Chapter 12 Chapter 11 What is the soul

What do you call me (atman, soul)?Is this soul consciousness itself?Or something special? In fact, whatever we call it, we will miss it, and any conceptualization will be wrong.So any 'I', 'soul' known to man is not a real thing, it cannot be.All those people who defined it, defined it in the same situation; they were trying ridiculous things.They are saying the unsayable, they are defining the undefinable, they are constructing a theory of what they cannot know. There are three attitudes about it. First of all there are the mystics, the knowers, who are completely silent about it.They won't give any definitions, they say definitions are useless.Then there is another group of mystics - the largest group, who say: "Even a futile effort can help. Sometimes even untrue theories lead to truth; sometimes even false may also become true; sometimes, even a false step may lead you to a correct end. It may appear false at this moment, or prove false at the end, but, false Design can still help."

This second group feels that, even in silence, you are saying something, and of course nothing can be said.Mystics of this second class have hit on a point, and the definition is theirs.Then there's the third category of people who are neither silent nor defined, they just deny the whole thing so that you don't get carried away by it at all. Buddha belongs to this third category of people.If you ask him: is there a soul?Is there a God?Is there a being above life?He would simply deny it.Even on the verge of death, when someone asked him: Will you exist after death?He still denies it.

He said, "No! I will not exist, I will withdraw from existence, just as the flame goes out." You cannot ask where the flame goes when it goes out, it just goes out.That's why Buddha said that Nirvana means "the extinction of the flame", not just moksha.Buddha said, "This is liberation: total cessation. To be is to be somewhere, in a certain way in slavery." This is the third type of people. These 3 types are always fighting because the speaker must feel that those who are silent are not compassionate enough and they should say something to those who cannot understand silence.And those who define it, they define it in so many ways that they argue about it.There are bound to be arguments.

All definitions are by design.A person can be defined in any way.Mahavira defines it one way and Sankara defines it another way, all definitions are equally false or true, there is no difference.How a person is defined depends on what kind of person he is.There are so many definitions, and those definitions become so many religions, so many philosophical systems.Now, they make so much confusion in the minds of men, indeed, sometimes those who keep silent seem more compassionate.Definitions have become conflicts, and one definition cannot allow another definition, otherwise it would itself be contradictory.

① Shangkara (788-820): Medieval scholastic philosopher, Vedanta advait theorist. —— Annotation Mahavira tried to say that every definition has some truth in it, but only some.Then there is something bogus in every definition.But Mahavira wants to have many followers, it is impossible because if you are not well defined, the confused mind will become more confused.If you say "every way is right" then you are saying "there is no way" and then a person who is looking for a way will be completely confused.If I say "every path is right, wherever you go, you will go to the divine. Go anywhere, do anything, there is some truth in everything", then, you can't go from I can't get any help here.This is true, but it's still not helpful.

If you define in a particular way and make that definition absolute, then the other definitions become false.Because Sankara has to define something precisely, he may say, "Buddha is not right, he is wrong." But if Buddha is thought to be wrong, then it will only create confusion.How can a Buddha be wrong?How can a Christ be wrong?Only Sankara is correct?So there is a conflict. Even the third attitude, the denial attitude of the Buddha, does not help.It does not help, because by denying the seeking is lost, and without seeking there is no need to deny.Very few people are capable of understanding what total extinction is.The desire for life is so ingrained that even our search for a god becomes a desire for life, in effect we are searching for more life.Even though we are searching for moksha, we are not searching for total death.We still want to exist in a certain way.

Buddha has been asked, for 40 years in a row, only one question: "If we are going to stop completely, then why this whole effort? It seems completely pointless! Just to stop? Just not to exist?" Why such a whole effort?" And still the people around Buddha felt that he was not resting, actually, that he had become more -- that was their feeling.Buddha has become something more, but still he denies and denies. How can you define the undefinable?But you either have to keep silent, or you have to define it. As for me, I don't fall into any of these 3 categories, that's why I can't be consistent. Everyone in the 3 categories can be consistent, but I am not concerned with the concept of soul at all.My concern has always been the questioner, the person asking the question, how can he be helped?If I think that by positive faith he can be helped, then I declare it; if I feel that by silence he can be helped, then I remain silent; if I feel that by definition he can be helped , then I give a definition.For me, everything is just a design, nothing serious, it's just a design.

