Can a Buddhist believe in God?

[Ablaze]

@Ablaze... I've read a few of your replies in the last few pages, and my question is this:

does the notion of the "Infinite" or "Eternal" then, have any meaning or significance for a Buddhist?

Anicca has greater meaning.

 

[Rohit Adhikarla]

I am particular interested in exploration of ultimate reality irrespective of presence or absenseof God.I am sure Buddha would have agreed to that.

Nirguna Brahman is not necessarily a thing or something full.It is also described as Shunya in shaiva texts.Buddhists should not be worried if this is same as their own reality.Because the goal is to raise above mental conceptions rather than supporting or refuting specific concepts of God.

 

[Ablaze]

I am particular interested in exploration of ultimate reality irrespective of presence or absenseof God.I am sure Buddha would have agreed to that.

Nirguna Brahman is not necessarily a thing or something full.It is also described as Shunya in shaiva texts.Buddhists should not be worried if this is same as their own reality.Because the goal is to raise above mental conceptions rather than supporting or refuting specific concepts of God.

:yes:

Good post.

 

[punkdbass]

Anicca has greater meaning.

Lastly, does not the Buddhist idea that each person is essentially Buddha, or that each person has "inner Buddha nature" support the idea of an underlying substratum, not in a materialistic sense, but at least in some other spiritual sense?

 

[crossfire]

@Ablaze... I've read a few of your replies in the last few pages, and my question is this:

does the notion of the "Infinite" or "Eternal" then, have any meaning or significance for a Buddhist?

There are two of the formless jhanas: the dimension of infinite space, and the dimension of infinite consciousness.

As for eternal, what exactly do you mean by that? In my contemplations regarding eternal, I have found it to be a limiting quality, rather than a liberating quality.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[Rohit Adhikarla]

:yes:

Good post.

See you outside of time,space and casuality.

 

[Ablaze]

Lastly, does not the Buddhist idea that each person is essentially Buddha, or that each person has "inner Buddha nature" support the idea of an underlying substratum, not in a materialistic sense, but at least in some other sense?

This does not refer to an underlying substratum. Buddha-nature is another concept prone to misconstrual. The Buddha clarified it thus:

"No, Mahamati, my Womb of Tathagatahood is not the same as the Divine Atman as taught by the philosophers. What I teach is Tathagatahood in the sense of Dharmakaya, Ultimate Oneness, Nirvana, emptiness, unbornness, unqualifiedness, devoid of will-effort. ...The doctrine of the Tathagata-womb is disclosed in order to awaken philosophers from their clinging to the notion of a Divine Atman as a transcendental personality, so that their minds that have become attached to the imaginary notion of a "soul" as being something self-existing, may be quickly awakened to a state of perfect enlightenment."

Gautama Buddha - लंकावतारसूत्र | Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra

Buddha-nature is a seed, a potential, not an underlying substratum. It is a capacity, not a substance. It is a potential within each of us to accomplish what the Buddha accomplished, an innate capacity for enlightenment. It is not the fabric of reality or a thread that underlies all existence.

 

[punkdbass]

This does not refer to an underlying substratum. Buddha-nature is another concept prone to misconstrual. The Buddha clarified it thus:



Buddha-nature is a seed, a potential, not an underlying substratum. It is a capacity, not a substance. It is a potential within each of us to accomplish what the Buddha accomplished, an innate capacity for enlightenment. It is not the fabric of reality or a thread that underlies all existence.

Interesting. Right now I have a strong desire to want to personify the Ultimate Reality. What you've shared is interesting, and I feel like there is definitely a spark of truth in it, but it is difficult for me to comprehend. If you are right, then perhaps one day I will realize what you are trying to convey. But for now, what I find fascinating is the very fact that each human being carries within theirself this seed or capacity for enlightenment.. it makes you wonder why it is this way.

 

[atanu]

Buddha-nature is a seed, a potential, not an underlying substratum. It is a capacity, not a substance. It is a potential within each of us to accomplish what the Buddha accomplished, an innate capacity for enlightenment. It is not the fabric of reality or a thread that underlies all existence.

Only those dwelling in mental notions will not see the essence in the Buddha nature inherent in every form. What one calls the 'pervading substance' another may call the 'thread' and yet another may call as 'warp and woof'. Using words gives rise to such differences and those who hold that nothing is permanent in this world only insist staunchly that the words indicate real permanent substantial differences. Irony.

Ha.

 

[crossfire]

Interesting. Right now I have a strong desire to want to personify the Ultimate Reality. What you've shared is interesting, and I feel like there is definitely a spark of truth in it, but it is difficult for me to comprehend. If you are right, then perhaps one day I will realize what you are trying to convey. But for now, what I find fascinating is the very fact that each human being carries within theirself this seed or capacity for enlightenment.. it makes you wonder why it is this way.

Actually, your question regarding eternal brought these two lines from The Dhammapada (1:5-6) to my mind. It also seems to fit in with each individuals capacity for enlightenment:

5. Na hi verena verāni sammantīdha kudācanaṃ 5
Averena ca sammanti esa dhammo sanantano.

6. Pare ca na vijānanti mayamettha yamāmase 6
Ye ca tattha vijānanti tato sammanti medhagā.

5. Hatred is never appeased by hatred in this world. By non-hatred alone is hatred appeased. This is a law eternal.

6. There are those who do not realize that one day we all must die. But those who do realize this settle their quarrels.​

If it weren't for these enduring principles, then we wouldn't really be able to become enlightened to them, and to how everything fits together, and how we can make it better.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram :namaste

This does not refer to an underlying substratum. Buddha-nature is another concept prone to misconstrual.

buddha nature or more correctly ' buddha dhatu ' (as its origin is sanskrit) refers to a primordial constitutional element of pure consciousness or sublime inteligence .

therefore it is the element of pure unchanging consciousness which is there for the realisation as is brahman ...therefore it is the substratam of all as it is the ultimate reality that we have yet to realise .

