Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

Do Buddhists Believe in God?

1246

Comments

  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Simonthepilgrim wrote:
    One of the things that fascinates me is that human beings spend so much time and effort on these questions.

    To some brilliant thinkers, like Richard Dawkins, they are worse than a waste of time. What surprises me is that so many people who dislike the God 'meme', still attack it from within the same system. As Bateson points out, in order to do so, we must accept the laws of that system. Or, as Matthew Fox puts it, slaves remain in slavery as long as they continue to use the language of the slave-owners.

    For me, it is not enough to assert one side or another of the God debate. Even personal experience is not enough, either of 'presence' or of 'absence', particularly second- or third-hand experience.

    From my pov, the ball is squarely in the court of the theists - and I count myself among those who are more on that side of the court than the other. If the language in which we are presenting the meme is not persuasive, we must either change the language or question the meme itself.

    We need to ask ourselves - and not the opposition - to define what, precisely, we do mean. When HHDL refers, as he regularly does when addressing the West, to 'God', does he mean anything at all similar to the 'God' of the Catholics or the Muslims?

    We need to be clear when we are using metaphorical or allusive language. Indeed, I think that we need to clarify it for ourselves. There is a tendency to confuse the symbol with the symbolised.

    As I say, I find it hard to credit that something which has occupied so much human energy for so much of human history and used so many resources is simply to be dismissed out of hand because we do not yet understand it.


    My thought on this whole question is first I'd have to understand why it's important to even know if there is a god or not. I mean, truly, what difference could it possibly make to know that one way or the other?

    Palzang
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited February 2007
    It is after all, one of the Four Imponderables the Buddha spoke about...
  • fofoofofoo
    edited February 2007
    Obviously,

    the Buddha did not merely believe in god(s) , he even affirmed their existence, like in MN 49


    Brahma, I know your goings and your splendour. Baka brahma has such powers and such splendour. Good sir, what do you know about my powers and splendour?

    As far as the moon and sun wield power illuminating, the directions,
    As far as the thousandfold world systems, you wield power,
    You know this world and the other world, and those with greed and without,
    And the movements of thoughts of beings `to be' here and there.


    Presumably, Brahma Bako is just a (very powerful) god, not God/G-D, so the question if Buddhists believe in God in a judeo-christian/islamic sense would probably be indeed no, nevertheless even the Buddha did not deny beings with supranatural powers which probably could be rightly labeld gods.

    Regards
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    The real question, fofoo, is whether Buddha really believed in those gods he spoke of, or was he simply speaking in the vernacular of the times to make his teachings understandable to people who believed in those gods? I'd vote for the latter, as in other places he quite clearly states that whether or not there is a god is irrelevant to his teachings.

    Palzang
  • fofoofofoo
    edited February 2007
    sorry to disagree Palzang:)

    I see it exactly the other way round. The language of the Dhamma was changed by humans thru times to make it understandable to new generations, while it was tried to preserve the core message ( four noble truths and the path).

    Regards
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    I think you miss my point, fofoo. Just as we have to put the Dharma into the modern vernacular so that modern people can understand it, so the Buddha had to put it in the vernacular of the day in order for people in that time to understand it. It's not different.

    Palzang
  • fofoofofoo
    edited February 2007
    Could be. While I agree that the path asks ourselves for action, I am not able to judge if believing in deities is a hindrance for liberation or if it can be supportive. There seems to be a difference between western and eastern Buddhists and also between different sects, I read about people praying to be reborn in the age of maitreya for instance. In any case, I understand Buddhism to tell us that the main thing we should rely on is ourselves, as the Dhammapada says:

    "Oneself, indeed, is one's saviour, for what other saviour would there be?.."

    Regards
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    I completely agree, fofoo. However, you have to go to people where they are. If someone only has the capability to pray to Buddha (or an image of Buddha) as a god, then that's where they're at. If someone only has the capability to pray that they are reborn in Shambhala, that's just where they're at. So you deal with them on that level. You don't tell them they're silly or stupid for having superstitious beliefs. Rather you respect them and honor them for having the merit even to do that. That's called skillful means. If the path isn't meaningful on some level, the person won't follow it at all.

    Palzang
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Palzang,

    Can you tell me a little bit more about being reborn in Shambhala? Just 'cuz I'm curious. I don't know anything about it.
  • ECMECM
    edited February 2007
    If there is "God" that means there is "us".

    Have you ever looked at the Fedex logo and seen the white arrow? (I am serious).

