z:\ ambedkar\vol 011\vol11 04.indd MK SJ+YS 5 10 2013/YS 18 11 2013 261
WHAT IS NOT—DHAMMA
261
His answer to all these theories about the existence of the soul was the same which he gave to Cunda.
To Cunda he said : “Now, Cunda, to those recluses and Brahmins, who believe and profess any one of these views, I go and say this : ‘Is this so, friends?’ And if they reply: ‘Yes. This alone is true, any other view is absurd.’ I do not admit their claim. Why is this ? Because persons hold different opinions on such questions. Nor do I consider this (or that) view on a level with my own, let alone higher.”
Now the more important question is what were the arguments of the Buddha against the existence of the soul.
The general arguments he advanced in support of his denial of the soul were the same as those which he advanced in support of his denial of the existence of God.
He argued that the discussion of the existence of the soul is as unprofitable as the discussion of the existence of God.
He argued that the belief in the existence of the soul is as much against the cultivation of Samma Ditthi as the belief in the existence of God.
He argued that the belief in the existence of the soul is as much a source of superstition as the belief in God is. Indeed in his opinion the belief in the existence of a soul is far more dangerous than the belief in God. For not only does it create a priesthood, not only is it the origin of all superstition but it gives the priesthood complete control over man from birth to death.
Because of these general arguments it is said that the Buddha did not express any definite opinion on the existence of the soul. Others have said that he did not repudiate the theory of the existence of the soul. Others have said that he was always dodging the issue.
These statements are quite incorrect. For to Mahali he did tell in most positive terms that there is
III