EnHiding

I don't know if a soul exists. The Buddha says there is not an "I" or "soul" that transmigrates after death. Rather the body changes thus, and it is called death, what happens after that we don't know.

Now, cycle (also known as samsara) is the process of rebirth (not reincarnation) which could be moment to moment or literal (think evolution or growth) that can be exited once we stop clinging to the self and the world around us.

Buddhism discourages both materialism and eternalism. What matters is what we do now.

So perhaps I should have used the jargon of the philosophy, I apologize for the misunderstanding. I do not myself fully comprehend the concept of rebirth, but the Buddha said that we need not accept anything we don't yet understand or that flies in the face of rational judgment.

The cycle, I suppose, is suffering in this life. Some believe that one's karma extends to the next stage (Buddhism in some sects has 31 planes of existence that someone can be born into). We don't reincarnate, we just pass to another phase.

Whatever is, is not eternal. All things arise, persist, and have an end. That is all we need to know. The question is what will we do about the situation we find ourselves in today.

EH

David B

David B (thinks that there is sufficient evidence to refute the idea of a soul, if that soul is entirely separate from a brain)

Leonard

Maybe that is called compassion, in the truest sense of the word? What we are doing to others, we are doing to ourselves...or maybe rather: life, the world, is doing this to itself. In this sense, we are part of life and we act accordingly. Does it not mean that we should not shy away from retaliating when our interests are at stake, and that we should in general act according to the laws of life and see our moral code more like a tool and not as an end in itself?

Tough questions.

Hrvoje Butkovic

I’ve had a look at the article, but I’m not sure what message I was supposed to take from it. Would you mind explaining?

David B

What about other people's interests? Is it in their interests for cheaters not to have sanctions placed on them?

David B (suspects that there is a deep atavistic trait in humanity to want to see assholes punished)

Hrvoje Butkovic

According to this view, retaliation makes no sense as it is essentially aimed at oneself. Furthermore, there is only one set of interests, so they cannot genuinely be threatened. It is too early for me to evaluate these claims based on my own experience, but so far the results are promising.

I’m not sure which moral code you are referring to.

David B

Well, as I see it, moral codes are emergent qualities of the universe.

We can look, for example, at the proto moralistic behaviour of vampire bats.

They will share their meals with the less successful bloodhunters of their fellows, even if not related.

But they have cheater detectors, and will remember those who try to take advantage of then, and then withhold sharing.

David B (thinks that in the unlikely event of the meek inheriting the earth, some bastard will steal it off them PDQ)

Hrvoje Butkovic

This is where I have found this approach to be particularly useful – it encourages me to deal with them constructively instead of responding with similarly destructive behaviour.

Hrvoje Butkovic

I don’t think that trying to help others implies submission to them. I hope that I haven’t implied this somewhere.

aupmanyav

Must not be, David.

Hrvoje, feel one but understand that the other person does not feel it that way.