    But perhaps we are just looking in the wrong way. If we look one way, there is God, if we look-perceive in another way, a different kind of perception, then we will have a different view. How about God who is in the process?
  • VoidWhereProhibitedVoidWhereProhibited
    edited February 2007
    Dear Simon:

    Thank you so much for your clear beautiful post which you needlessly appoligized for as being "rambling".

    I appreciate your words on ecumenism, as well, and I need them, of course.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Well, Shambhala first of all is a mythical(?) Buddhist kingdom ruled by enlightened Chakravartin kings (the Rigdin kings). The entire country is in the form of a mandala with encircling mountains and the whole shtick. The legend is that under the reign of the 25th and final Rigdin king (I think we're on 23 or something now, so it won't be long, folks) there will be a "final conflict" between the forces of good (i.e. Dharma) and the forces of evil (i.e. Samsara), which, naturally, the good forces will win, and then there will be 1000 years of peace and bliss. It bears some resemblance to the story of Armageddon in the Bible and probably, like the Bible story, can trace at least some of its origins back to the Zoroastrian tale of the final battle between Ahura Mazda, the creator and lord of the world and the leader of the forces of light, and the forces of darkness, after which the old world will be burnt away to be replaced by a new world of light and goodness.

    I have received the Kalachakra initiation twice, once from Kalu Rinpoche in 1983 (I think) in New York City and once from H.H. Penor Rinpoche in Rochester, New York, back in the '90s. Part of the empowerment is the promise that once you have recieved this particular empowerment, you will be reborn in the Kingdom of Shambhala at the time of the final battle against evil, and in fact, you even receive the name that you will supposedly have in that life (since I got two names, does that mean I'll be twins?!)

    Of course, there are many ways to read this whole legend. Edwin Bernbaum wrote an excellent book on the subject called The Way to Shambhala that not only details the legend but explores the different levels of meaning it has. It's out of print, but you can still find copies at Amazon. It's quite a fascinating subject. Shambhala was where the Buddha first taught the Kalachakra cycle of teachings, which are said to be the very highest teachings. One who masters these teachings, for example, understands the true nature of space and time and develops the ability (siddha) of being able to move through time and space as if walking to the next room.

    The massive Kalachakra empowerments that are given by the Dalai Lama and other high lamas are meant mainly as peace blessings. To really get into the meat of the Kalachakra teachings requires years and years of retreat under the guidance of an accomplished master.

    Palzang
  • ECMECM
    edited February 2007
    Thanks Palzang. That was enlightening.
    ECM
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited February 2007
    That wonderful, strange and infuriating man Nicholas Roerich produced a number of 'Shambala' paintings. He was convinced that it existed and, perhaps, that he knew its location.

    Song of Shambala:


    from:
    http://www.roerich.org/wwp.html
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2007
    That's so totally fascinating, Palzang. Thank you so much for telling me about it.

    When I was a child I saw a movie called "Lost Horizon" that I became obsessed with and your explanation made me think of it again.

    I love that painting, Simon.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    The movie and book are based on the Shambhala legend, though obviously a bit skewed. Nichoas Roerich was indeed a character, Simon. Quite the oddball, but an interesting one. Sort of a Blavatsky groupie. He did indeed look all over Mongolia for Shambhala, as many people believe Mongolia fits the description given in the guidebooks to Shambhala. However, his conclusions about the Shambhalians fit more with Blavatsky's spiritualism than with the actual Shambhala teachings and legends.

    Palzang
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Oh, btw, if anyone might be interested in attending a Kalachakra initiation, H.H. Penor Rinpoche is giving one in Upstate New York at his retreat center June 24-July 1 of this year. You can find out more info here.

    Palzang
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Palzang wrote:
    The movie and book are based on the Shambhala legend, though obviously a bit skewed. Nichoas Roerich was indeed a character, Simon. Quite the oddball, but an interesting one. Sort of a Blavatsky groupie. He did indeed look all over Mongolia for Shambhala, as many people believe Mongolia fits the description given in the guidebooks to Shambhala. However, his conclusions about the Shambhalians fit more with Blavatsky's spiritualism than with the actual Shambhala teachings and legends.

    Palzang

    If you're ever in the Kullu Valley and have a chance to visit his house, it is well worth it.

    Despite his eccentricities, roerich was considered important to the emerging science of archaeology by Flinders Petrie. And the White House obviously thought him important: FDR hosted the signing of the "Roerich Pact":
    Pax Cultura
  • XraymanXrayman Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Nirvana wrote:
    QUESTION:

    Is it foolish to believe in God or a god if it by some means that belief liberates a part of you and helps you deal more confidently and producively with problems that come your way in life?




    hey Nirvy!

    my daughter received her first eucharist at school during mass (she attends a Catholic school)-she said it tastes like cardboard.

