Oh word.... thanks.
And um.... what did 'we' make of it?
Varying opinions I'm sure
Can you give me a quick run down?
-
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!
Can a Buddhist believe in God?
- Thread starter Sand Dancer
- Start date
Oh word.... thanks.
And um.... what did 'we' make of it?
Varying opinions I'm sure
Can you give me a quick run down?
Here's one thread:Oh word.... thanks.
And um.... what did 'we' make of it?
Varying opinions I'm sure
Can you give me a quick run down?
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...ha-preaching-essential-part-his-revealed.html
These posts in specific:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3339276-post24.html
Last edited:
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
OK, I think I've found similar translation from the Pali:
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (3)
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. And on that occasion the Blessed One was instructing, urging, rousing, & encouraging the monks with Dhamma-talk concerned with unbinding. The monks receptive, attentive, focusing their entire awareness, lending ear listened to the Dhamma.
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is, monks, an unborn[1] unbecome unmade unfabricated. If there were not that unborn unbecome unmade unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born become made fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn unbecome unmade unfabricated, escape from the born become made fabricated is discerned.[2]
There are discussion notes after the sutta at above link.Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is, monks, an unborn[1] unbecome unmade unfabricated. If there were not that unborn unbecome unmade unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born become made fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn unbecome unmade unfabricated, escape from the born become made fabricated is discerned.[2]
Here are the four (Unbinding) Nibbana Suttas:
All four suttas begin thusly:
The second sutta: Sounds like Tao Te Ching 1, no?
Third sutta: sounds very much like the Zen "pure consciousness," which is spontaneous, no?
Fourth sutta: Finding rest in non-duality?
All four suttas begin thusly:
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Sāvatthī at Jeta's Grove, Anāthapiṇḍika's monastery. And on that occasion the Blessed One was instructing, urging, rousing, & encouraging the monks with Dhamma-talk concerned with unbinding. The monks — receptive, attentive, focusing their entire awareness, lending ear — listened to the Dhamma.
I'll post <...> in the following suttas for the above part.Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (1)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,[1] unevolving, without support [mental object].[2] This, just this, is the end of stress.
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (2)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
It's hard to see the unaffected, for the truth is not easily seen. Craving is pierced in one who knows; For one who sees, there is nothing.
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (3)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (4)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.[1]
The first sutta seems to be talking about beyond the major jhanas.<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is that dimension, monks, where there is neither earth, nor water, nor fire, nor wind; neither dimension of the infinitude of space, nor dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, nor dimension of nothingness, nor dimension of neither perception nor non-perception; neither this world, nor the next world, nor sun, nor moon. And there, I say, there is neither coming, nor going, nor staying; neither passing away nor arising: unestablished,[1] unevolving, without support [mental object].[2] This, just this, is the end of stress.
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (2)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
It's hard to see the unaffected, for the truth is not easily seen. Craving is pierced in one who knows; For one who sees, there is nothing.
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (3)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
There is, monks, an unborn[1] — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated. If there were not that unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, there would not be the case that escape from the born — become — made — fabricated would be discerned. But precisely because there is an unborn — unbecome — unmade — unfabricated, escape from the born — become — made — fabricated is discerned.[2]
Nibbāna Sutta: Unbinding (4)
<...>
Then, on realizing the significance of that, the Blessed One on that occasion exclaimed:
One who is dependent has wavering. One who is independent has no wavering. There being no wavering, there is calm. There being calm, there is no yearning. There being no yearning, there is no coming or going. There being no coming or going, there is no passing away or arising. There being no passing away or arising, there is neither a here nor a there nor a between-the-two. This, just this, is the end of stress.[1]
The second sutta: Sounds like Tao Te Ching 1, no?
Third sutta: sounds very much like the Zen "pure consciousness," which is spontaneous, no?
