B
Ben_Sinner
Guest
This question is asked many times by religious figures in history that don’t believe in a self/soul. When the ones they asked don’t have an answer, they go “A Ha. See there is no self/soul!”
So I’m assuming Catholics would be able to answer the question better. Where is the location for the self? Where is the soul? Where is our consciousness?
Here is also a quote by the Dalai Lama as well
“Try to leave your mind vividly in a natural state… Where does it seem that your consciousness is? Is it with the eyes or where is it? Most likely you have a sense that it is associated with the eyes since we derive most of our awareness of the world through vision… However, the existence of a separate mental consciousness can be ascertained; for example, when attention is diverted by sound, that which appears to the eye consciousness is not noticed… with persistent practice, consciousness may eventually be perceived or felt as an entity of mere luminosity or knowing, to which anything is capable of appearing… as long as the mind does not encounter the external circumstances of conceptuality, it will abide empty without anything appearing in it.”
How do we refute his stance as well?
So I’m assuming Catholics would be able to answer the question better. Where is the location for the self? Where is the soul? Where is our consciousness?
Here is also a quote by the Dalai Lama as well
“Try to leave your mind vividly in a natural state… Where does it seem that your consciousness is? Is it with the eyes or where is it? Most likely you have a sense that it is associated with the eyes since we derive most of our awareness of the world through vision… However, the existence of a separate mental consciousness can be ascertained; for example, when attention is diverted by sound, that which appears to the eye consciousness is not noticed… with persistent practice, consciousness may eventually be perceived or felt as an entity of mere luminosity or knowing, to which anything is capable of appearing… as long as the mind does not encounter the external circumstances of conceptuality, it will abide empty without anything appearing in it.”
How do we refute his stance as well?