Expert: John Willemsens aka Advayavadananda - 10/6/2005

Question
Why do you presume modern buddhism is so heretical in its attempt to deny/negate the Soul (atman/attan) since nowhere does Buddhism in Sutta deny the Soul, but what the soul IS NOT (form is not the soul [anatta], feelings are not the soul [anatta]........SN 3.196)...?

Since ABCDEF not-X (anatta, not the Soul) is not a denial of X, but a fallacy of composition, why is modern buddhism so heretically and wickedly trying to deny the Soul, since Gotama never did any such thing?

Since anatta is neti neti (not this, not that), and is always contextually an adjective... (form is anatman, feelings are anatman.....A is anatman,...B is anatman)...then why is Buddhism so perverse in its  NON-DOCTRINAL denial of the Soul?

www.attan.com

Answer
Hello Adamantius,
Also in Advayavada Buddhism we deny the existence of the soul. In our glossary our position reads as follows: anatman (Skt.) no self or soul; the Buddhist anatman doctrine teaches that 'no self exists in the sense of a permanent, eternal, integral, and independent substance within an individual existent'; a fundamental precept in Buddhism that 'since there is no subsistent reality to be found in or underlying appearances, there cannot be a subsistent self or soul in the human appearance'; one of the three (in Advayavada Buddhism, four) signs or marks or basic facts of being (see further anitya, duhkha, and pratipada).
Peter Harvey puts it as follows: This important teaching was introduced in his second sermon. Here he explained, with respect to each of the five skandhas, that if it were truly self, it would not 'tend to sickness', and it would be totally controllable at will, which it is not. Moreover, as each skandha is impermanent, dukkha, and of a nature to change, it is inappropriate to consider it as 'this is mine, this am I, this is my self'.
Kind regards,
Advayavadananda.