How did the concept of rebirth arise in Buddhism if Buddha does not believe in the existence of the Soul? What can happen to the whole teaching of Buddha, if its key concepts are translated incorrectly?
Buddhism is a teaching for the most mature souls
The character of Jesus and his teaching represent the greatest preservation of the soul’s interest on this planet, during the time the soul lives in this world and performs the role that souls have, which is to go through the process of materialization and contribute to the transformation of nature. The teaching of Jesus and the Judeo-Christian culture of coercion and pressure, introduced later on, were intended for young souls who are just entering the incarnation process.
The original Buddha’s teaching is the most straightforward path of the liberation of soul and the purest testimony of the soul about its own essence. However, this is the teaching, which is not connected to the soul’s life in this world or the role it assumes, that is intended for it to pass through the process of work and materialization contributing to the transformation of nature.
Buddhism is the teaching for the most mature souls who seek only the complete liberation from the cycle of incarnation. The process of incarnation for the fully self-conscious souls is suffering. Buddhism is a science of the overall soul maturity in this world and of liberation from all the illusions of this world.
When the soul becomes fully aware of itself while it is in the physical body, then the man is enlightened or awakened. He walks like Buddha, behaves and speaks like Buddha, knows who he was before physical birth. He also knows what he did in his past life, which is then as irrelevant as the current life.
The important thing is who he is in absolute terms. Such a person is liberated from this world like any true Buddhist, who practiced Buddha’s teaching regarding the path of purification (meditation and discipline). He then sees the world from the perspective of the soul exactly the way Gautama Siddharta described it when he became Buddha after awakening in Bodhgaya.
Buddhism is the only completely nonviolent religion towards all sentient beings, just because it is the only testimony of a fully conscious soul. Everything that is written in the original Pali Canon, such as Buddha’s speeches and teaching is the testimony of the awakened and liberated soul, how it sees life in the body and in the world, and how to get rid of all that is not authentic to it and therefore makes it suffer.
The essence of this teaching is the fact, that from the perspective of the soul all this ‘isn’t mine and isn’t me’- starting from the body, the feeling, the mind and the content of the mind. Therefore, it could always be aware of everything that is done with the body, the feelings, and mind. However, Buddha never said what the soul truly is; the reason for this is – his testimony relates to an enlightened soul alone.
The soul is an expression of the unconditioned divine consciousness
The soul is an expression of the unconditioned divine consciousness, and therefore it has no attributes, it cannot be identified with anything: the mind can only state that it is pure voidness because it is the closest to the truth, although not the very truth. However, it is the least wrong of all the other descriptions.
The void or sunyata of which the Buddha speaks is, therefore, a description of the soul and not some real emptiness. When talking about the soul in this world, sunyata, emptiness, and nirvana are the best compromises with the mind and its power of understanding.
Just as the eye cannot see itself, hence, the testimony of the soul about itself cannot describe itself, but it can only describe what it is not and how it can be released from everything that it is not.
To put it vividly, the mind can understand and establish only what it sees before itself, and the soul is always beyond the mind. That is why a meditative turn away from the mind to the Self is needed. The numbing of the mind, its void, and the emptiness of the mind is the only emptiness Buddhism actually speaks about. That emptiness of the mind is actually the purity and the openness through which the unmodified soul can express itself in this world.
That is why the essence of Buddha’s teaching is only the path of purification (visudhimaggo) and not the description of the goal of the path. That is why Buddha never talked about the goal, but only about the way, the middle path between all extremes, which means between materialism and idealism, beyond the proving of God and soul and their denial.
If Buddhism spoke of the soul and the Divine, either affirming or denying them, it would be a proof that it is not the testimony of the soul itself, and it would not be the middle path. This would only satisfy the needs of the mind for describing and holding on to those descriptions blindly. That is what all the other teachings always strive for.
Being genuinely awakened, Buddha merely spoke from the highest point of view, just as the awakened ones see it. By speaking of sunyata or emptiness or absence of individual self-interest, he actually said that nothing is ever happening in the entire universe – except for what the Absolute does to itself.
But he did not speak about the Absolute because it cannot be presented in any way since it is neither subject nor anything from the outside.
We ourselves are the Absolute, it is our essence or the soul
Since there is no time in the Absolute, it cannot be said that it is ever doing anything, not even for itself. It also cannot be said that it is not doing anything because life still exists. Therefore, nothing can be said about reality. We should just awaken in it.
Since the original Buddhism is the greatest testimony of the essence of the soul while it is still in the body, it represents a direct path to its liberation and awakening during lifetime. As such it represented the greatest obstacle to the plans of the Illuminati to carry out the process of materializing the soul through Judeo-Christianity.
That is why they took on the task of translating Buddhist teachings from the original Buddha’s language, Pali, to the Western languages, through their Masons and the Jesuits. They did this, of course, by making a subtle modification of the Pallian concept of the atta during translation, that corresponds to the Sanskrit Atman but does not mean the same.
Atta in the Pali language is only a personal reflexive pronoun and it simply means I, myself or my own, while the meaning of the Sanskrit Atman extends to the being or Self, corresponding to the notion of the soul in the West.
Buddhism key concepts suffer incorrect translation
Thus, the essence of Buddha’s teaching that is constantly repeated by the anatta, meant “it’s not me” or “it’s not mine” when talking about everything that comes from the body and mind. The Jesuits and the Masons, translated it so that it means “it is not my soul” or “my Self”, with the conclusion that everything is unstable and transient, and therefore, nothing has a lasting quality, and the soul is no exception, it doesn’t exist.
In fact, everything that Buddha spoke of anatta is against the illusion of substance, materialistic individuality and Ego, and against the metaphysical posture of the Self as a mental projection, which would also be an illusion.
They did the same with another key concept of Buddha’s teaching, cittam translating it as consciousness. The correct translation of the Pali word cittam is the manifestation, thinking, activity of the mind.
They translated it as the very consciousness that enables the mind and the manifestation, and even the alertness itself. So Buddha’s teaching became absurd when in those translations he says that one should “end his consciousness” in order to attain nirvana.
In the original writings, it is thought that one should overcome the mind and the opinion, and not abolish the consciousness itself, which is the basis of the alertness and the revival, which he taught about.
What else is awakening if not awareness? How could consciousness abolish itself, except to become unconscious? Thus, the “abolishment or the numbing of the consciousness itself” has become the basis for the contemporary interpretation of the goal of Buddhism, of nirvana, as sort of numbing in nothingness, as well as the criticism of its stating that “religion is without a soul”.
This absurdity of the false translation of the essential concepts has, unfortunately, remained unrecognized among all contemporary academic interpreters of Buddhism, even those who tried to live it.
Today, the Masonic authors are trying to prove that Buddha did not exist, that he was a mythical person, and how it was all based on myths that were created centuries after Buddha’s life.
Conclusion
To sum up, we can draw the conclusion that the soul is an expression of the Spirit of discord, and therefore it has no attributes, it cannot be identified with anything. Buddha never talked about the goal, but only about the way. Buddhism is the only completely nonviolent religion towards all sentient beings, just because it is the only testimony of a fully conscious soul. However, due to the incorrect translation of the key concepts in western languages the greatest part of Buddhist teaching about the soul became absurd and unfortunately, it has remained largely unrecognized by all the contemporary academic interpreters even to this day.
You can learn more about the challenges of the soul in this world from the book: Soul Guide On Planet Earth. Help your dreaming soul to wake up!
If you enjoyed this article please share it with your friends.