    Anyway, to your question,

    We encourage her to believe in God. I havent read anywhere or heard that she should be nasty, rude or violent in her Bible/Religious Education study notes. In fact the school has girls from 50 different nationalities and many different religions. The school was started by the Brigidine sisters (note: Brigid!).

    she prays and believes in God etc. my point is-If "God" can help you feel better and become a better person, then why not?

    However, for myself, I follow the buddhist path-so I tend to think that I'm responsible for all the problems and issues affecting me/ my family.

    cheers
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Sure, why not? Beats being a Republican!

    Palzang
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Simonthepilgrim wrote:
    If you're ever in the Kullu Valley and have a chance to visit his house, it is well worth it.

    I dunno, I just don't get down to the Kullu Valley as much as I used to, Simon.

    Palzang
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2007
    The school was started by the Brigidine sisters (note: Brigid!).

    Hey, cool, Xray!!
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    I had no idea you started an order of Catholic nuns, Brigid. You are amazing! :o

    Palzang
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    edited February 2007
    Oh, it's just a habit she's trying to shift.....

    Ba-dah-bum!
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Ha ha, er, ha.

    Palzang
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2007
    Palzang wrote:
    I had no idea you started an order of Catholic nuns, Brigid. You are amazing! :o

    Palzang
    I didn't know either! Wow! How cool am I? I'm not in love with the name Brigidines, though. I wonder what possessed me...?
  • BrigidBrigid Veteran
    edited February 2007
    federica wrote:
    Oh, it's just a habit she's trying to shift.....

    Ba-dah-bum!

    LOL and *groan*. :)
  • ansannaansanna Veteran
    edited February 2010
    one must has the wisdom to understand, at times the Buddha just speak in according to the (unelightened) minds of the people who asked the questions , and only rarely the buddha preached according to his own enlightened mind without someone asking the questions

    For the former it was because the Buddha clearly perceived them yet matured enough to understand the higher truth the enlightened mind has obtained,
    but it is far too complex for these suffering people raised to the level of understanding due to their karma and their dull minds were pre-occupied by the tospy turvy illusion of the reality that they are living in , they are just the the man who go an arrow shot to their heart, the immediate task is to save the man and not explaining how the arrow was able to shot into their body.
  • bluefaceblueface
    edited February 2010
    Is longing for 'the promised land' a form of grasping? Humble apologies. BF
  • ansannaansanna Veteran
    edited February 2010
    BF , if you do some study , you should know that the concept of Paradise actually derived from the ancient Persian religions
    Attested in it's Avesttan language as pairi.daêza-.<SUP> </SUP>The literal meaning of this Eastern Old Iranian language word is "walled (enclosure)",from pairi- "around" + -diz "to create, make".
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited February 2010
    ansanna wrote: »
    but it is far too complex for these suffering people raised to the level of understanding due to their karma and their dull minds were pre-occupied by the tospy turvy illusion of the reality that they are living in , they are just the the man who go an arrow shot to their heart, the immediate task is to save the man and not explaining how the arrow was able to shot into their body.

    Gosh . May I sit at your knee oh Lord of rarified amazingness? :lol: Sorry. it just tickled the funny bone, and Ive been enlightened too long.
  • FreudianFreudian
    edited February 2010
    With so many schools and sects of Buddhism how does one make a choice?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited February 2010
    Freudian wrote: »
    With so many schools and sects of Buddhism how does one make a choice?
    You may find this thread helpful.:)

    http://newbuddhist.com/forum/showpost.php?p=85078&postcount=1
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    edited March 2010
    ECM wrote: »
    If there is "God" that means there is "us".


    Speculating about God is a waste of time. Better to meditate!:p

    P
  • MountainsMountains Veteran
    edited March 2010
    I don't see this as an "either/or" choice. I grew up attending a Christian church (although I never "got" organized Christianity, and still don't). But as far back as I can remember being intellectually capable of pondering it, I've believed that what the monotheistic religions call "God" and what other spiritual traditions see as god or gods, spirit, or whatever name they put on it, it's all the same thing. I don't believe there's an old bearded white guy wearing flowing robes sitting in the clouds someplace, but I believe there is definitely a spiritual energy that is found in every atom of everything in the universe. A collective consciousness if you will. To me, and with the reading I've done on Buddhism, that seems to pretty well sum up what Buddhism says about consciousness. When the body dies, it's that energy/consciousness that continues on.

