Atma or Soul: Does it exist?

[Raj]

Does the Atma or soul exist?

This question is an off-shoot of an intense, 1 hour 30 min debate I had with this Hindu pundit/scholar on God, the point of existence, death, reincarnation, right and wrong, and humanity in general.

His main contention, circulated around a fundamental, that he never proved or justified to me, that life, even insects, have a soul.

He used an anaology that life is like a journey in a car, and our body is the engine, and the soul/atma is the driver. When the car's journey's ends, the driver leaves. Like when the journey of life ends; the soul leaves the body.

He used this conjecture as proof to say why a body erodes away almost instantly, as soon as the soul leaves. Even when the brain is still functional.

He further said, that only because of a soul, we can sense our world, have a consciousness, and have free-will.

I of course refuted this, as I refuted every other statement of his. Yet he said to me, that even scientists of today have proven the existence of a soul.

So, what do you think, does the Atma or the soul exist? If it does, can you prove it?

[premjan]

in a manner of speaking, the soul is merely the software that runs on the human brain hardware. It is the patterns rather than the physical substances that make up our physical body. The patterns are what remain stable and slowly evolve from one generation to another, from one era to another. Of course, it is possible to void the pattern, using Buddhist meditation techniques too, since our software is capable of controlling itself.

[Raj]

Originally posted by premjan
in a manner of speaking, the soul is merely the software that runs on the human brain hardware. It is the patterns rather than the physical substances that make up our physical body. The patterns are what remain stable and slowly evolve from one generation to another, from one era to another. Of course, it is possible to void the pattern, using Buddhist meditation techniques too, since our software is capable of controlling itself.

That sounds quite thought provoking Premjan. However, I am asking wether a physical indestructible soul/spirit/atma actually resides in us, and drives us, and then leaves after we die.

Do you think such a soul/atma exists?

[premjan]

there is surely a pattern of existence embedded within the human being, although the pattern is without a true characteristic essence and consists mainly of idiosyncratic ways of thought.

the pattern enters us through our senses from the moment we are born, is locked into place in our developmental years, and then refined by our education, perhaps erased by our spirituality and we carry it to our deaths. it influences our family and associates even beyond our death. The swirling pattern of information that constitutes us is indeed quite real. If it were not, culture would not exist, people would not have persistent personalities, and there would not be a permanency of thought and ideas.

[Raj]

Originally posted by premjan
there is surely a pattern of existence embedded within the human being, although the pattern is without a true characteristic essence and consists mainly of idiosyncratic ways of thought.

the pattern enters us through our senses from the moment we are born, is locked into place in our developmental years, and then refined by our education, perhaps erased by our spirituality and we carry it to our deaths. it influences our family and associates even beyond our death. The swirling pattern of information that constitutes us is indeed quite real. If it were not, culture would not exist, people would not have persistent personalities, and there would not be a permanency of thought and ideas.

That sounds remarkable. However, the pattern you are suggesting, is that not just cultural influences? And thus mankind as a whole, in different geographical locations, evolves different cultures? For instance, if your kin was born in a different culture, he/she would have a completely different "pattern" wrt you, all together.

So this pattern would not be uniform for humanity as a whole.

I think it is an interesting idealogical model for a soul. However what I am referring to, is the notion of the soul as described in Hinduism, of a soul, that drives us, and without which, we would be lifeless and devoid of sentience and will. A soul, that defines our consciousness and which lives on, even after death, with our consciousness.

Does it exist? And can it be proven?

[premjan]

our mental patterns do "drive us", especially if we are more mentally driven than instinctual people.

the differences are not only cultural. There is an overlay of at least two or three different separable signals: we may call them:

1) personality arising from our unique physical characteristics and our unique developmental history

2) race arising from group genetic characteristics

3) culture originating from group remembered characteristics.

Soul is not a scientific concept. however there is no question that it is a correct concept, when seen in broad outline only.

Moreover, you should realize that human beings, are capable of manipulating their own information patterns. If they believe in reincarnation, they will copy their ancestors. If they do not, then they will behave in a different resulting way.

The real question is one of cause and effect, chicken and egg.

[premjan]

not really. the disembodied soul is not conscious. However, inasmuch as a human being is architecturally quite general, and we do end up adopting personality characteristics from other people quite often, the soul is hardware independent, much like a java program. in this sense, the soul is "disembodiable" in concept but not disembodied in fact.

[Raj]

Originally posted by premjan
our mental patterns do "drive us", especially if we are more mentally driven than instinctual people.

the differences are not only cultural. There is an overlay of at least two or three different separable signals: we may call them:

1) personality arising from our unique physical characteristics and our unique developmental history

2) race arising from group genetic characteristics

3) culture originating from group remembered characteristics.

