wandering ascetic named Vacchagotta asked the Buddha whether there was an Atman (self) or not. The story is as follows:

Vacchagotta comes to the Buddha and asks:

'Venerable Gotama, is there an Atman(soul)?

The Buddha is silent.

'Then Venerable Gotama, is there no Atman(soul)?

Again the Buddha is silent.

Vacchagotta gets up and goes away.

After the ascetic has left, Ananda asks the Buddha why He did not answer Vacchagotta's question. The Buddha explains His position:

'Ananda, when asked by Vacchagotta, the Wanderer: 'Is there a Self?, if I had answered: 'There is a Self'. Then, Ananda, that would be siding with those recluses and brahmanas who hold the eternalist theory (sassata-vada).'

'And Ananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there no Self?, if I had answered: 'There is no Self', then that would be siding with those recluses and brahmanas who hold the annihilationist theory (uccedavada)'.

'Again, Ananda, when asked by Vacchagotta: 'Is there a Self? If I had answered: 'There is a Self', would that be in accordance with my knowledge that all dhammas are without Self?

'Surely not, Sir.'

'And again, Ananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there no Self?', if I had answered: 'There is no Self', then that would have created a greater confusion in the already confused Vacchagotta. For he would have thought: Formerly indeed I had an Atman (Self), but now I haven't got one.' (Samyutta Nikaya).

The Buddha regarded soul-speculation as useless and illusory. He once said, 'Only through ignorance and delusion do men indulge in the dream that their souls are separate and self-existing entities. Their heart still clings to Self. They are anxious about heaven and they seek the pleasure of Self in heaven. Thus they cannot see the bliss of righteousness and the immortality of truth.' Selfish ideas appear in man's mind due to his conception of Self and craving for existence.

Anatta: The Teaching of No-Soul

The Buddha countered all soul-theory and soul-speculation with His Anatta doctrine. Anatta is translated under various labels: No-soul, No-self, egolessness, and soullessness.

To understand the Anatta doctrine, one must understand that the eternal soul theory _ 'I have a soul' _ and the material theory _ 'I have no soul' _are both obstacles to self-realization or salvation. They arise from the misconception 'I AM'. Hence, to understand the Anatta doctrine, one must not cling to any opinion or views on soul-theory; rather, one must try to see things objectively as they are and without any mental projections. One must learn to see the so-called 'I' or Sour or Self for what it really is : merely a combination of changing forces. This requires some analytical explanation.

The Buddha taught that what we conceive as something eternal within us, is merely a combination of physical and mental aggregates or forces (pancakkhandha), made up of body or matter (rupakkhandha), sensation (vedanakkhandha), perception (sannakkhandha), mental formations (samkharakkhandha) and consciousness (vinnanakkhandha). These forces are working together in a flux of momentary change; they are never the same for two consecutive moments. They are the component forces of the psycho-physical life. When the Buddha analyzed the psycho-physical life, He found only these five aggregates or forces. He did not find any eternal soul. However, many people still have the misconception that the soul is the consciousness. The Buddha declared in unequivocal terms that consciousness depends on matter, sensation, perception and mental formations and that is cannot exist independently of them.

The Buddha said, 'The body, O monks, is not the Self. Sensation is not the Self. Perception is not the Self. The mental constructions are not the Self. And neither is consciousness the Self. Perceiving this, O monks, the disciple sets no value on the body, or on sensation, or on perception, or on mental constructions, or on consciousness. Setting no value of them, he becomes free of passions and he is liberated. The knowledge of liberation arises there within him. And then he knows that he has done what has to be done, that he has lived the holy life, that he is no longer becoming this or that, that his rebirth is destroyed.' (Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta).

The Anatta doctrine of the Buddha is over 2500 years old. Today the thought current of the modern scientific world is flowing towards the Buddha's Teaching of Anatta or No-Soul. In the eyes of the modern scientists, man is merely a bundle of ever-changing sensations. Modern physicists say that the apparently solid universe is not, in reality, composed of solid substance at all, but actually a flux of energy. The modern physicist sees the whole universe as a process of transformation of various forces of which man is a mere part. The Buddha was the first to realize this.

