1. 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!

There is nothing in Kalama Sutta that supports Atheists

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by paarsurrey, May 19, 2012.

  1. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    This has always been part of the truthful religion. Buddha, Krishna, Moses, Zoroaster, Socrates, Jesus never said anything that is against it; rather they supported it.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. Tathagata

    Tathagata Freethinker

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,030
    Ratings:
    +82
    And no one said that the Kalama Sutta "supports Atheists." The Kalama Sutta supports critical examination, reliance on oneself, and against blind belief.
    The Kalama Sutta has been part of other religions? No, I think the Kalama Sutta is rather unique to Buddhism. (Yes I've heard the Bible quote "test all things, hold on to the good.")

    .
     
  3. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    Being from different regions and different languages; they had different names and terminology;they meant the same things; none is against it.

    Please quote from any of them who supported blind faith.
     
  4. Tathagata

    Tathagata Freethinker

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,030
    Ratings:
    +82
    Not relevant. Please show me a quote from other religions that parallel the Kalama Sutta.


    .
     
  5. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    Buddha had to be unique as he had a converse with the ONE- the Creator God and became in His image like other perfect men founders of other religions whom their followers consider unique in personality and teachings as they also had a Converse with Him and became in His image.

    One may enquire into it from them if one likes.
     
  6. tumbleweed41

    tumbleweed41 Resident Liberal Hippie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    20,463
    Ratings:
    +1,334
    Source?
     
  7. Tathagata

    Tathagata Freethinker

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2010
    Messages:
    1,030
    Ratings:
    +82
    Please cite the verse from scripture where it says the Buddha conversed with the Creator God.
     
  8. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344

    “Moses brought the law from Mt. Sinai. Moses was unique in that he spoke with God "face to face."

    People of the Bible: Moses
     
  9. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    Please quote from Buddha where he claimed to be unique.
     
  10. Sunstone

    Sunstone De Diablo Del Fora
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2004
    Messages:
    68,974
    Ratings:
    +26,028
    Religion:
    Erotic Dancing Girls
    Nice dodge. But please do address the question.
     
  11. tumbleweed41

    tumbleweed41 Resident Liberal Hippie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    20,463
    Ratings:
    +1,334
    :facepalm:

    In other words, you have no reliable source of Buddha conversing with God.
     
  12. arthra

    arthra Baha'i

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2004
    Messages:
    6,120
    Ratings:
    +1,561
    Religion:
    Baha'i
    Maybe quoting from the Kalama Sutra would be helpful:

    Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing,
    nor upon tradition,
    nor upon rumor,
    nor upon what is in a scripture,
    nor upon surmise,
    nor upon an axiom,
    nor upon specious reasoning,
    nor upon a bias towards a notion that has been pondered over,
    nor upon another's seeming ability,
    nor upon the consideration, "The monk is our teacher."
    Kalamas, when you yourselves know: "These things are good; these things are not blamable; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness," enter on and abide in them.'

    There are elements of the above in other scriptures and Writings in my opinion...

    All the people have formed a god in the world of thought, and that form of their own imagination they worship; when the fact is that the imagined form is finite and the human mind is infinite. Surely the infinite is greater than the finite, for imagination is accidental while the mind is essential; surely the essential is greater than the accidental.
    Therefore consider: All the sects and peoples worship their own thought; they create a god in their own minds and acknowledge him to be the creator of all things, when that form is a superstition -- thus people adore and worship imagination.
    That Essence of the Divine Entity and the Unseen of the unseen is holy above imagination and is beyond thought. Consciousness doth not reach It. Within the capacity of comprehension of a produced reality that Ancient Reality cannot be contained. It is a different world; from it there is no information; arrival thereat is impossible; attainment thereto is prohibited and inaccessible. This much is known: It exists and Its existence is certain and proven -- but the condition is unknown.

    (Abdu'l-Baha, Baha'i World Faith - Abdu'l-Baha Section, p. 381)


    The third method of understanding is by tradition -- that is, through the text of the Holy Scriptures -- for people say, "In the Old and New Testaments, God spoke thus." This method equally is not perfect, because the traditions are understood by the reason. As the reason itself is liable to err,

    how can it be said that in interpreting the meaning of the traditions it will not err, for it is possible for it to make mistakes, and certainty cannot be attained. This is the method of the religious leaders; whatever they understand and comprehend from the text of the books is that which their reason understands from the text, and not necessarily the real truth; for the reason is like a balance, and the meanings contained in the text of the Holy Books are like the thing which is weighed. If the balance is untrue, how can the weight be ascertained?

    Know then: that which is in the hands of people, that which they believe, is liable to error. For, in proving or disproving a thing, if a proof is brought forward which is taken from the evidence of our senses, this method, as has become evident, is not perfect; if the proofs are intellectual, the same is true; or if they are traditional, such proofs also are not perfect. Therefore, there is no standard in the hands of people upon which we can rely.

    (Abdu'l-Baha, Some Answered Questions, p. 297)

    Among these teachings was the independent investigation of reality

    so that the world of humanity may be saved from the darkness of imitation and attain to the truth;

    may tear off and cast away this ragged and outgrown garment of a thousand years ago and may put on the robe woven in the utmost purity and holiness in the loom of reality

    (Abdu'l-Baha, Selections from the Writings of Abdu'l-Baha, p. 298)
     
  13. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    I had no intention to dodge. Please explain your question in one or two sentences.
     
  14. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    Thanks for your input.
     
  15. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    The word "enlightenment" in itself a proof that Buddha had it from the Creator God.
     
  16. tumbleweed41

    tumbleweed41 Resident Liberal Hippie

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    20,463
    Ratings:
    +1,334
    Ah, so then Descartes, Paine, Spinoza, Rousseau, etc. all spoke to the "Creator God".

    Enlightenment thinkers all.
     
  17. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,241
    Ratings:
    +1,931
    Religion:
    Hindu Sanatana Dharma
    hello paarsurrey

    I think both in Buddhism and in Hinduism, the realm of brahmA, the creator god is not the ultimate goal. There is express instruction in Hinduism against glorifying or worshipping the creator -- which is the mind

    In Hinduism, however, the steps of the ladder have not been cut away, so you see the value of worshipping gods-God. In Buddha's teachings, many can see only materialism and I agree with you that that view is wrong. Buddha was always pointing to the transendental.

    However, I am sure that the Transcendental of Budhha transcended all gods.
     
  18. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    I agree with your above words.
     
  19. paarsurrey

    paarsurrey Veteran Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2012
    Messages:
    14,608
    Ratings:
    +1,344
    You get me wrong; Buddha was not one of the above; Buddha was a different category; his "enlightenment" was like that of Moses and Jesus.
     
  20. atanu

    atanu Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    12,241
    Ratings:
    +1,931
    Religion:
    Hindu Sanatana Dharma
    Thank you paarsurrey, i agree with you largely. But I differ on a very imporatant point and that over-rules all other points.:D

    From scriptures it would appear that Buddha talked of creator bramhA. However, I am certain, that unlike Islam, Christianity, and some schools of Hinduism, Buddha taught aiming for the reality higher than the Creator. He has never glorified or villified the Creator, since creator God is not apart from one's mind.

    There is reason for this. Creation, as per Buddhism and a school of Hinduism is ignorance. Who will like to create a world full of rapes and killings?

    I am not saying what is correct and what is not. I am noting my understanding borne out of study and practise.

    Regards
     
Loading...