Expert: Laurie McLauglin - 4/16/2010

Question
QUESTION: Hello Laurie,
I read some great answers given by you on this post and I think you would help me clear my confusion on my this question. I have borned as Hindu and studied it too to an extent. I also practiced Vipassana several times and it helped me a lot. I see great benefits from teachings of Hinduism and teachings of Buddha. However there is one point that always bothers me and I think I am not able to answer it or clear my doubt. Here is the question -

In Bhagavad Geeta, Lord Krishna says several times that "Soul is immortal" (not exact words or sholkas) and something like "you are never born and you never die so do not. Atman lives forever, eternally.

In Buddhism, Buddha says that there is no self. I agree to that too because upon close examination we do not see any inherent self. Then does this mean that there is no soul which it looks like. And if so, then what is it that reincarnates because apparently Buddhism believes in reincarnation certainly. So, there must be something that transmigrates over lives. if so, what is that? And is it the same as Atman that does not born and does not die and immortal therefore?

OR is it that in Buddha's teaching life that is eternal is equivalent to Atman that is immortal in Hinduism where as individual entitites are devoid of any inherent self?

As you can see from my quesitons, I am literally confused on this. Thank you in advance for your time and co-operation on clearing this doubt.

ANSWER: Hello -

Thank you for your kind words and letting me answer your question.

I will do my best to help answer your question.

It is true, Buddhism teaches that there is no self - but it not the self that reincarnates. According to what I understand, it is our very subtle mind. We do not have an inherent nature. There is no part of us that is permanent, inherent and never changing. We die and are reborn every moment basically, so there is no self as we normally understand it. But again, it is snot the self that reincarnates.

Atman is like a soul - a piece of something that we got from God. And it is immortal.  Catholics also teach that the Soul is immortal.

From what I understand, Atman has nothing to do with the mind.  From the Buddhist perspective, it is our mind that travels from life to life.

The idea of the soul being immortal conjures up the idea that it is permanent and never changing.  The Very Subtle Mind which travels from life to life according to the Buddhists as I understand it is permanent in that it never ends, but it is constantly changing - our imprints are constantly changing - so if I die next month, the Very Subtle mind that will travel to my next life would be very different than the Very Subtle mind that will travel to my next life if I died tomorrow.  Therefore it is not immortal in that it is ever changing.

According to Buddhism as I understand it, we have three types of mind. Our gross mind is what we use on a day to day level, our subtle mind is what we use when we sleep and our very subtle mind is what goes from life to life.  When we die, the gross mind dissolves into the subtle mind. And the subtle mind dissolves into the very subtle mind.

And it is our very subtle mind that travels from life to life.  The very subtle mind carries our karmic imprints and seeds and the memories of all our lives.So that when we take rebirth, the karma and memories we carried from our countless rebirths appear in the new body.

I have read the Bhagava Gita a while back but am not really well versed in the Hindu religion. From what I do understand, and I could be wrong, although Atman and Very Subtle Nature are different in what definition in each religion, perhaps they both do the same thing - carry the essence of the person from one life to another

I hope this begins to clear your confusion.  Please don't hesitate to write back if you have any follow up or other questions.

Thanks again and Namaste - Laurie

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you, Laurie for your insights.
I have one more question that is remotely related to this question. Is this world a dream? And if so, how? Almost all religions in one way or another seem to indicate that this world and this life of ours is a dream. This is difficult to grasp because "I am typing now" and "you are reading it", obivoulsy these actions are not dream actions. Besides, nature, tree, earth, sun that we see, they are not dream entities. So, how is it a dream world and what is the illusion in this world/life?

Because this also brings other questions like, if this is a dream then, whose dream is this? Who is the dreamer of this dream?

Thnks for your time.

ANSWER: Hello again -

Thanks for letting me answer your questions again. They are good questions.

As you are reading and I am typing no, this is not a dream. Buddhism teaches that this reality is LIKE a dream.

From what I understand this means that it is not what it appears.  It comes from our mind and our karma, just like dreams do.

For example, if you see a movie and I see the same movie, although we have seen the same movie, we are different people, so we experience the movie in different ways - it may really inspire you to go and be a better person and the very same movie might bore me to tears.