Now going back to chaos theory. As I have stated on the first post I have shared on this thread you will see similiarities in its teachings that go with buddhism. Not that you have to believe in it or anything, but just acknowledge that it has been thought about for a long time before scientists used mathematics. I think it was a guy named Lorenz that gave it some special attention at the time.

Dependent origination

The enlightenment of the Buddha was simultaneously his liberation from suffering (dukkha) and his insight into the nature of the Universe - particularly the nature of the lives of sentient beings (principally humans and animals). What the Buddha awakened to was the truth of dependent origination.

This is the understanding that any phenomenon exists only because of the existence of other phenomena in an incredibly complex web of cause and effect covering time past, time present and time future. This concept of a web is symbolized as a multidimensional spider's web on which lies an infinite amount of dew drops or jewels, and in these are reflected the reflections of all the other drops of dew ad infinitum.

Stated in another way, everything depends on everything else. A human being's existence in any given moment is dependent on the condition of everything else in the world at that moment, but in an equally significant way, the condition of everything in the world in that moment depends conversely on the character and condition of that human being.

Everything in the Universe is interconnected through the web of cause and effect such that the whole and the parts are mutually interdependent. The character and condition of entities at any given time are intimately connected with the character and condition of all other entities that superficially may appear to be unconnected or unrelated.

Because all things are thus conditioned and transient (anicca), they have no real independent identity (anatta) and thus do not truly exist, though to ordinary minds this appears to be the case. All phenomena are therefore fundamentally insubstantial and empty (sunya).

Wise human beings, those who "see things as they are" (yatha-bhuta-ñana-dassana), renounce attachment and clinging, transform the energy of desire into awareness and understanding, and eventually transcend the conditioned realm of form becoming Buddhas or Arhats.

Chaos Theory

Chaos Theory or what I like to call as the butterfly effect.
The amount of difference in the starting points of the two curves is so small that it is comparable to a butterfly flapping its wings.
The flapping of a single butterfly's wing today produces a tiny change in the state of the atmosphere. Over a period of time, what the atmosphere actually does diverges from what it would have done. So, in a month's time, a tornado that would have devastated the Indonesian coast doesn't happen. Or maybe one that wasn't going to happen, does.

This phenomenon, common to chaos theory, is also known as sensitive dependence on initial conditions. Just a small change in the initial conditions can drastically change the long-term behavior of a system. Such a small amount of difference in a measurement might be considered experimental noise, background noise, or an inaccuracy of the equipment. Such things are impossible to avoid in even the most isolated lab.

So as you can see there is similarity of the buddha’s teaching “dependent origin” and the scientific view “chaos theory”.

Okay maybe not exact for the scientists use a lot of numbers to their philosophy as the Buddhists just looked with their eyes at the nature presented to them.

I wrote a post way back and everyone trampled right over it like it didn't exist.

But it is okay! I am laughing about it.

Nevertheless it is interesting to see different perspectives of what clinges to be true for that individual.

What is important is that each individual is happy with their own conclusions and who knows perhaps a few have raised an eyebrow and gave a new alternative a thought that a different poster gave.


The way I see it there are many possiblities. Each has its own truth to it that could be possible of a designer or not.

The Buddhist idea of “no self” was very confusing to me in the beginning. I had the same reaction as most of you have now. Some of you have even replied and denied this philosophy. I thank you for your input on opinion and am not offended or upset. It is just an opinion that you hold strongly for. I can understand that and support your idealogy because it works for you.

I see that many understand the beginnings of how Buddhism was taught and how it evolved later into different foundations like James has explained earlier a few posts up, yet many don’t go past the actual teachings of what was taught.

It gets confusing and doesn’t fit in well with what we were raised or grew up with. The beginning of Buddhism is where it stays at for most that try it out. This is where patience is required. One also has to remember that there are many different views on its teachings. The philosophy of Buddhism wants you to find what works best for you.

