Prove to me that you have a soul.

Originally posted by Alliance
somwhat. The sub-genre crystallized in 1958 with Heinlein's Starship Troopers . American Military SF had its influences on pulp SF, but they are considered different genres.

AMSF is a facinating genre. I wrote a very large thesis on it...tracing its origins and how it describes the rise and change of American militarism during the cold war.

Of course, the genre has changed significantly since 1992. But, it always was changing anyway.

Fascinating.

I agree entirely. Though the closest I have got to studying it for education was in one of my English classes discusses genre and value in times of trouble (of which cold war/post 9/11 genres were a big part.)

I'd love to do some more study some time in the future, but then I'd do it because I just enjoy the reading. One of the most galling things I ever heard, and made me question the intelligence of ones average human was, during one of my electives where I was doing literature I heard some guy remark "I don't think I like it, I didn't expect so much reading." I like to think he accidentally mailed himself to South America or something.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Prove to me that you have a soul.

Do we have a soul, and if we do, how do you know this to be true?

Give me your proof.

Originally posted by Imperial_Samura
I agree entirely. Though the closest I have got to studying it for education was in one of my English classes discusses genre and value in times of trouble (of which cold war/post 9/11 genres were a big part.)

I'd love to do some more study some time in the future, but then I'd do it because I just enjoy the reading. One of the most galling things I ever heard, and made me question the intelligence of ones average human was, during one of my electives where I was doing literature I heard some guy remark "I don't think I like it, I didn't expect so much reading." I like to think he accidentally mailed himself to South America or something.

Cool. I just lvoe the relationship between Republics and the military. How societies reconcile facist ideals with democratic ones.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Prove to me that you have a soul.

Do we have a soul, and if we do, how do you know this to be true?

Give me your proof.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Don't say "prove it".
I've come to realize that the phrase "prove it" is a way of getting out of talking it through. No one is going to prove anything here. I don't think this forum is a "prove it" forum. The point is to talk about things, even arguing is better then the "prove it". We all have a responsibility to communicate and "prove it" cuts off communication.

Originally posted by FeceMan
How recent was this enlightenment? 😛

The term "prove it" in the title is meant as a provocateur. Where as the other "prove it" is used in a way of challenging another person. There is nothing wrong with saying "prove it"; it is just a waste of time.

Originally posted by animelover4ever
how can i prove what i don't have....

Ah, but you do have a soul.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Prove to me that you have a soul.

Do we have a soul, and if we do, how do you know this to be true?

Give me your proof.

I like to share this article..

With regard to the soul theory, there are three kinds of teachers in the world:

- The first teacher teaches the existence of an eternal ego-entity that outlasts death: He is the eternalist.

- The second teacher teaches a temporary ego-entity which becomes annihilated at death: He is the materialist.

- The third teacher teaches neither an eternal nor a temporary ego-entity: He is the Buddha.

The Buddha teaches that what we call ego, self, soul, personality, etc., are merely conventional terms that do not refer to any real, independent entity. According to Buddhism there is no reason to believe that there is an eternal soul that comes from heaven or that is created by itself and that will transmigrate or proceed straight away either to heaven or hell after death. Buddhists cannot accept that there is anything either in this world or any other world that is eternal or unchangeable. We only cling to ourselves and hope to find something immortal. We are like children who wish to clasp a rainbow. To children, a rainbow is something vivid and real; but the grown-ups know that it is merely an illusion caused by certain rays of light and drops of water. The light is only a series of waves or undulations that have no more reality than the rainbow itself.

Man has done well without discovering the soul. He shows no signs of fatigue or degeneration for not having encountered any soul. No man has produced anything to promote mankind by postulating a soul and its imaginary working. Searching for a soul in man is like searching for something in a dark empty room. But the poor man will never realize that what he is searching for is not in the room. It is very difficult to make such a person understand the futility of his search.

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?

The Buddha is silent.

'Then Venerable Gotama, is there no Atman?

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.

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.

A prominent author, W.S. Wily, once said, 'The existence of the immortal in man is becoming increasingly discredited under the influence of the dominant schools of modern thought.' The belief in the immortality of the soul is a dogma that is contradicted by the most solid, empirical truth.

The mere belief in an immortal soul, or the conviction that something in us survives death, does not make us immortal unless we know what it is that survives and that we are capable of identifying ourselves with it. Most human beings choose death instead of immortality by identifying themselves with that which is perishable and impermanent by clinging stubbornly to the body or the momentary elements of the present personality, which they mistake for the soul or the essential form of life.

About those researches of modern scientists who are now more inclined to assert that the so-called 'Soul' is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences, Prof. James says that the term 'Soul' is a mere figure of speech to which no reality corresponds.

It is the same Anatta doctrine of the Buddha that was introduced in the Mahayana school of Buddhism as Sunyata or voidness. Although this concept was elaborated by a great Mahayana scholar, Nagarjuna, by giving various interpretations, there is no extraordinary concept in Sunyata far different from the Buddha's original doctrine of Anatta.

