What does it mean that we exist?

First of all, thank you.
Reading your question made me realize once again that I'm worried about everyday work and the like, “I'm worried about such a small thing.”

That's a very big question.
This is probably a question that most monks have thought about at least once.
But, unfortunately, I don't know the answer.
When I say “it was made for,” it sounds as if someone with intentions like the creator made it with a purpose.
However, Buddhism does not preach the god of creation.
In Buddhism, we decide “what we do for what.”
Also, what Buddhism teaches is “how to get rid of worries and suffering.”
Buddhism answers the question of how to live in order to get rid of worries and suffering.
Anything else may be outside of Buddhism's jurisdiction.

Buddha was asked this question by his apprentice and answered “no note.” There will never be an answer to this kind of metaphysical discussion, so go ahead with your current training. I mean, you just said that this has nothing to do with Buddhism.

Why is that? It is said that this was due to a backlash against the caste system that was dominant in the Indian region from that time on. The caste system described this kind of discussion as “We are powerful people born from good behavior in past lives. Slaves are slaves because their behavior in past lives was bad. It guided me in the form of “Well, I hope you work hard as a slave and opportunities will come around in the next life and beyond.”
In response to this, the Buddha said, “What's important isn't your previous life, is it! How you live in the present will make your life easier, right?” I said that and stood up. The idea behind this argument is the causal theory that I answered in the question “differences between humans and animals.”

On the caste side, causality theory indicates the theory of reincarnation between previous and next lives, but on the Buddhist side, it is a worldview. The analogy is a bit limited, but I don't think it's wrong if you have the image that it explains how the world is connected, such as the food chain and the water cycle.

> Or do you live to the fullest because the soul happened into the world by chance, regardless of purpose or anything?

Hmm... there's no cut here either, but if I add red in my own way, it looks like this.
> regardless of purpose
→The network of cause and effect is expanding

> What is a soul
→The main premise of Buddhism is that the existence of oneself “can be said to have or not exist”

> Something happened by accident
→Since it is a balance between cause and effect, opinions are divided on whether it is inevitable or a coincidence. The theory of relativity is an inevitable theorist. Quantum mechanics is an accident theorist.

> Are you going to live to the fullest
Yes, we can! In Buddhism, you yourself are the protagonist.

This question is actually directly linked to Master Tange's answer to the question “about the meaning of disaster,” “Leave the vision centered on “me.”

> Narafutifu Buddhism narrows down the self.
To speak of oneself is to dismiss oneself.
If you spoil yourself, it's like being proven by Manpo.
As evidenced by Manpo, it's like falling out with one's own body and mind and another's body and mind.

I wonder if it's okay to breathe this much into followers of other denominations...

If you read the Kojiki and the Bible, you'll understand everything very well.
Some religions clearly explain the beginning of the world and the birth of life (soul).

But there is no such scripture in Buddhism. ※Maybe I just don't know...
Buddhism's position is that the beginning of the world is “immortal.”
Buddha said there is no beginning.
In other words, the world of Rikudo and Shinnyo has been around since the distant past.
“Why is that so?” Even if I'm told, I don't know because it's not in the sutras.

However, there is a way to understand.
It's about realizing it yourself.
Once you become a Buddha, you'll understand everything, so please walk the path to becoming a Buddha.
I understand everything when I attain Buddhism.

Good evening Indigo.

Unfortunately, I don't understand the meaning of being born or why this world was created.
If nothing is fine, no wonder it's nothing.

Since the purpose of Buddhism is to remove suffering and reach a state called Buddha, it is certainly true from a Buddhist standpoint that it is unfinished during ascetic practice.
However, when it comes to whether they were born to practice, that is not Buddhist.

In Buddhism, people already exist here, and being here is full of suffering, so the Buddha was left behind for the purpose of breaking away from it.

Buddhism always involves looking at the self.
The word soul is often used, but it is a very unfamiliar word in Buddhism.

I think that everything in the world arises from delusions based on one's own notions, and if you don't see it there, it exists; if you don't see it, it doesn't exist.
That area has something in common with “I Think, That's Why I Am” in the introduction to the method proposed by Descartes.

The essence of Buddhism is not to lose everything.

It explains how we can survive in this world, where everything exists, and where there is suffering, and first of all, humans are there.

Even if you don't ask for any particular meaning, I recommend that you live your life as “nothing” at that time.

Why does this world exist?
That's because Indigo exists.
Indigo exists because it's the results you want.
This way of thinking is one way of thinking in Mahayana Buddhism called wisdom. All events exist because they are recognized. That's the way of thinking.
Everything in this world exists because Indigo exists and recognizes it.
There are no unrecognizable events in this world. It is only after recognition that it is in a state where it exists.
Actually, until now, there was no existence called Sanuki Eisho in Indigo's world, but I only existed in your world when you read this sentence.
The world exists because of you, and the reason the world is not empty is because you, the recognizer, exist and recognize the world.
However, there are as many unrecognized events as there are stars. If you think so, it can also be said that the world is made out of nothing.
I wonder how far the training should go after that, but if you don't mind it, I think it's fine to finish it for now.
I think all of the sentences are complicated and difficult to understand, but I hope it helps even a little bit.

Indego-sama

This is Kawaguchi Hidetoshi. This is my humble answer to the question.

Regarding “nothing,” we have recently answered the following questions.

The question “What is nothing?”
http://hasunoha.jp/questions/1199

The meaning of not “nothing” means that this world is not “nothing,” but if it is “nothing,” of course, it is “nothing,” so nothing will happen, nothing should be destroyed, and it should remain “nothing.”

However, as long as a reality that is not the case is right in front of you, it still means that there was no “nothing” so far (“nothing” as an entity is impossible).

So, when it comes to what this world is, what existence is, in Buddhism*, I will explain that it is made up of a state called “good fortune.”

Also, we have received many questions related to “the meaning of life” until now, as shown below.

http://hasunoha.jp/questions?tag=生きる意味

Among these, in the question “The meaning of living” http://hasunoha.jp/questions/93, I answered “if there is a meaning to live, there is no point in living.”

Anyway, one thing I can say here is that from the ultimate level of truth (Katsu Yoshitaka) considered by Buddhism, there is no “nothing,” “having,” “life,” “death,” “meaning,” “purpose,” etc. (as an entity, autonomy, or self-phase), but on a secular level (secular) (what is considered correct in the world in general), it is certainly possible that “nothing,” “there is,” “life,” “death,” and “purpose” are also “lucky”.

To understand this area, it is necessary to study and practice Buddhism thoroughly as a premise, but as Daiji has already said, well, it is important to leave aside things that are unavoidable even if there is much discussion (not recorded), and to live this reality to the fullest, in a better and more correct way.

* There are three main understandings of “luck”: first, “dependency in cause, condition, and effect,” second, “dependency between part and whole,” and third, “dependency due to being pseudonymised, hypothesized, or hypothesized due to conscious effects, conceptual effects, and thought discrimination effects.”

Kawaguchi Hidetoshi Gassho

The answer to your question will be solved by noticing why the way you are asking is wrong.
As with the questions up until now, I ended up with nothing but negative thoughts.
It can be said that this is because writers and philosophers who commit suicide were unable to abandon their knowledge.
It's exhausting because it's based on knowledge and supremacy.
Relying on wisdom (fact) is a source of salvation.
There is a 1000 character limit here, so if it's Saitama, you can come to a zazen session and you'll be able to come to a conclusion right away. Please come and change the shift from knowledge to wisdom. A new world will open up.
The best way to surpass the question “why” is to “not try to answer that ❝ why ❞ with reasons or words.”
Because the facts have already proven it.
The immediate fact that already exists before words is already the best answer.
I ordered ramen at a ramen shop and asked, “Why is this ramen so good?” Why don't you think about it. Conclusion: Novichimautno.
Before I think about it, I already have the real world right in front of me. And since I was a child, I have enjoyed that world without question. There were no issues.
The world was originally clean before I painted it black with paint thinking it was empty, nothing, nothing, useless.
Philosophers are kind of cool, so when I was young, I tried to give reasons in the same way. However, at one point, I felt that the way to seek answers itself was unhealthy.
Originally, painting with paint of thought before justifying one's own reasons stains the world and the inside of the brain.
Just as trees, rivers, and animals exist, human existence transcends human reasoning before human justification, and is just like that.
What you're doing is close to painting ink on a polar bear and trying to turn it into a panda. You should enjoy polar bears as they are. If you paint everything with the paint you know and the dramatized paint of your thoughts, all the polar bears will turn into bears.
Don't even remain a panda without black and white on.
It's about tasting the truth before you take care of it with your own intellectual brush. I'm waiting for you.