The movie and everything else exist in dependence on how we perceive it. This means that reality is not hard and fast and indisputable.  It becomes more ethereal like a dream because none of us are seeing the same thing when we look at something.

And the thing itself is not hard and concrete and solid.

Take a table. It looks real but what part of a table is the table? Is it the leg or the top or the screws that hold it together?  If we take a leg away, is it still a table?  If the table were real and inherently existent, a two year old would not have to learn the word table.  They would know it was a table because it exists as a table from its own side.

Everything we see and deal with is merely labled on a base of pieces.  

If you take the table completely apart, where did the table go?  And then you can take the wood the table is made of and see that it comes from the mill where it was made into a table and there was a guy who milled the table leg and then the tree was brought to the plant by a truck so it could get milled and then it grew in the forest and it came from a seed which came from a seed which came from a seed -

Where is the table now?

We are to see the world LIKE a dream to remind us that nothing is real as we think it is or as we have been conditioned to believe it is -

The reason to see things this way is to understand that by grasping at things as real that are not only causes us suffering.

Lets say self same table is a family heirloom.  Let's say it has been passed down generation to generation and it had been used by the signers of the Declaration of Independence. This is a priceless heirloom table and you love it!!

Now let's say it catches fire - And burns up - If this table were that important and priceless, one could cry, suffer greatly and even commit suicide because they lost such a precious thing.  

Buddha asks why? If we see the table as a dream - impermanent, like everything else - then there will be no suffering when the table which is impermanent like a dream burns in a fire.  All things like dreams are impermanent - So when they manifest their impermanence, there would be no sorrow.

I hope this helps and or begins to explain why this world is like a dream and why Buddha taught thus.

Don't hesitate to write again if you have any further questions.

Namaste - Laurie

---------- FOLLOW-UP ----------

QUESTION: Thank you, Laurie.
I partly understood and still have some confusion hence this follow-up question. I understand when we say that we all are different and we perceive same world but in a different way altogether. This I understand. Also, I agreee with your example of table. If you take the table completely apart, where did the table go? Well, as you have explained it nicely, table never existed in first place. It is a 'lable' that we have given for conventional purpose. Same way, we can extrapolate this to say that no individual exists but for living in day-to-day world we give labels to them and should not seek 'self' in them and that will avoid suffering. Very good explaination. I agree with it.
My confusion is lets say, if I in a deep sleep, still the world outside exists, world with its ocean, trees, weather, earth, galaxies everything does exists regardless I perceive it or not. Then it is not like a dream that comes and goes away when I wake up. Here the world is as it is (although changing every moment) when I am awake, asleep, again wake up! regardless of my perception, "world out there" does exist. Does it not? If so, how can it be a dream? My confusion lingers around this portion of this question.
Thanks again for your help and time on this.
with regards

Answer
Hello again -

Thank you for letting me answer this question too.

It took me so long to write back because I wanted to ask my guru his oppinion of the answer to the question.

My initial answer to your question was that the teaching that life is like a dream or a water bubble for example just means that we should not grasp at this life as "real" and instead we should see its nature as dependent arising and changing moment to moment is what is meant by the concept that life is a dream.

It does not mean that life is EXACTLY in every sense like a dream and it seems from my side that you are trying to make dream and life have all the same exact features. So even though when we are in a deep sleep the conventional world still exists when we wake up, which is not the case with a dream (as there is no dream within a dream) the teachings still mean that the world is LIKE as in similar to but not exactly like a dream.

Does that make sense or help.

My guru added:

"I have had teachings (that I believe) that say that dreams are just as real as waking reality.  Both the waking state and the dream state are manifestations that depend on perception and are therefore illusory and unreliable, so there are similarities, but because we can distinguish between dream and waking, they can't be EXACTLY the same."  

He also said ... "in a manner of speaking, anyone who is not yet buddha can be thought of as being asleep or dreaming.  But one should not take this (or anything) too literally.  As my understanding of the dharma increases, I do feel as if I am slowly waking up from a dream.  Hence the description of a bodhisattve as an awakening (in the process of waking up) being."

And to answer your other question - yes that world is "out there", but only conventionally.  If you understand the analogy of the table then that can also be applied to the world.  It exists from our own side and not exactly as it appears.

I hoped this helped a bit - Don't hesitate to ask any further questions if you have any as this is a confusing subject.

Namaste - Laurie