Each individual will have a different understanding of its teachings. Actually most people believe in somekind of soul in this world. I am not saying there is anything wrong with that, but I have considered trying to understand a different concept that could be possible and enjoyable to learn. Now as I learned about this concept, I decided to create notes and comparisons on how we can attain this knowledge within our own lifetime. It is a bit lengthy, yet nevertheless it will provide an understanding that you can accept or not. Your choice of course!

If I asked you who you are, what would you say? Many people might begin by telling me what they do for work – teacher, software engineer, and accountant. But no, I’d say. That’s the work you do, not who you are. If you changed or lost your job, that identity would disappear. So who are you really?

OK, then next you might tell me something about your family and your people – perhaps you’re a mother or father, a person of African descent, an American citizen, and so on. But no, that’s you in relation to others. So who are YOU, independent of them?
So then you might bring up your personality or values – an introvert, a romantic, or that you have a deep love of beauty. But I’d say these are descriptors of ways you behave or what motivates you. They aren’t who you are.

The thing is, we can continue this exercise forever, but we’ll never find anything we can nail down as “who we are.” That’s because everything we come up with is superficial and impermanent. There really isn’t anything we can point to within ourselves that we can confidently say is a core essence that will never change.
Let me be clear that this idea isn’t saying we don’t exist. If we walked into a wall, our bodies would bump against it and we’d feel pain. Yes we exist! Instead, what it’s really saying is that we’re constantly changing beings, always in flux. We’re not permanent, fixed entities.

We’re more like rivers. If you stood on a bank and watched a river, the water molecules passing by now would be different from what passed by a moment ago. So then how can we say it’s the same river? Giving it a fixed name and identity is just a convention that humans came up with so we can talk about it. The whole idea is a fiction.

At this point, you might argue that there are core aspects of our character that don’t seem to change over our lifetimes. OK, now we’re getting into some tricky territory. The problem is that as soon as we attach labels and concepts onto something, our egos kick in and start objectifying it, nailing it down, and spinning off stories to make something permanent out of it. And that’s what can get us into trouble.

Let me illustrate with an example of my own. Some of the traits that emerged very early in my life were my hard-working and self-motivated nature, and that I enjoyed accomplishing goals I set for myself. The various labels I took on included “high achiever,” “Type A personality,” “motivated by excellence

But labels are traps. With every one of them comes a whole string of stories, assumptions, and beliefs. And for the most part, they don’t match with reality. I took my labels to mean I should go after a high-paying, high-status professional job, become part of a “respectable” (i.e. conventional) community … you get the idea. But more than that, I felt I had to do my absolute best at everything I did. I was driven to excel at everything I took on because it made my ego feel good.

Many of you know my life story, so I’ll keep it short here — but basically, my house of cards came tumbling down hard in my thirties. I had so taken in my own stories of what being excellent meant that
I wasn’t seeing any of the signs around me that were telling me otherwise. My physical health collapsed and I fell into a depression.
So what did the idea of “no self” have to teach me about all this? First and foremost, drop the stories. In any given moment when I’m faced with a choice, look at what I’m bringing to the table RIGHT NOW. Not my concepts of who I think I am or should be, but the full, raw potential of what I have in this present moment. Of course, this doesn’t mean I disregard everything from my past. I have all that

I’ve learned from my life experiences, all the skills and knowledge that I’ve acquired, and all my personal strengths and talents. But the real question is, how are those things actually manifesting in me right now, and how do they apply to the situation at hand? It’s not about the degrees I have, or the idea that I strive toward excellence, or that I want to succeed. Those are my stories. What’s really present for me right now, and what’s the most positive choice I can make based on that?

The Buddha’s teaching of no-self is about letting go. Let go of our stories, or in short, our egos. Our egos think those stories bring us security, but in reality they act more like ill-fitting glasses that distort our vision. But at the same time, the teaching isn’t telling us to be passive and let the winds blow us around. It’s about being so completely immersed in and open to the present moment that we know clearly and fully what the situation is – including our own strengths and weaknesses. With that clarity of vision, we can choose to flow more in harmony with the way things really are by confidently relying on our known strengths, rather than fighting to hold up our version of a fool’s paradise.

This is where the practice of mindfulness is vitally important. At some point in our practice, we begin to let go of our grasping to uphold “me” as something opposed to “the world out there.” We start subtly shifting away from being dualistically MINDFUL OF various things to sensing that we are just awareness itself, inseparable from our surroundings. We stand naked just as we are, the pure potential present in us right now, and flow intimately with the world as it is. That’s the real gift of mindfulness — to feel so confident and in harmony with the world that we can trust and let go of our lives to it.

Back to that notion of character traits that don’t change much – yes, I still have many of those qualities that keep me motivated to do my best at everything I do. But my way of thinking about them has really changed. I now know I’m at my best when I stand back and let the world around me augment what talents and skills I have. I suppose it’s sort of like sailing. Rather than me doing a lot of rowing, I’m learning how to harness the wind so it propels me toward where I want to go.

So if there is no self, then who’s sitting here? I guess the answer is a growing, changing being. In my case, this being also wants to grow toward becoming wiser and more open-hearted, and so every moment, I try to make the best choice I can to point myself in that direction. Where am I going? I don’t know, but it doesn’t matter.
Because the more I make positive choices, the more strongly the flow of my life seems to move in the direction I aspire toward.
I find the Buddha’s teachings profoundly optimistic and hopeful, because it says that we can change, and we can choose how. And paradoxically, I’m finding that the more I take in the idea of no-self, the more I’m becoming who I really am.


Initially, this teaching of anatman was a rejection of the Vedic belief that everyone has an undying, unchanging essence called the atman (“Self”).

It was one more way to distinguish the teachings of the Buddha from the teachings of the Vedas. Instead of locating identity in something akin to a soul, the Buddha taught that there is only a sense of self. There is no permanent foundation, such as a soul, to consciousness and experience.


Oh my this post is getting very long. I should stop here! Anyway life is so interesting isn't it. I hope you are living it the way you like to live it with much happiness and joy.

Stay critical, but don't forget to empty your mind once in awhile and just enjoy the things around you. Don't ask how they got there, or what made them, or why. Just appreciate it first and ask later if you need to. Have a great day everyone

Finally I have another trivia book completed. These are fun to create actually. If anyone is interested in a free copy then let me know.

At least according to my understanding of chaos theory, in Buddhism the concept of the individual and the soul do not exist; in fact they are refuted. Nor is there an inherent sense of me-ness that can be distinguished or segregated from the rest of the world. Everything, they say, is related and dependant. Nothing is independent.

The argument goes that each situation, each decision, each so-called “fact” was reached through a complex series of incidents, without which the uniqueness of its circumstances just wouldn’t exist. This applies to the argument against a notion of self as well.

What I consider to be “me” is in fact not one distinct unit. “Me” is comprised of hands, fingers, wrists, elbows and so-on; but even these are not distinct unto themselves either. Cells regularly die and are replaced by new ones. So literally speaking, the physical personal I call “me” right not is not going to be the same one getting on the bus tomorrow. Physcially the cells will be different.

Similarly, if a person is the sum of their experiences, this too is different from one moment to the next. Therefore I cannot say I am consistent and ever-present throughout my lifetime because of the circumstances and experiences I am a part of; because the aggregated pool of experience changes from one instance to the next.

Likewise is the concept of mind as distinct from brain. As with an inherent concept of “me”, what we consider the mind – at least in my understanding – is reliant on our comprehension of reality, information, and experience, both past and present. Given this changes constantly, the notion of one eternal mind cannot exist either.

The brain is comprised of distinctly distributed activities. As such it is not a single entity. Physically it’s also composed of cells too, which as I said die and change from one day to the next.

I wonder if this is what we’re talking about when we say chaos theory?