Soul is not a scientific concept. however there is no question that it is a correct concept, when seen in broad outline only.

Moreover, you should realize that human beings, are capable of manipulating their own information patterns. If they believe in reincarnation, they will copy their ancestors. If they do not, then they will behave in a different resulting way.

The real question is one of cause and effect, chicken and egg.

I think you are going off on a tanget here. What you describe to solidy the conception of a soul, is not a soul, but social and evolutionary dynamics - that depend upon -

1: A precursory generation
2: Having a brain to have perception

If either conditions were FALSE, the existence of soul would also become FALSE. However, a soul is undestructible by the Hindu notion. Furthermore, the Hindu Atma exists seperate or disembodied from the biological body. So what you describe is NOT the soul postulated in Hindu theology, or the soul most religions and cultures in the world beleive in.

Further more, what you describe, social and evolutionary dynamics, does not depend upon a "soul" but on the biological or mental faculties of one. Purely by definition and cultural and religious notions, what you state, cannot be called soul.

I am going to ask again, but refine my question. Does the Hindu Atma, as described in Hindu theology, in the literal sense, exist? And can you prove it?

[premjan]

I don't think it exists literally

[Raj]

I was having a discussion with someone on the soul, and I must say, I found his theory to be very fascinating and wonderfully imaginative. He suggested, that the soul is like an echo of consciousness and this consciousness pervades all of existence.

Man's mind echos in in space/time, and his mind/soul continues to exist even afer he ceases to humanly exist.

I was just sharing this, as I think it is quite a beautiful, though I would say quite idealogical, concept of a soul.

I can rationalize with this theory on one level however, the mind, and every thought that occurs, are a manifestation of existence, and thus must leave an impression in space/time, however, does that exist as "you" or is it just a virtual time capsule?

[premjan]

what is existence?

[Raj]

Originally posted by premjan
what is existence?

A good question. In this context, it means the universe in totality. In the true sense, it is an abstractation of the mind.

[premjan]

I don't think so. I think there is a real physical world that exists regardless of whether we think about it or not.

[Raj]

Originally posted by premjan
I don't think so. I think there is a real physical world that exists regardless of whether we think about it or not.

This IS the Hindu philosophy of Maya.

[premjan]

I guess Maya is just saying that our view of reality is highly conditioned by our individual biases. As the Talmud also says: We see the world not as IT is, but as WE are.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste Raj,

thank you for the post.

i'm sure that you are aware that Buddhism specifically refutes the idea of Atman as expressed in Hindu Theology, are you not?

in any event, that would be how i would answer the question... no, i do not believe in the existence of an unchanging, eternal spirit that indwells in my body and will exist after this body dies.

[Sattwic]

Raj..

If you drive deep into Advaita vada, you will tie yourself up in knots trying to define first, the great question Premjan asked: What is existence.

What can exist.

If there is existence, is there non-existence.

What does the realm of non-existence mean? Can there be an exchange between the sheres of existence and non-existence?

Is existence a moment or a flow/stream? Does any existence have a starting point and an end? or it is in perpetuallity?

If there is no existence, will there be time?

Does existence need space?

if I Imagine an Unicorn, does it exist or does it not exist?

If might not exist physicially, but it exists as a thought process.

Now, if we accept that imagination of something too is like bringing into existence as a thought process something that did not exist before.

Is there a limit for imagination? Where does imagination stop?

Only after answering all these fundamental question can we move into the next step of trying to discuss Atman.

You are rushing into Hinduism too quickly by trying to discuss things that take whole scriptures just to introduce.

Cheers,
Jagan Mohan.

[premjan]

I think that the soul is just a pattern of flow or activity of our bodies, that may escape our bodies by becoming a general cultural pattern that is copied by other people. other than this the immortal atma does not literally exist, at least not for all human beings, IMO. Of course, Christians claim that the soul is so immortal that it can control the physical body (cause resurrection). Devotees of Adi Shankara claim his spirit left his body to inhabit the body of a King, and thus permitted him to experience sex with the King's wife vicariously, and enabled him to discourse on the sex experience. It seems unlikely, and in any case, people who remember "out-of-body" experiences seem to be very rare, so it is probably just a superstition. This is seen in African voodoo also, and in hibernative yogic states. I have seen no evidence that the human mind is other than a chemical-electrical pattern existing within our bodies, so I do not believe there is any quantum feedback component to our human minds, this being the speculation of some quantum physicists. Introspection may lead us to consider such possibilities, however, science must be performed to validate them otherwise they are just speculation.