The belief in soul or Self and the Creator God, is so strongly rooted in the minds of many people that they cannot imagine why the Buddha did not accept these two issues which are indispensable to many religions. In fact some people got a shock or became nervous and tried to show their emotion when they heard that the Buddha rejected these two concepts. That is the main reason why to many unbiased scholars and psychologists Buddhism stands unique when compared to all the other religions. At the same time, some other scholars who appreciate the various other aspects of Buddhism thought that Buddhism would be enriched by deliberately re-interpreting the Buddha word 'Atta' in order to introduce the concept of Soul and Self into Buddhism. The Buddha was aware of this unsatisfactoriness of man and the conceptual upheaval regarding this belief.

All conditioned things are impermanent,
All conditioned things are Dukka -- Suffering,
All conditioned or unconditioned things
are soulless or selfless.

There is a parable in our Buddhist texts with regard to the belief in an eternal soul. A man, who mistook a moving rope for a snake, became terrified by that fear in his mind. Upon discovery that it was only a piece of rope, his fear subsided and his mind became peaceful. The belief in an eternal soul is equated to the rope of that man's imagination.

It really all depends, as its been mentioned what you define soul as. Proof needs to be something material, and soul, as far as other deffinitions go, it isnt.

I guess you can call the life enery soul. Life energy moves in and out of us, so that can be a soul or a spirit.

My question is, reagarding mahasattva's post...

The Buddah says that the soul is neither mortal or eternal...and that we should not waste our time discussing it becuase we have no proof.

However, what proof does Buddah have that we have a soul in the first place?

Has there ever been any evidence of a soul?

Not to my knowledge. It more just a "feeling" which is local evidence, but not evidence in general.

Well then if it don't fit, you must acquit... Seriously everything i know is evidence, so i base my beliefs on that. I mean whats the secrecy behind this soul, or devine God. Why is the world in conflict, and '' God'' is powerless to help.

Or does God only work, when one dies??

Well, if we had this answer, ther would be a lot less to talk about.

Originally posted by Alliance
Well, if we had this answer, their would be a lot less to talk about.

Scenario A: there is a God. We can talk about heaven, or on how to purify our souls.

Scenario B: Santa clause story. Here we could discuss on how governments tattoo the idea of a God, in order to control the people.

If you think religoin is simply a governmental issue...you're dead wrong.

Originally posted by Alliance
If you think religoin is simply a governmental issue...you're dead wrong.

Originally posted by JesusIsAlive
Ah, but you do have a soul.

Originally posted by JOE NUNEZ
Huh? explain please....

Religion is not a tool of the government...it may be one, but there are many more restrictions preventing that.

There are not many thocracies in the world anymore. Worshipping your monarch is no longer the same as worshipping christ. Government has more power than the church in most nations.

Religion survives because it puts a whole nother set of people in power (clergy). Think about how much money is made off of the Hajj, or Christmas, and other such spiritual events. Or even just donations to your holy place...

Government is one of the smaller forces propgating religon.

Originally posted by Alliance
My question is, reagarding mahasattva's post...

The Buddah says that the soul is neither mortal or eternal...and that we should not waste our time discussing it becuase we have no proof.

However, what proof does Buddah have that we have a soul in the first place?

I believe that there is an infinite ocean of pure reality that is neither outside nor inside the creation. I call It the Single Principle. That reality, is not a substance, it does not have a being. It is the law of creation. As matter evolves, it absorbs and reflects a portion of that infinite reality. Life for example is a manifestation of that reality. It reflects in the living organism when this comes together in that specific combination. In other words the living being becomes an instrument, or better said, a receptacle of that ultimate reality. The more complex is the being the sharper are its antennae and the more reality is reflect in it.

Take the example of a radio receiver and a television set. One can receive only sounds while the other can receive sounds and images. Some TVs are black and white while others can also receive and transmit colors. Compare this to the millions of life forms that are pullulating in this planet (and who knows how many outside this planet). Each life form is an instrument, they all are organized or built in a way that they can capture life, but then each has specialized in a different way and each reflects hundreds or thousands of other unique forms of the Reality. In other words, we are all instruments, each reflecting different aspects of the same Reality.

This process is not unlike the light of the sun reflecting on different objects in this world. The light is the same yet once it shines on the planet it is reflected back in millions of colors, hues and shades. Each object reflects that light according to its own capacity, shape or texture, yet these objects are not luminaries on their own. They do not emanate light. They are simply reflecting the colorless light of the Sun.

I believe this is what is happening with the world of the creation. The mater reflects the Reality and that portion of the Reality reflected in the matter is the spirit of the being.

Humans are complex instruments; therefore they reflect the ultimate Reality to a higher degree. The reflection of the Reality or the Single Principle in humans is what we call human spirit. Therefore if what I say make any sense, the human spirit is not the product of the matter. It is not born out of the combination of the atoms but is reflected in the body of humans when that is formed, the way light is reflected in a mirror. This would make all humans, animals and as a matter of fact all beings, whether living or inanimate, imbued from the same Reality. We are all manifestations of the Single Principle.