Fourth sutta: Finding rest in non-duality?
ratikala
Istha gosthi
namaskaram sage ji :namaste
''varying oppinions I am sure'' :yes:
I read it years ago and found it to be a plesant read if I remember it correctly it began by paralelling christianity with buddhism in that religions are often beset with sectarian differences .....which cause impenitrable devides .
from experience buddhism is certainly devided , ... which I see no reason to perpetuate , to my mind we are here to contemplate and allow realisation to naturaly occur , personaly I welcome chalenging thought ,as it is only by contemplation of such that we come to any true personal realisation .
yet to some it is threatening . in that respect each to their own , and eventualy truth will by its own nature become apparent .
and to some any thought that there might be a divine element to the notion of buddhahood seems sadly abhorent , I think this was the message of the book ?
....that whilst some may wish to negate any divine element , others were happy to pay homage to it , .... personaly I could not live without that divine element nor would I want to be witout its blessing :namaste
can a buddhist belive in god ? ..... me thinks so , ...yes
and without being syncretic ? .....most certainly
Oh word.... thanks.
And um.... what did 'we' make of it?
Varying opinions I'm sure
Can you give me a quick run down?
''varying oppinions I am sure'' :yes:
I read it years ago and found it to be a plesant read if I remember it correctly it began by paralelling christianity with buddhism in that religions are often beset with sectarian differences .....which cause impenitrable devides .
from experience buddhism is certainly devided , ... which I see no reason to perpetuate , to my mind we are here to contemplate and allow realisation to naturaly occur , personaly I welcome chalenging thought ,as it is only by contemplation of such that we come to any true personal realisation .
yet to some it is threatening . in that respect each to their own , and eventualy truth will by its own nature become apparent .
and to some any thought that there might be a divine element to the notion of buddhahood seems sadly abhorent , I think this was the message of the book ?
....that whilst some may wish to negate any divine element , others were happy to pay homage to it , .... personaly I could not live without that divine element nor would I want to be witout its blessing :namaste
can a buddhist belive in god ? ..... me thinks so , ...yes
and without being syncretic ? .....most certainly
Learn Buddhism.
BUDDHADREAM
Member
Thirza, it always depends on how you define "god".
If you define "god" as the creator of all, then, no, because that was not the universal truth buddha had discovered in 2600 years ago.
If you define "god" as the source of universe & we are all part of the source who created the universe, then, yes, there is god in buddhism.
If you would like to know more, you can visit my blog at my website: BUDDAHS DREAM HOLISTIC ORGANIC TEA SHOP
Love & kindness connected people; Not religion.
In "Love" I trust; Not god.
Humanity can save the world; Not religion.
Death is not the end; No birth, no death is.
:rainbow1:
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
"Some conceive Nirvana to consist in the extinction of merit and demerit; some in the destruction of the passions by means of knowledge; some in regarding Isvara (God) as the free creator of the world. Some think that the world is born of interaction and that there is no [special] cause other than this cause, and clinging to it they have no awakening because of stupidity, and they conceive Nirvana to consist in this non-awakening."
"Things have no beginning, no end; they are abiding in the aspect of reality; there is no creator, nothing doing in the world, but the logicians do not understand."
The Lankavatara Sutra. A Mahayana Text
Hey, I don't mind being accused of heresy, as I am a self-described heretic!
That said, once again, let us revisit the Four Dhamma Seals: Anicca, Dukkha, Anatta, Nibbana, which are the criteria by which one discerns Buddhism from "sorta looks like Buddhism."
The Four Dharma Seals -- The Four Dharma Seals Define Buddhism
The Four Seals reveal what is unique about Buddhism among all the world's religions. Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche said, "Whoever holds these four [seals], in their heart, or in their head, and contemplates them, is a Buddhist."
Last edited by a moderator:
DreadFish
Cosmic Vagabond
Im curious how you would explain concepts like rebirth from a Buddhist PoV. Please reference suttas to back up your explanation.
apophenia
Well-Known Member
You just don't get it.
When Gautama was asked about his 'future incarnations' he said that would be 'wherever wisdom arises'.