As I study Buddhism I discovered a doctrine called the "dependent origination" or "dependent co-arising." To scientists, it seems formally the same as Chaos Theory, but more inclusive. Where Chaos Theory only explains the interdependence of physical causality, dependent co-arising also includes mental factors in the web of mutual causal interaction.

In contrast to our simplistic notion of causation whereby A causes B, which causes C, which causes D, the Buddhist theory recognizes the true complexity of causation. Everything is involved causally with everything else. According to the Buddha, causality is a function of relationship, of mutual factors that cannot be isolated, including "feedback" interactions -- the mutual influence of dependent and independent variables.

No effect arises without cause, yet no effect is predetermined, for its causes are multiple and mutually affecting. Hence there can be novelty as well as order. Thus, Buddhist teachings presented a middle way between the positions of determinism and indeterminacy that had polarized the discussion of causality.

The middle way is something I have posted in the Buddhist thread for those interested in knowing what this is about. It could use some attention and also some work.

Does one have to own a website to use padfiles? I like to learn how to use padfiles to advertise my work. Any good suggestions on how to use them most effectively?

Wow this is a very sad story. I heard that Philly is one of the most dangerous cities in the nation to live in. I hear it all the time from people who are from there. What ashame that this cannot be resolved so kids can grow up in peace.

Whatever it is worth, I believe that such a story should be passed around to as many people as possible to understand the significance of trying to keep peace on the grounds.

Thank you HuckleberryFinn for sharing this with us.

I have dedicated more then half of my life helping children that are less fortunate as a Red Cross worker and still continue to participate as a member for the UNICEF programs. It just seems like it will never be enough.

Brilliant and the title is fantastic

Over here in Miami they wrap them up in these large leaves and string it up tight to boil in water. Of course many Latin American nationalities are living in Miami so you have many different variations to look at.

Bruce Lee believe it or not was also a philosophist and believed that water had its own life and conscience in its own way.

Perhaps there is a perfect universe out there and we so happen to not live in one.

Perhaps this universe is as perfect as it can get.


I think many of the most influential thinkers have thought about it for thousands of years. As they couldn't find ultimate answers many have created stories that soothed the mind and create many followers to believe in it also.

Afterall, most of us would like to go to sleep not worrying about it or at least believing that after we die we could or can go to a better place.

Then of course there are many that are contempt that this life is all that really counts and nothing else happens afterwords.

Whatever the reasons are for our existence we might never know, yet regardless, most of us try to make the best out of it.

One thing is for certain, you will never run out of idealogies of what might be available as a answer. The many different minds at work on this planet can give you many possiblities of what we claim to be true.

Concerning evidence for a designer.

I think it is safe to say that we don't know.

Of course many will have great thesis and idealogies claiming they know or are very close. That is why there are followers that share the same view.

Here on this specific thread we can clearly see difference of opinion, yet as we live and grow old, how important was it to know and ask yourself if you could of constructed your time more wisely on other subjects that could have really made a difference in our societies today.

I am not saying don't discuss these hard questions that have been asked for thousands of years, yet what purpose does it have if we try to figure it out on a tiny planet in a vast galaxy or galaxies for that matter.

My personal belief is that we should advance in technology to somehow travel at super fast speeds to see other universes to find more answers that could answer some of the questions we have been asking for a very long time. I mean think about it. You have had some of the greatest minds tackle these questions who shifted this world for better or worse (you decide) and in the end they passed away leaving only a footprint of what they believe to be true and what only some (not all) accept to be true.

So in the end will we advance in technology enough to (perhaps) find more answers to how or who the designer is? That is if there is a designer and only if we can even come close to comprehending this.


Now maybe I don't make much sense here for you highly intelligent posters that have studied alot of this in your lifetime, yet consider the possiblity that perhaps our answers are beyond this universe. I would say we need to fly to the Pegasus system where some European scientists have discovered a possiblity of planets that could hold life. We could get DNA samples or whatever they use over there (hoping they are more advanced in the questions we ask) to hopefully get a better perspective of how everything started.

