Indian Philosophy

Author(s): Sukhlal Sanghavi
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 79

The Various Buddhist Views Regarding Soul
The Nyaya-Vai esika tradition, agreeing with the Jaina tradition, attributes to a soul a real progress and degeneration depending on the purity and impurity of the cognition, faith and endeavour-that is effort or perseverence - belonging to this soul; thus it disagrees with the SankhyaYoga tradition which treats them as something imputed or imaginary and ones produced as a result of associatedness with an adjunct of the form of a subtle body or linga-sarjra.
The Various Buddhist Views Regarding Soul
Among the lines of thinking positing soul in the form of an independent element the Buddist one comes last of all. Generally speaking, each nonBuddhist-tradition dubs the Buddhist one as an upholder of the doctrine of no-soul. So when we here include it among those positing soul in the form of an independent entity the first question that deserves consideration is as to wbat is meant by its rivals when they call it an upholder of the doctrine of no-soul and as to what is meant when it is to be treated as one positing soul in the form of an independent entity.
Before and during the time of Buddha-the Enlightened One, there were current among the philosophers of the country chiefly two thoughtcurrents as to the nature of soul or the conscious element. Of these, one submitted that time-factor in no way affects the element soul or its capacity--that is, even while occupylog in every sense a place on the standing -board of time it remains untouched by an influence thereof; on the other hand, the second thought-current maintained that the element soul and its capacites, even while retaining an identical form in every sense, cannot remain entirely untouched by the influence of time-factor. Thus according to the first thought-current, being or existence means remaining uncancelled or unchanging in all the three phases of time while according to the secoad, existence means that even while the thing existing does undergo change its individuality is one and remains ever impartite. Both these thought-curr. ents uphold the doctrine of eternality. Being eternal means being something uninterrupted so that an entity is eternal in case it, while undergoing no change or even undergoing a change, remains ever-standing or permanent, Both these thought-currents considered in their respective manners the conscious element also to be something eternal-that is, in their respective manners did they consider the conscious element or soul to be an impartite substance. In confrontation with this consideration came into existence the view upheld by Buddha. Thus he came out with the suggestion that there exists no such element or enitity as remains impartite or uncancelled in the course of time. Every element or entity is by its very nature subject to the law of temporal uninterruptedness or ordered succession - so that there can be no two moments during which a real retains one and the same form.