Buddhist philosophy does not admit the existence of the spirit soul

Expressions researched:
"buddha" |"buddhist" |"buddhists" |"soul"

Notes from the compiler: VedaBase research query: "buddha soul"@60 or "buddhis* soul"@60

BG Chapters 1 - 6

BG 2.26, Purport:

There is always a class of philosophers, almost akin to the Buddhists, who do not believe in the separate existence of the soul beyond the body. When Lord Kṛṣṇa spoke the Bhagavad-gītā, it appears that such philosophers existed, and they were known as the lokāyatikas and vaibhāṣikas. Such philosophers maintain that life symptoms take place at a certain mature condition of material combination. The modern material scientist and materialist philosophers also think similarly. According to them, the body is a combination of physical elements, and at a certain stage the life symptoms develop by interaction of the physical and chemical elements. The science of anthropology is based on this philosophy. Currently, many pseudo religions—now becoming fashionable in America—are also adhering to this philosophy, as are the nihilistic nondevotional Buddhist sects.

SB Canto 3

SB 3.4.20, Purport:

The verses of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam are purely theistic science understandable by the postgraduate students of Bhagavad-gītā, The unauthorized dry speculators are offenders at the lotus feet of the Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa because they distort the purports of Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam to mislead the public and prepare a direct path to the hell known as Andha-tāmisra. As confirmed in Bhagavad-gītā (16.20) such envious speculators are without knowledge and are surely condemned life after life. They unnecessarily take shelter of Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya, but he was not so drastic as to commit an offense at the lotus feet of Lord Kṛṣṇa. According to Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, Śrīpāda Śaṅkarācārya preached the Māyāvāda philosophy for a particular purpose. Such a philosophy was necessary to defeat the Buddhist philosophy of the nonexistence of the spirit soul, but it was never meant for perpetual acceptance. It was an emergency. Thus Lord Kṛṣṇa was accepted by Śaṅkarācārya as the Supreme Personality of Godhead in his commentation on Bhagavad-gītā. Since he was a great devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, he did not dare write any commentary on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam because that would have been a direct offense at the lotus feet of the Lord. But later speculators, in the name of Māyāvāda philosophy, unnecessarily make their commentary on the catuḥ-ślokī Bhāgavatam (SB 2.9.33/34/35/36) without any bona fide intent.

SB Canto 4

SB 4.23.15, Purport:

When the spiritual spark, which is described as one ten-thousandth part of the tip of a hair, is forced into material existence, that spark is covered by gross and subtle material elements. The material body is composed of five gross elements—earth, water, fire, air and ether—and three subtle elements—mind, intelligence and ego. When one attains liberation, he is freed from these material coverings. Indeed, success in yoga involves getting free from these material coverings and entering into spiritual existence. Lord Buddha's teachings of nirvāṇa are based on this principle. Lord Buddha instructed his followers to give up these material coverings by means of meditation and yoga. Lord Buddha did not give any information about the soul, but if one follows his instructions strictly, he will ultimately become free from the material coverings and attain nirvāṇa.

SB 4.28.40, Purport:

The conditioned soul is often frustrated in trying to understand the distinctions between the material body, the Supersoul and the individual soul. There are two types of Māyāvādī philosophers—the followers of the Buddhist philosophy and the followers of the Śaṅkara philosophy. The followers of Buddha do not recognize that there is anything beyond the body; the followers of Śaṅkara conclude that there is no separate existence of the Paramātmā, the Supersoul. The Śaṅkarites believe that the individual soul is identical with the Paramātmā in the ultimate analysis. But the Vaiṣṇava philosopher, who is perfect in knowledge, knows that the body is made of the external energy and that the Supersoul, the Paramātmā, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, is sitting with the individual soul and is distinct from him. As Lord Kṛṣṇa states in Bhagavad-gītā (13.3):

kṣetra-jñaṁ cāpi māṁ viddhi

sarva-kṣetreṣu bhārata

kṣetra-kṣetrajñayor jñānaṁ

yat taj jñānaṁ mataṁ mama

"O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all bodies, and to understand this body and its owner is called knowledge. That is My opinion."

CC Adi-lila

CC Adi 7.114, Purport:

Why the daivī-māyā, or illusory energy of Kṛṣṇa, takes away the knowledge of the Māyāvādī philosophers is also explained in the Bhagavad-gīta by the use of the words āsuraṁ bhāvam āśritāḥ, which refer to a person who does not agree to the existence of the Lord. The Māyāvādīs, who are not in agreement with the existence of the Lord, can be classified in two groups, exemplified by the impersonalist Śaṅkarites of Vārāṇasī and the Buddhists of Saranātha. Both groups are Māyāvādīs, and Kṛṣṇa takes away their knowledge due to their atheistic philosophies. Neither group agrees to accept the existence of a personal God. The Buddhist philosophers clearly deny both the soul and God, and although the Śaṅkarites do not openly deny God, they say that the Absolute is nirākāra, or formless. Thus both the Buddhists and the Śaṅkarites are aviśuddha-buddhayaḥ (SB 10.2.32), or imperfect and unclean in their knowledge and intelligence.