A definition may not be true, in fact if I had to make it meaningful to you it really couldn't be true.You do not know what the soul is, you do not know this eruption, this we call Brahman.What is that divinity, you don't know the meaning, you only know the words.Words not experienced are just meaningless sounds.You can create the sound "God," but unless you know God it is just a sound. ① Brahman (Brahman): Brahmanism, Hindu term.That is "Vatican". —— Annotation "Heart" is a very meaningful word, "cow" is a very meaningful word, because you have your own experience of what they mean.But "God" is just a word to you, and "soul" is just a word.If I had to help you, then I could only help you with a false definition, because you have no experience of God, you have no experience of a soul, and unless I define it by something you know, a definition will is of no use.For someone who has never known flowers but knows diamonds, I must define flowers by diamonds, there is no other way.A flower has nothing to do with diamonds, but through it something can be indicated.I can say, "Flowers are living diamonds; living diamonds!" The whole thing is false, diamonds and flowers are two different things, but if I say "Flowers are living diamonds, growing diamonds," I can go for you Going through it creates a desire.A definition exists only to help you experience it.All definitions are like this.

If you don't know diamonds, if you don't know anything positive by which I can define, then I have to define by negative.If you don't have any positive feeling about anything then I would define it by negative.I would say, "Your unhappiness is not part of the soul, your dukkha, your excruciating pain in body and mind is not part of the soul." Define, negatively define by something that you carry, that is hell to you.I have to do that by saying: "It won't be this, it'll just be the opposite of that" To define negatively. So it depends on the situation.I don't have absolute answers, I only have some designs, only psychological answers.And the answer does not depend on me, but on you: because of you, I give a particular answer.

That's why I can't be a guru, never!Buddha is a Guru, but I can never be.Because you are so inconsistent, everyone is so different, how can I be consistent?not possible for me.It is also impossible for me to start a denomination because that would require consistency very, very much.If you want to start a sect then you have to be consistent, stupidly consistent, you have to deny all inconsistency.They're there, but you have to deny them, otherwise you can't attract followers, so I'm less of a guru and more of a psychotherapist -- or something.To me, you are what matters.If you can understand this, then more things can be said.