Buddha-nature is a seed, a potential, not an underlying substratum. It is a capacity, not a substance. It is a potential within each of us to accomplish what the Buddha accomplished, an innate capacity for enlightenment. It is not the fabric of reality or a thread that underlies all existence.

as buddha dhatu belongs to the mahayana traditions let me explain it for you , ....

buddha dhatu is the imaculate primprdial serene suchness , it is non arising and non ending ,therefore it is eternal , it is the 'sat-cit' of 'sat cit ananda' and its realisation is the ever present 'ananda' ...nirbana .it is the primordial wisdom that is the ultimate reality .

it will never be found by the scrutinising texts but is found only by surrender of 'this' ... which does not equqte to nothingness , but to that which is fullness , ...it is empty only of illusion .

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram atanu ji :namaste

Brahman is pre word -- if we may say so.

....even according to the jataka (accepted by indiginous theravadan comunities) brahman is accepted as the universal spirit .....
and brahma , the cheif god of the upper heavens ....
agni is the fire god , ...and surya the sun god ...and the only difference between hindus and buddhists is that you my dear brother come from jambudvia (the southern continent ), .....and meru is the core of the universe atop of which is smeru the abode of the gods , ....and so it goes on ....

What you say is your personal opinion devoid of experience of samadhi. The non-dual realisation in samadhi is not different for Hindus and different for Buddhists.

jai jai , there is but one truth , therefore one realisation , one bodhi .

 

[Badran]

***Mod post***

Please keep in mind this is the Buddhism DIR. Debate of any kind for members and non-members of the DIR alike is strictly prohibited.

Non-members can post within the guideline outlined in rule 10;

10. Discuss Individual Religions Forums/Same Faith Debates/"Only Sections"
The DIR subforums are for the express use for discussion by that specific group. They are not to be used for debate by anyone. People of other groups or faiths may post respectful questions to increase their understanding. Questions of a rhetorical or argumentative nature or that counter the beliefs of that DIR are not permitted. DIR areas are not to be used as cover to bash others outside the faith. The DIR forums are strictly moderated and posts are subject to editing or removal.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored blue, non-members of that area are limited only to respectful questions, and are not allowed to make any non-question posts.

-For any DIR or discussion sub-forum that is colored green, non-members of that area may make respectful posts that comply with the tenets and spirit of that area. This includes questions, as well as knowledgeable comments.

The Same Faith Debates subforum is specifically for debate between members of the same faith. Members that are not part of a same faith debate thread's selected faith may not post at all in those threads. The Political "Only" subforums are also used specifically for that group and may not be posted in by members that do not correspond to the political position of the subforum. These two forums are colored purple.

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram punkdbass ji :namaste

Interesting. Right now I have a strong desire to want to personify the Ultimate Reality. What you've shared is interesting, and I feel like there is definitely a spark of truth in it, but it is difficult for me to comprehend. If you are right, then perhaps one day I will realize what you are trying to convey. But for now, what I find fascinating is the very fact that each human being carries within theirself this seed or capacity for enlightenment.. it makes you wonder why it is this way.

it is our natural state , it is simply that we are momentarily distracted from that realisation by absorbtion in this temporary bodily existance :namaste

 

[ratikala]

***Mod post***

Please keep in mind this is the Buddhism DIR. Debate of any kind for members and non-members of the DIR alike is strictly prohibited.

Non-members can post within the guideline outlined in rule 10;


​

namaskaram badran :namaste

this is a most interesting discussion and the inclusion of our hindu brothers is not inappropriate , in my opinion it is important to examine the understanding of many buddhist concepts against those held within hinduism , both of who's origins are in vedic brahminism .

therefore may I request that this thread be moved to 'dharmic religions DIR '

 

[NobodyYouKnow]

namaskaram badran :namaste

this is a most interesting discussion and the inclusion of our hindu brothers is not inappropriate , in my opinion it is important to examine the understanding of many buddhist concepts against those held within hinduism , both of who's origins are in vedic brahminism .

therefore may I request that this thread be moved to 'dharmic religions DIR '

There isn't much difference between Brahman and Buddha-Nature...also, Buddha is an Avatar of Lord Vishnu anyway, so it's natural these two schools of thought are going to find 'common ground' and a few Hindus on here are also Hindu/Buddhists like us and there's no forum for that, so we make do.

**MOD EDIT**

Having said that - watching Monkey again...Wu Ch'eng Eng said "even the greatest God is much less than the Buddha within ourselves".

 

[Quagmire]

***Mod Post***

Thread moved to the Dharmic DIR.​

 

[ratikala]

***Mod Post***

Thread moved to the Dharmic DIR.​

many thanks to you and the mystical christmas monkey :namaste

 

[apophenia]

Your mileage may vary.

Seems buddhism is now silly putty which could be interpreted as a path to Jesus Christ, our personal lord and saviour. It's just a matter of a little adjustment here, a tweak there ... and being tolerant of other's views

Merry Crishna, and Hare New Year !!!!

 

[ratikala]

namaskaram NYK ji :namaste

There isn't much difference between Brahman and Buddha-Nature...also, Buddha is an Avatar of Lord Vishnu anyway, so it's natural these two schools of thought are going to find 'common ground' and a few Hindus on here are also Hindu/Buddhists like us and there's no forum for that, so we make do.

natural to anyone with the ability to crossreference buddhist iconography with the hindu parthenon , ....prehaps a tad confusing otherwise , ...

realising that buddha is an incarnation of visnu is nondifferent from realising that adi buddha lays on the causal ocean not the creator but the originator of all phenomena the esential nature of which is truth :namaste