• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Buddha favors religion and shuns having no-religion

idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
paarsurrey said:
That does not make Jesus an anti-religious person. He was a Jew and followed the teachings of Moses.
Click to expand...

Jesus was following his own version which many would be opposed to. Both Buddha and Jesus had religious backgrounds but both founded something new. Jesus was about establishing his own kingdom which would do away with anything except a Jesus religion.
 
Wannabe Yogi

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
The Sum of Awe

The Sum of Awe

Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
Tathagata said:
Again, I repeat:

The Buddha was NOT an Agnostic. It is scripturally false to say he was an Agnostic. He was in fact vehemently opposed to Agnosticism and he called them "evasive eel-wrigglers." See the Brahmajala Sutta and the Samannaphala Sutta.

Brahmajala Sutta - Wikipitaka - The Completing Tipitaka
Samannaphala Sutta - Wikipitaka - The Completing Tipitaka

Sanjaya Belatthaputta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


.
Click to expand...
So Siddartha had complete knowledge, knew 100% of certainty?

If he was not 100% certain, he was an agnostic. Do not deny that agnosticism isn't a theological view, like atheism and theism, because it is a field of certainty between Gnostic and Agnostic.
 
Tathagata

Tathagata

Freethinker
The Sum of Awe said:
So Siddartha had complete knowledge, knew 100% of certainty?

If he was not 100% certain, he was an agnostic. Do not deny that agnosticism isn't a theological view, like atheism and theism, because it is a field of certainty between Gnostic and Agnostic.
Click to expand...

"These, monks, are those other matters, profound, hard to see … which the Tathágata, having realized them by his own super-knowledge, proclaims, and about which those who would truthfully praise the Tathágata would rightly speak."

-- The Buddha [Samannaphala Sutta]


.
 
DreadFish

DreadFish

Cosmic Vagabond
Tathagata said:
"In the*Pali literature, Sanjaya's teachings have been characterized as "evasive"[1]
*or "agnostic." In the*Brahmajala Sutta*(DN 1), Sanjaya's views are deemed to be "amaravikkhepavad", "a theory of eel-wrigglers."[5]

-- Sanjaya Belatthaputta - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




.
Click to expand...

I think this is a matter of semantics, "agnosticism" in the sense that is discussed in the suttas seems to be illustrated with examples of being evasive and unsure in the face of various questions regarding that person's dharma.
 
Wannabe Yogi

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
DreadFish said:
I think this is a matter of semantics, "agnosticism" in the sense that is discussed in the suttas seems to be illustrated with examples of being evasive and unsure in the face of various questions regarding that person's dharma.
Click to expand...

Thats how I see it. I am not a Buddhist so what do I know.

I have always taken the Buddha as saying. It Matters not if God exists. It is by self effort that we stop the suffering.

This is an idea Hindu's need to take a good long look at. Today there are any number of Guru's who teach I will give you enlightenment. (many buddhist teachers also teach easy ways out) I see the Lord Buddha as practical. It's the effort that is important. 10 moments in the morning and evening is not going to do it.
 
Last edited:
DreadFish

DreadFish

Cosmic Vagabond
paarsurrey said:
Buddha says: “The gift of religion exceeds all gifts; the sweetness of religion exceeds all sweetness; the delight in religion exceeds all delights; the extinction of thirst overcomes all pain.” Verse- 49: Chapter – 48: THE DHAMMAPADA.

Gospel of Buddha

http://reluctant-messenger.com/gospel_buddha/

Paarsurrey comments: Atheism/Agnosticism/Skepticism do not subscribe to any religion; they rather abhor religion. Hence, they don’t belong to Buddha and Buddha does not belong to them.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Click to expand...

Im a bit late to the conversation, but I would like to comment on the OP.

Others have already said it, Gautama Buddha is referring to Dharma here, not "religion" as we know it, so this claim is null and void in this context.

There are religions that are atheist, one do not require a god to believe in the transcendental or have a spiritual path or religion. The other Indian religion that is atheist is Jainism. While Jainism basically states that each individual's soul is basically pure and unlimited, much like God, there is not a creator God because there is not a first cause and the universe is seen to be self governing. Also I believe that there is atheist Vedanta, someone can correct me if I am wrong about that.


For me at least, it is debatable whether Gautama Buddha denies the transcendental and that which is beyond conditions and concepts, similar to some concepts of God, he most certainly does deny a Creator God, because there is not a first cause. Based in dependent origination, all phenomena arise dependently on various phenomena and nothing is inherent or independent.

The closest thing to God in the various schools of Buddhadharma is the Adi-Buddha or Primordial Buddha. This idea is not accepted by Theravada, and is mostly found in Vajrayana.

Adi-Buddha

But we should be careful when approaching the idea of Adi-Buddha to avoid as taking it in the traditional sense of "God." Adi-Buddha is not something that is different or separate from any other sentient being like us, and I do not think it is meant to be taken as a concrete inherent entity.
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Nowhere Man said:
More or less appropriate in respect to each religion. Path suffices personally. :0)
Click to expand...

Since the founders of religions were not authors of the Word revealed on them from the Creator God; hence they did not register saying it; like Jesus said he had come to fulfil Torah not to oppose it which contained teachings of Moses.
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The Sum of Awe said:
Eh, I would say that most Buddhists, if not all, are agnostic on their atheism, being that agnostic isn't a viewpoint on God, it's a standpoint on how right you are.
Click to expand...

I don't have to follow any Buddhist denomination or any Buddhism; I follow Buddha and defend him and his position.
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
The Sum of Awe said:
So Siddartha had complete knowledge, knew 100% of certainty?

If he was not 100% certain, he was an agnostic. Do not deny that agnosticism isn't a theological view, like atheism and theism, because it is a field of certainty between Gnostic and Agnostic.
Click to expand...

Please elaborate for me.
Do you mean that by Word of Revelation one gets 100% certainty?
 
DreadFish

DreadFish

Cosmic Vagabond
paarsurrey said:
I don't have to follow any Buddhist denomination or any Buddhism; I follow Buddha and defend him and his position.
Click to expand...


Unless one has realized fully what Gautama Buddha realized, then I dont think one can defend Buddha's position. One could defend their idea of Buddha's position, but that's something else entirely. I believe you are defending your idea of Buddha's position.

EDIT: also, unless one has practiced, even for a short while, the practices and teachings of the Dharma, then one does not likely have a proper perspective on the teachings. Without meditation, it remains ideas and terms; we might as well debate whether Aslan in the Narinia stories is actually God or not.
 
Last edited:
Twilight Hue

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
paarsurrey said:
Since the founders of religions were not authors of the Word revealed on them from the Creator God; hence they did not register saying it; like Jesus said he had come to fulfil Torah not to oppose it which contained teachings of Moses.
Click to expand...

Sorta like saying there is not a full understanding thereby no claim can be layed to what is not fully understood. Bit like my sig line....
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Nowhere Man said:
Sorta like saying there is not a full understanding thereby no claim can be layed to what is not fully understood. Bit like my sig line....
Click to expand...

I don't agree with your signature line.

The founders of religions always praised perfect men before them and prophesied for the future coming perfect men; they upheld the message they received from ONE for the humanity; they were selfless persons serving ONE and the humanity.
 
Road Warrior

Road Warrior

Seeking the middle path..
paarsurrey said:
I don't agree with your signature line.

The founders of religions always praised perfect men before them and prophesied for the future coming perfect men; they upheld the message they received from ONE for the humanity; they were selfless persons serving ONE and the humanity.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I don't hold our predecessors to such a high standard. They were human with human faults. Thomas Jefferson and George Washington are often held up to such high degrees of perfection and selflessness, but the fact remains they were as human as you and I. Brave? Yes. Hardworking? Yes. Selfless at times? Yes. Perfect? No.

Even Christ lost his temper in the Temple....although that tantrum may have also been part of the greater plan and, therefore, intentional.
 
idav

idav

Being
Premium Member
paarsurrey said:
That makes Jesus believer in religion; not an anti-religion.
Click to expand...

Religions are man-made institutions. Jesus didn't care how people label themselves and he was even able to teach seeing beyond it even within Judaism. Same goes for Buddha who saw beyond the facade.
 
paarsurrey

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
idav said:
Religions are man-made institutions. Jesus didn't care how people label themselves and he was even able to teach seeing beyond it even within Judaism. Same goes for Buddha who saw beyond the facade.
Click to expand...

I don't get you exactly; please give details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top