What is, then, the true nature of reality all about. The concept of shunyata (Sanskrit), or Ku (Japanese), has been variously translated as latency, non-substantiality, emptiness and void was first detailed articulated by Buddhist scholar Nagarjuna, living in India between 150 and 250 C.E, believed that the state of "neither existence nor nonexistence" described in this concept expressed the true nature of all things. The paradoxical nature of this idea, however, makes it somewhat foreign to Western dualistic logic, and has helped contribute to a stereotype of Buddhism as a detached, mystical philosophy that sees the world as a grand illusion. The implications of Ku, however, are much more down-to-earth, and are in fact consistent with the findings of contemporary science.

Modern physics, in attempting to discover the essence of matter, has arrived at a description of the world that is very close to that of Nagarjuna. What scientists have discovered is that there is no actual, easily identifiable "thing" at the basis of matter. Subatomic particles, the building blocks of the physical world that we inhabit, appear to oscillate between states of being and nonbeing. Instead of a fixed "thing" in a particular place, we find only shifting waves of probability. At this level, the world is actually a highly fluid and unpredictable place, essentially without substance. It is this non-substantial nature of reality that the concept of ku describes.

Ku also elucidates the latent potential inherent in life. Consider how, when we are in the grip of a powerful emotion, such as anger, this expresses itself in our entire being--our glaring expression, raised voice, tensed body and so on. When our temper cools, the anger disappears. What has happened to it? We know anger still exists somewhere within us, but until something causes us to feel angry again, we can find no evidence of its existence. To all intents and purposes, it has ceased to exist. Memories are another example; we are unaware of their existence until they suddenly rise into our consciousness. The rest of the time, as with our anger, they are in a state of latency, or ku: they exist and yet they do not.

In the same way, life (in all its manifestations) contains vast potentials and possibilities that are not always apparent or obvious, but which, given the right circumstances, can become manifest. This infinite potential is, in fact, the very nature of life.

Moreover, the Buddhist teaching of the "Nine consciousnesses" offers the basis for a comprehensive understanding of who we are, our true identity. It also helps explain how Buddhism sees the eternal continuity of our lives over cycles of birth and death.

A correlative theory, that of the “nine consciousnesses,” offers a Buddhist explanation of what, in Anglo-Western thought, is usually conceived of as the mind, but it provides a means of understanding subjective and precognitive existence as well as everyday mental functions. The first five in this articulation correspond to the five senses; they are the gateways to the external world. The sixth consciousness integrates the sensory data from the first five and allows us to form judgments and carry out our daily activities.

The seventh consciousness, by contrast, is the site at which a person’s inner life unfolds and is, to a degree, unfettered by external conditions. This abstract mind, or mano-consciousness, allows one to reflect on one’s existence rather than simply to deal with external matters of daily life. This is where one’s sense of self, or separateness, comes into being. Mano-consciousness spans both the conscious and subconscious dimensions of life.

Below the seventh consciousness, Buddhism elucidates a deeper layer, the eighth or Alaya consciousness, also known as the never-perishing or storehouse consciousness. It is here that the energy of our karma resides. Whereas the first seven consciousnesses disappear on death, the eighth consciousness persists through the cycles of active life and the latency of death. It can be thought of as the life-flow that supports the activities of the other consciousnesses. The experiences described by those who have undergone clinical death and been revived could be said to be occurrences at the borderline of the seventh and eighth consciousnesses.

Buddhist teachings describe the seventh layer as emerging from the eighth consciousness: it is always focused on the eighth consciousness of the individual, which it perceives as something fixed, unique and isolated from other things. In reality, the eighth consciousness is in a state of continual flux. At this level our lives constantly interact, exerting a profound influence on each other. The perception of a fixed and isolated self(or soul) that the seventh consciousness generates is thus false.

Buddhism posits that our thoughts, words and deeds invariably create an imprint in the deep layers of the eighth consciousness. This is what Buddhists refer to as karma. The eighth consciousness is therefore sometimes referred to as the karmic storehouse--the place where these karmic "seeds" are "stored." These seeds or latent energy can be either positive or negative; the eighth consciousness remains neutral and equally receptive to either type of karmic imprinting. The energy becomes manifest when conditions are ripe. Positive latent causes can become manifest as both positive effects in one's life and as positive psychological functions such as trust, nonviolence, self-control, compassion and wisdom. Negative latent causes can manifest as various forms of delusion and destructive behavior and give rise to suffering for ourselves and others.

While the image of a storehouse is helpful, a truer image may be that of a raging torrent of karmic energy. This energy is constantly moving through and shaping our lives and experience. Our resultant thoughts and actions are then fed back into this karmic flow. The quality of the karmic flow is what makes each of us distinct beings--our unique selves. The flow of energy is constantly changing, but, like a river, it maintains an identity and consistency even through successive cycles of life and death. It is this aspect of fluidity, this lack of fixity, that opens the possibility to transforming the content of the eighth consciousness. This is why karma, properly understood, is different from an unchanging or unavoidable destiny.

The deepest and, from the Buddhist perspective, most important level of consciousness is called the ultimately pure or amala-consciousness, because this level of consciousness is not affected by one’s karma. It is this ninth level that unites all human beings with the reality of the universe imbued with compassion and wisdom-that is the life of the universe. Thus, one who awakens this reality is called a Buddha or state of enlightenment.