By "consciousness" I mean a movement toward fullness of living being.You are never fully alive, sometimes you are a little alive, you know that, sometimes you are less alive.And when you are more alive, you feel happy.Happiness is nothing, it is just an interpretation of your comparison.If you are in love with someone, you become more alive with him, and this more aliveness gives you a happy feeling.Then you keep projecting the cause of your happiness onto someone else. When you encounter nature, you are more alive; when you are born on a mountain, you become more alive; and when you live only with machines, you are less alive.With a tree you become more alive because you were a tree.At a deep level, we are just walking trees with roots in the air rather than in the ground.And when you face the ocean, you feel more alive, because the first life was born in the ocean.In fact, in our bodies, we still have the same composition as sea water, with the same salt content as sea water. When you're with a woman, if you're the opposite sex, you start to feel more alive than with a man.With a man you don't feel alive because there's nothing pulling you out, you're closed.And the energies of the opposite sex will pull you out, the flames are flickering, and you can become more alive.And whenever you start feeling more alive, you start feeling happy. When we use the word "soul" we are referring to the fully living being.To be fully alive, not with someone else but with oneself; to be fully alive without external causes.The ocean is not there and you can become oceanic; the sky is not there and you become the whole space; the lover is not there and you are just love, nothing else. What I mean is that you start becoming alive independently.Without depending on someone or anything else, you are liberated.With this liberation, this inner liberation, it is impossible for your happiness to be lost.It is fully alive, it is fully conscious, it cannot be lost. With this total livingness, many things happen that cannot really be understood unless they have already happened.But for the time being, I can give you this definition of the soul: to be fully conscious, fully alive, fully blissful, not bound by anything.If you start loving, or if you can be happy without a reason, then you are a soul, not a body.Why? By physical body I mean the part of your soul that is always in relationship to the outside world.You start to feel sad when there are some reasons to be sad, or you start to feel good when there are some reasons to be happy.But without something else there, you never feel yourself.When nothing is there and you exist in your total livingness, in your total awareness, that feeling, that state is the soul. But this is a provisional definition, it is only implied.It's not defining, it's just showing.It's abundantly there, but it's just a finger pointing to the moon.Never mistake your finger for the moon.The finger is not the moon, it's just a pointer.Forget about fingers and look at the moon.All definitions are like that. You ask whether the soul is individual.It's a pointless question, but since you asked it, it's appropriate, like a question a blind man would ask. A blind man moves by his cane, without which he cannot move, by which he seeks and gropes in the dark.If we told him that an operation would be needed to cure his blindness, the blind man would properly ask, "When I have eyes, will I still be able to grope in the dark with my stick?" If we said "You won't need your cane anymore", he couldn't believe it.He would say, "I cannot exist without a cane, I cannot live. What you are saying is unacceptable, I cannot imagine it. Without a cane, I am nothing. So, what will become of my cane? You first have to tell me!" In fact, this individuality is like the blind man's walking stick.You are groping in the dark with an ego because you have no soul.This ego, this 'I', is just a groping, because you have no eyes, and as soon as you become fully alive, the ego disappears.It is a part of your blindness, a part of your half-deadness, it is a part of your unconsciousness, a part of your ignorance.it will fall. It is not a question of whether you are individual or not; the two are irrelevant.Individuality is irrelevant, but the question continues because the source of questioning remains the same. When Maulingaputta first went to the Buddha, he asked many questions, and the Buddha said, "Are you asking to solve the problem? Or just to get the answer?" Malingava said, "I came to ask you, and you started asking me! Let me think about it, I have to think about it." He thought about it, and the next day he said, "Really, I am to solve them." Buddha said to him, "Have you ever asked others these same questions?" Malingava said: "For 30 years, I have been asking everyone." Buddha said: "After 30 years of asking, you must have got many answers, many, many, but has any one proved to be that answer?" Malingava said: "No!" So Buddha said, "I will not give you any answers. In 30 years of asking, many answers have been given, I can add some, but that will not help, so I will give you solutions, not give you Answer." Malingava said, "Okay, give it to me." But Buddha said, "It cannot be given to you by me, it has to grow in you. So stay with me in peace for a year, don't ask a single question, be completely silent, be with me, Years from now you can ask, and then I'll give you the answer." Sariputta, the great disciple of the Buddha, was sitting under a nearby tree, and he started laughing, and Malingaputra asked, "Why is Sariputta laughing? What's so funny?" Shariputra said: "If you have to ask, ask now, don't wait a year. We have been fooled, it happened to me too, because after a year we will never ask. Because you stay in complete peace One year, then, that source of questioning disappears. This man is a liar, this man is a good liar. After a year, he will not give you any answers." Therefore, the Buddha said: "I will fulfill my promise. Shariputra, I will also fulfill my promise to you. It is not my fault that you do not ask." One year passed, Malingava kept silent and meditated quietly, his inside and outside became more and more peaceful.So he became a peaceful pond, without vibrations, without fluctuations.He forgot that a year had passed.The day had come when he could ask, but he himself had forgotten. Buddha said: "In the past there was a man named Malingava who was here, where is he now? He has to ask some questions, a year has passed and the day has come, so he has to come to me." There are 10,000 A monk was there and everyone was trying to find out who Malingaputra was, and Malingaputta was trying to find out where he was! Buddha called him and said, "Why are you also looking here and there? You are the one. I must keep my promise, so you ask and I will give you the answer." Malingaputra said, "The person who asked the question is dead. That's why I was also searching everywhere to see who this Malingaputra was. I also heard his name, but he has disappeared for a long time." That source must be transformed, otherwise, we will continue to ask questions, and some people will provide you with some answers, which you think are good when you ask, and they think good when they answer, but these things are just a mutual deception.