• 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!

Buddhists don't believe in G-d: why should they have a scripture then?

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Buddhists may believe in a deity of some kind, and even create their own. It is just not a crucial matter for our practice, except perhaps when the specific person has such a need.

What may be surprising you is that most religions that do not claim Ibrahim (Abraham) as a prophet do not feel compelled to follow the Abrahamic mold.

There is no particular reason why a religion needs scripture (oral transmission is actually far superior in most circunstances), much less a deity, and less still a deity that is presented as the necessary element of the religion itself, let alone of existence.

Scriptures, when correctly employed, are just written aids, reminders of the living religious doctrine, to be interpreted, forgotten, supplemented or disregarded as befits the situation.

Myself, I have come to decide that I don't think a person has much of a claim of being religious until and unless he or she has decided to accept the responsibility of writing and interpreting at least a bit of his or her own persona scripture, thereby learning that scripture is something that people lend credibility to instead of the other way around.

A true religious person accepts that scripture is not and can not ever have any authority, and that it falls upon the practicioners to decide if and how to use it. One of the most important qualities for a religious person is the wisdom that is necessary for, among other more crucial tasks, deciding when any given scripture is useful or not, and to which extent, and under which qualifiers and which interpretation.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Is belief in God paramount for having and using a scriptural text?
I assume it may look that way for someone who has learned since very young that Islam (or perhaps Christianity) is ultimately the one true religion that is not seriously misguided.
 

Rick O'Shez

Irishman bouncing off walls
I don't understand the question. Is there a reason that only monotheistic religions should have religious texts?
 

Ouroboros

Coincidentia oppositorum
Scriptures should only be considered guides to understand God/gods/worldview/religion. When they're put on pedestal and considered "Holy" they've become the replacement of God/gods. The scripture becomes more important than the personal faith or experience. A person's relationship with any god is ruined by a rulebook that dictates the "proper" way, and the person loses his/her ability to have a personal experience. A book is good to have for guidance and help, like a map, but the map doesn't replace the true ground your walking on.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
I don't understand the question. Is there a reason that only monotheistic religions should have religious texts?
I think the implication was that scripture is revealed, and if nothing's been revealed to you then you don't need scripture(?).
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
Open to Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics and the Theists alike.
Regards
Per Webster's dictionary, scriptures are the sacred writings of a religion. I think the point you are making is that since Buddhist teachings are not considered divinely inspired then it is just the writings of men. The word 'scripture' does not necessarily imply 'divinely inspired'.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
I think the implication was that scripture is revealed, and if nothing's been revealed to you then you don't need scripture(?).
The Word of Revelation in original language even in the verbal form is a scripture; subsequently it could be written and published in a book form for convenience of the people.
Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Come to think of it, if I believed that there is a revelation from God through a specific scripture or religion, I would probably wonder where other faiths came from and feel more than a littlebit uncertain about what they are and how much I can trust them.

The Word of Revelation in original language even in the verbal form is a scripture; subsequently it could be written and published in a book form for convenience of the people.
Regards

You mean that a revelation from God could come in other form besides as written words from the start? Fair enough. It is my understanding that this is in fact doctrinarily accurate in most any revealed religion.

However, I think Willamena was talking about something else. She is attempting to explain why you find it surprising that Buddhism has scriptures.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
You mean that a revelation from God could come in other form besides as written words from the start?

Revelation always comes in verbal, pictorial and or the form of a dream; then the person whom it descends narrates it to other people and in subsequent immediate or later it could be written down to secure it and keep it pristine for the benefit of the peoples at large and or for the subsequent generations . Nothing comes from the sky in the physical form of tablets or in the form of a written down scripture that could be touched down with hands.

Regards
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Revelation always comes in verbal, pictorial and or the form of a dream; then the person whom it descends narrates it to other people and in subsequent immediate or later it could be written down to secure it and keep it pristine for the benefit of the peoples at large and or for the subsequent generations . Nothing comes from the sky in the physical form of tablets or in the form of a written down scripture that could be touched down with hands.

Regards

I don't believe that they do, either, but there are those who do.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Open to Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics and the Theists alike.
Regards
Scripture to a Buddhist does not have the same view as abrahamics view. It is not holy as in it comes from God. Its, the sutras, are "Holy" in that they contain the Buddha's words "about" life and the nature of it. Buddha tells us not to be attached to his words as being a buddha does not depend on them but the practice itself. Scripture is the practice not words on page.

Why should they have scriptures? They dont. Their sutras are not the Word of the Buddha. We do not depend on them, only in our practice.

Why we need them? They tell us how to practice and what for. They say dont be attached to the scriptures. Unlike other religions who are attached to their scriptures, we go to the sutras to disatach ourselves from them.

Religions who depend on Holy Scriptures reminds me of a patient depending on his therapist. The point of therapy is to NOT go to therapy. Likewise, thats how I see scripture.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
What was Buddha's source of knowledge except Word of Revelation from G-d.
Regards
The Buddha had no revelation from an abrahamic God. Abrahamics arent special in regards to others just dont know their truth.

The Buddha found his revelation or enlightenment by the suffering of his people. He founs that there is a cause. He was enlightened to know (not believe) the end to this cause. He expounded how to end it.

He rejected any supernatural causes. All revelations come from ourselves, our inner wisdom (Buddha nature) that is stuck under illusions of power, egotism, beliefs, etc.

He knew nothing about God nor his Word. The Buddha lived hundreds of years before christianity in a different country.

So that statement, historically by itself, does not make sense.. Also, it assumes abrahamics have the key to the universe; they dont.
 

genypher

Member
Ultimate Reality, I would assume. Enlightenment means waking up to reality as it is. In honesty, the prophecies of Buddhism are very, very low on the scale of importance of most practitioners. I think there may only be 2 prophecies in Buddhism: The Sermon of the Seven Suns and the coming of Maitreya. Often, these are seen as metaphorical, though.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
The Vows of Amida Buddha are of considerable importance, at least in the Pure Land lineages of Buddhism.

However, I'm not sure they woud qualify as prophecies. They are certainly more suited to inspiration than to predicting the future.
 

Musty

Active Member
Open to Atheists/Agnostics/Skeptics and the Theists alike.
Regards

I'm fairly new to Buddhism but the scriptures often relate to the Buddhist practice and not to God. That said Buddhism can't escape the native theistic beliefs of the lands it have evolved in.
 
Top