Of course I can't believe it will happen in our lifetime, but if we can somehow stablize this world to unite more into space programs and to stop unneccessary wars, disagreements, and suffering, we might be able to advance quicker. Of course this sounds utterly impossible, yet I would like to believe that we can somehow fix our internal problems on this planet and concentrate more into knowing more of what is out there by investing into it.

Thanks for reading all this and now back to the program with the host 'Creative' asking the mighty and difficult question.

What designed or who was the designer of everything, of our universes, and galaxies?

The Golden Compass by Philip Pullman is a entertaining movie of how the author shares his views on "God's dirt or dust" and how everything started.

It is a fantasy movie, but had much controversial debates and negativity amongst Catholic believers at one time. I think even the Catholic heads even indicated that it shouldn't be watched if you are a catholic. Of course this isn't the first time this happened. Harry Potter was another movie that had negative effects on Christian religion. Of course I am not saying all Christians had a problem with it, but nevertheless, it was discouraged by a large population who practice this faith system.

I mainly watched "The Golden Compass" for entertainment and donated money to help polar bears at the time when advertised.

Perhaps someone has watched it and thought about this possibility of design. Even though it is pure fiction it does have one thinking about the many possiblities of what could have started everything as we know it.

Some economic advisors from the University of Harvard mentioned that the U.S. is borrowing a trillion dollars a year and that it will be a economic downfall if continued.

The reason why is it would devalue the dollar drastically and lose confidence of its international partners. Afterall, they also can only lend so much money.

I don't even want to know what the interest rate is on these loans!


So my question is

Will the United States experience a drastic downfall leveling off with Latin America where most of the countries have unstabile economies and horrible infrastructure?

Please explain why and what could be done to turn around the economy if you are not pleased of what Congress is doing including the business ethics Corporations are practicing today in this country.

A good book to write and continue Terry. How to find happiness by using the Internet.

Keep writing and collect the pages. Each day write 1 or 2 pages.

Then go back and form them into chapters.

Eventually you will have created a work that might even effect someones life in a positive way.

A great book is "Peaceful Warrior"

It also has become a movie later on.

It is spiritual in many ways and also philosophical.

Keep writing. Good work

Empty your mind

There is never nothing going on

There are no ordinary moments

There are no ordinary minds

Everyone is unique

Remember to empty your mind

Have a great time friends

-smiless

That will work. Well if I ever encounter such numbers again, I will make sure to put those little asterix next to them.

First I would think that one has to believe they can write a book. Never say I suck! Writing isn't a lucrative job in my opinion. It can be a great hobby though!

Now the publishing business is a whole different situation. That is where it gets hard, upsetting, and even discouraging, yet once accepted and selling those millions of copies, your perspective will change alot.

The big question is how to get a publishing company to accept you. You better write one darn good book is all I can say. A book that can get people off their toes.

Now if your book is about yourself and being single. I would say that "reality shows" seem to be doing great on television. I would say that you have good chances in getting a book published if you make the reader laugh, cry, and keep those pages turning until 5 in the morning!

Concerning language structure, punctuations, and other iota of things one has to worry about when writing, I wouldn't worry too much about. This doesn't mean you shouldn't try, but there are some really good editors out there that can polish your work.

First step in my opinion, know what to write. Create a chapter outline of let us say 30 to 40 chapters. Each chapter 5 to 15 pages would be good. Now this isn't a guideline or anything. You can write 1 page chapters if you like! As long as it keeps the reader on his or her toes is what is important.

So once you have a chapter outline then just write, write, write! Express your feelings and just write it out. Don't worry about sequence of how it is written. You will soon see that you will be rewriting your sentences anyway until you have it to where you like it.

Also share your chapters if you like on Mingle2. There you will get opinions on it, but don't take it personal or as a final answer. Remember everyone has different taste on writing styles.

I hope this helps a little. So what I am saying is yes you have what it takes only if you believe you do.

Keep us updated and ask questions. You already know there are some great writers who like to hang out here on the forums all the time.