    Just my take on it..

    Mtns
  • wahaneebellywahaneebelly
    edited May 2010
    Well the Pope no longer speaks for the whole Christian world either but the Dalaim Lama is a signficant voice for Buddishm as Pope John 2 words were often for non-catholics.

    I don't think either the Dalai Lama or any Pope would think mixiing and watering down the religions like we tend to do in America is good for either faith. You really do need to make a choice for you can't serve two masters as the Bible clearly says now if your a professing christian one shouldn't have qualms with the BIble even if you don't answer to Pope or Dailia Lama.
  • JavelinJavelin
    edited May 2010
    I'm open to the idea that there may be a god or gods in the sense followers of other religions use the terms (in Buddhism, a god/deva is quite different). Still, there has never been enough evidence or rational/reasonable explanation from my perspective for the existence of one, so my mind has never latched on; never "believed".

    I follow the teachings and mode of practice that the Buddha taught because it ends suffering in the here-and-now. After my own suffering is put to an end, it would be toward the alleviation of that same suffering in others that would be my path.

    Each human can believe whatever they like, as long as the rest of society doesn't ostracize them for it (and even then, if willing to face that consequence). Humanity as a whole is not certain of anything.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    You're right, wahaneebelly, you should stick to whatever path you're on and not mix them for the best result...whoever Dailia Lama is (well, hello, dailia, hello dailia...). :)

    And Javelin, it is also important to help other sentient beings before you reach enlightenment, though of course you can't be of ultimate benefit until you do.

    Palzang
  • JavelinJavelin
    edited May 2010
    I meant that as well, but the kind of help is different. I can help people with math but I'm not that great at math so the effectiveness wouldn't be astounding. If I were a professor, such a great tutor could I be..... same with Buddhism.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Yeah, I know. I was just clarifying, not criticizing. :)

    Palzang
  • JavelinJavelin
    edited May 2010
    Same here, just clarifying. ;)
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Now I'm confused!:lol:

    Palzang
  • JavelinJavelin
    edited May 2010
    Would it help if confusion were only an illusion? Wait, no, that is the way things are...... and that doesn't help one bit, just makes it more confusing. Skip this part. In fact never play this scene again.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    What scene? ;)

    Palzang
  • JavelinJavelin
    edited May 2010
    A little SpaceBalls humor. Don't mind me. :)
  • Love-N-PeaceLove-N-Peace Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Hehehe

    All the best,
    Nikidoodle
  • budhabeebudhabee
    edited May 2010
    Canon wrote: »
    Hi, iam a bit confused about his whole thing, iam a christian but i wan tot practice the way of the buddist but i dont want to quit my other faith.....is this possible, i would also like to know what are the main foundations of buddism, does it include worshing some type of god..argh all of this is so confusing.

    Hi sweetie...my mother is devout Methadist. She is old. I want to go to church with her cause I don't want to cause her unnessary problems. She knows all my books are buddistic. But I see no harm in going to church with her. It is kinda fun actually. Its a good learning experience. There is a lot in Christianity that conforms to Buddism. It helps me understand their simular existence. I don't know how to label what I say. Like am I a Christain or am I a Buddist. I think I am both. I take the Christianity as not being as severe as it once was in days of old....where no one spared the rod. Believe you me....Corporeal punishment at that time was in vogue. So I had to wait for may a year later to get my feet under me again. It is still confusing to me though. Ah well...I like to see the smiles from those old people who strived and fought for their country in the best of lights. But I don't have to tell them anything about what I believe. It is not nessacery (sp..sorry) to bring up differenses. They need to desperitly (sp..) to hold on to what they have. So I just sit and listen and It is very nice group.
  • PalzangPalzang Veteran
    edited May 2010
    There is no reason one can't practice Christianity and also practice Buddhism. On a very profound level, once you get past all the god and jesus stuff, they're the same anyway. I once knew an Episcopalian bishop who also practiced Buddhist meditation. They're not contradictory.

    Palzang
  • Love-N-PeaceLove-N-Peace Veteran
    edited May 2010
    Things would be a lot simpler if people didn't feel they need labels, trust me :-/

    All the best
    Nickidoodle
  • KundoKundo Sydney, Australia Veteran
    edited May 2010
    LoveNPeace wrote: »
    Things would be a lot simpler if people didn't feel they need labels, trust me :-/

    All the best
    Nickidoodle

    QFT - I also <3 your piccie :)
This discussion has been closed.