CC Madhya-lila

CC Madhya 9.49, Purport:

It is stated that mercy is one of the qualities of a Buddhist, but mercy is a relative thing. We show our mercy to a subordinate or to one who is suffering more than ourselves. However, if there is a superior person present, the superior person cannot be the object of our mercy. Rather, we are objects for the mercy of the superior person. Therefore showing compassion and mercy is a relative activity. It is not the Absolute Truth. Apart from this, we also must know what actual mercy is. To give a sick man something forbidden for him to eat is not mercy. Rather, it is cruelty. Unless we know what mercy really is, we may create an undesirable situation. If we wish to show real mercy, we will preach Kṛṣṇa consciousness in order to revive the lost consciousness of human beings, the living entity's original consciousness. Since the Buddhist philosophy does not admit the existence of the spirit soul, the so-called mercy of the Buddhists is defective.

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 2.17 -- Hyderabad, November 22, 1972:

Now I am living body. If somebody pinches my body, because the consciousness is all over the body, so I feel: "Somebody's pinching me." But when the conscious, consciousness is not there, if somebody chops up my body I will not protest. Therefore we should understand what is that living thing. That consciousness, which is spreading all over this body, that is living force. Kṛṣṇa says here: avināśi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idaṁ tatam. Yena, by that consciousness. The consciousness is spread all over the body. So Kṛṣṇa says, "That consciousness is avināśi." After the death of, after the annihilation of this body, which we call dead, the consciousness is not dead. That we do not understand. There is no science; there is no philosophy. Everything based on a foolish assumption. They say the consciousness is made possible by combination of matter. The combination of matter, five elements, gross, the subtle elements, they cannot see. Even they see. So their... (aside:) Not now. Their proposition is that this consciousness is a symptom of combination of matter. That is Buddhist philosophy. They do not accept the existence of soul. "The consciousness is a combination of matter." But if it is a fact, then why don't you, if some matter is lacking, why don't you bring that matter or chemical and inject in the dead body and make it again conscious? Why it is not possible? What is your argument?

Lecture on BG 2.18 -- London, August 24, 1973:

So the soul is in the heart and Kṛṣṇa is also in the heart. Because they remain both together. So place is also located. You can perceive also by consciousness where there is presentation of soul, but if you want to measure by experiment, that is not possible. Therefore it is called aprameya. Prameya means direct perception. I can see or I can touch, I can handle. So that is... Kṛṣṇa says no, it is not possible. Aprameya. Then, how I shall accept? Now Kṛṣṇa says. So how I can believe Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa says ukta, it is already settled up by authorities. Ukta. This is paramparā system. Kṛṣṇa also says ukta. Kṛṣṇa does not say that "I speak," no. Ukta, there is Vedic evidence. Where it is? In the Upaniṣads there is. Just like,

bālāgra-śata-bhāgasya

śatadhā kalpitasya ca

bhāgo jīvaḥ sa vijñeyaḥ

sa cānantyāya kalpate

It is in the Upaniṣad, Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad. This is called Vedic evidence. In another, in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, there is evidence. What is that? Keśāgra-śata-bhāgasya śatadhā, sadṛśaṁ jīvaḥ sūkṣma (CC Madhya 19.140). Sūkṣma, very fine. Jīvaḥ sūkṣma-svarūpo 'yaṁ saṅkhyātītaḥ kalpate. This jīva, not one, two, three, four—you cannot calculate. Asaṅkhya. So these are evidences in the Vedic literature. So we have to accept it. Kṛṣṇa confirms it and actually also you cannot measure. But we get evidence, the presence of the soul, presence of the soul. Still, how we can say there is no soul? No. This is foolishness. The whole world is going on under this foolishness. Not only now, before also. Like Cārvāka Muni, he was atheist, he did not believe. Lord Buddha also said like that, but He cheated. He knew everything because He is incarnation of God. But He had to cheat the people in that way because they are not intelligent enough. Why not intelligent? Because they were killers of animals, they lost their intelligence. Keśava dhṛta-buddha-śarīra jaya jagadīśa hare. Those who are animal killers, their brain is dull as stone. They cannot understand any thing.