The actions of the moon and tides and winds create waves. Waves constantly arise and dissipate. The energy of each wave influences the arising of future waves.
But there are no eternal waves !
You might say that there is the ocean of complex interaction of waves, and that buddha mind is everpresent.
But the 'waves' are not permanent, nor does one wave 'reincarnate' as another wave.
Last edited by a moderator:
Excellent.
apophenia
Well-Known Member
This is positing a 'universe-as-moksha-generator' hypotheses. It is speculation.
Buddha did not say, as far as I know, that our perceived reality (what we call the universe) is a teleological mechanism. i.e. that we exist because [Something Or Other] wants to crank out enlightened beings.
I am not necessarily relating a wave to a lifetime. Perhaps more to a momentary sense of identity. A human experience is an ongoing process of 'selves' arising and passing.
Gautama was not speculating about cosmology, he was dissecting and analysing the experience we label as self.
What Gautama had to say was about our experience, not a bunch of factoids about a hypothesised Conscious Universe With A Purpose or whatever else we may imagine.
DreadFish
Cosmic Vagabond
If I may add to this (and if not, i'll do it anyway),
The wave is a composite formation entirely the product of various conditions yet, more than the sum of its parts. When the wave ceases, the same wave does not begin another existence as another wave. That wave never comes back into existence, yet, the various components which make up that wave (water molecules, air molecules (which in turn make bubbles with carbon molecules and so on), microscopic organisms, pollutants, magnetic forces, light, etc.) are recycled into other forms based upon existing conditions. The next wave will contain some parts from the previous wave and some new parts that were not part of the previous wave. Likewise, some parts of that previous wave become part of another wave.
All this parts belong to the ocean, the wave does not own itself, and if it thinks that it owns any of it's parts, it becomes upset when it's various parts dissolve from it or wash into another wave.
As Buddhadasa put's it, (and im quite fond of this explanation):
Bhikkhu Buddhadasa - Anapanasati Mindfulness with Breathing (Scroll down to "stage four")
Also, George, you are speaking from an Advaita perspective, no? Unless you can cite where in the Suttas you are getting that perspective on reincarnation, you are not speaking from a Buddhist standpoint and your argument is null in this context (i.e. question about Buddhism in the Buddhism DIR)
How does an 'an ever-changing non-permanent soul' (the exact words from my quote) conflict with Anatta?
I think the people here are taking Anatta to mean 'no soul'. The expert western commentators I've read take it to mean 'no permanent soul' which does not mean there is not a 'temporary soul' that can last many lifetimes and experience accumulated karma.
Are you saying a 'Real Buddhist' cannot believe in a cycle of rebirth because of the concept of Anatta? If so, what do you call that which is reborn and attains Nirvana? The world 'soul' in the western sense may be an imperfect term.
I didn't realize initially this is the Buddhist DIR so I will, after this post, stay out of where I'm not welcomed or belong.
Last edited:
DreadFish
Cosmic Vagabond
I think it's debatable what "atman" was taken to mean back in the day of the Buddha. I have heard that they yogis of the time took the Self to be synonymous with the feeling of "I", and the more modern concepts of the self are influenced by the teachings of the Buddha. Unfortunately, I dont have anything to back that up.
As far as what anatta means, I think it's kinda funny how much debate there is about it when it is spelled out in a sutta (from the Samyutta Nikaya):
To me, the more pertinent question is what "atman" specifically referred to back then and what the context was.
Im not aware of anything in the suttas where Buddha actually asserts the nature of the Self but, maybe crossfire can cite something. Like apophenia has said, I dont think the Buddha ever made any ontological assertions except for the four noble truths and the three marks of existence. The rest is simply instruction as to how to become free from dukkha.
EDIT: also, George,I dont want you to think that you are not welcome but I do think it's necessary to cite examples if you are going to make a statement regarding Buddhist beliefs. Im not trying to be an *** hole, I just sound like one
Last edited: