An Investigation about God
mockeymind
Veteran
Hi to all. I just finished my evening meditation and instead of going to bed, I decided to take a walk since its already spring and the temperature is just quite right. Suddenly something came out from nowhere about God.
I know some buddhist may or may not believe in the creator God, In the same token I sometimes think that some people in three major religions does not believes in God as well. This may arise depending on experience, motivation, thinking etc.
Maybe it is a personal preference.
But what my mind gearing me is to look deeply how things unfolded to people, from being a believer of God to a non believer and vice versa. Is God really don't exist? or we just stop believing that there is God. I know for some people, they cannot comprehend life with out something to cling on (like God), that there is somebody up there taking care of them, loving them. It's there only "just reason" to keep it life moving.
Others maybe realized that there is no God at all, that it doesn't makes sense, that it is better to live life entirely on our own best knowledge what is good and what make sense. But for some maybe they just stop believing Him because of what painful experience they had in the past. They know He is there, but they just ditch God on the side and take matters on their own hands.
I could be wrong, but I believe that believing whether there is God or not is embedded in our beings. We don't have to put logic why to believe or not. It is just there and our being knows it from this life or the previous.
As a practicing buddhist, my being come to a platform that believing in the creator God or not isn't important. What is important at the present moment, the here and now is how to deal with suffering. Any thoughts? Thanks.
Comments
I like that you're thinking about it.
But I think a person who believes in a particular concept of God will look at suffering in a very different way than a Buddhist.
@vinlyn But I think a person who believes in a particular concept of God will look at suffering in a very different way than a Buddhist.
For some suffering is a result of defiance to God, which I believe God has nothing to do with it. I look at suffering as a result of karma, a natural order things. In suffering there is a tremendous power to know ones strength and wisdom, with right view this is can also be a path to freedom.
When we flip our view towards it, it no longer much like suffering, but an opportunity.
I'm not speaking for myself. Just pointing out what many Christians would think -- that God will cure their suffering.
Generally speaking, I don't think God is a micromanager.
I don't believe in a god, at least not as presented by the Jew-Christian tradition.
The notion never made sense, never added up.
It is precisely in the face of suffering that I believe even less, because if a God who loves you can't stop the world from suffering, he can't be almighty, so what do I need him for?
And if he really exists and allows for suffering to happen, then he can't love you that much.
One of my Christian friends prays all the time.
When her prayers get fulfilled, it was the will of God.
When they don't, it was the will of God.
If dukkha is going to take place independently of God answering your prayers or not, why not eliminate the middleman?
I don't need to find an explanation to the origin of the universe in order to be happy.
Dependent origination is enough of an explanation to me.
It is by working on the 4 NT and the N8P, that dukkha will cease.
And no God-notion will see me out of dukkha: I have to tread the path myself.
I always say "God needs us, but we don't need God."
Not at least, if we are strong and resilient enough to stand on our own two feet.
Some people have God, I have Buddhadharma.
Today I think..
God is just us. We are all of God. We all represent the other.
Nothing needing to be embraced, ignored or rejected.
Trusting God to do something, or not, is like the hubris of one cell of our body trusting us to do something, or not.
No deification of God or ourselves required.
Any separation or connectedness between ourselves, others or God resides with the beholder.
And that's the biggest issue I have with the typical Christian view of God. If he's going to do whatever he wants, why should anyone pray?
Sounds like a plan. Cod or God not required. Phew one less thing to worry about ...
I think God is a comforting fiction. But what do we want, is it truth or comfort?
I have a very detailed belief system pertaining to the existence and manifestation of this thing called God.
Developing that very detailed belief system pertaining to the existence and manifestation of this thing called God has yielded no beneficial results as far as I can tell.
@mockeymind
From a personal view point, a belief in a creator god with all the trappings that tend to go with such a belief,( I'm on about the Abrahamic religions points of view) would serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever when it comes to practising the BuddhaDharma...I feel it would be just more excess baggage to contend with....
This is how I personally see a god-centric belief that has become attached to Buddhist practice, others may take great comfort in holding such beliefs...whatever floats ones raft ( and keeps it afloat) I guess...
I think the issue is that humans create an image of god through their minds. We know our minds create all sorts of fantasy beliefs that have nothing to do with experiential reality. This is why people imbue human qualities onto god.
I wouldn't be so bold as to say there isn't a god, but not a god our human minds can comprehend.
There is some sort of 'intelligent' energy( for lack of a better word) that is creating each moment.
Humans don't even understand how they work, how are they going to understand a god.
There is a person who asked a buddhist if he believes in God or not.
The buddhist replied, well what is God to you?
And the person answered,
God is peace, merciful, compassionate, kind, loving, generous etc.
The buddhist smiled and said, Those are some of the qualities that we are developing in
the practice, would that makes us a believer in God?
God = good? Not all believe in "good". My son boggled my mind when suggesting that chaos only evolved because order has evolved in this universe. Without order, there would not be so much chaos. Without good, there would not be so much evil?
4NT: Life entails suffering (evil)
Good = the N8P?
I have no evidence that the N8P will work for me. But I have faith that it will reduce overall suffering if I incorporate it into my daily life. That's why I say I believe - and I use the words "in a power greater than me" as this seems to have less associations than the word "God". But guess this is contrary to Buddhist beliefs too - that there is some power greater than me?
~ http://www.bps.lk/olib/mi/mi017-p.html, paras 39-44
As I understand it, this is a "false view":
~ ibid para 51
Not sure whether I've got this right or not
... but I do love the simplicity of Christianity:
Perhaps Buddhism is just 2? But I'm guessing not ... my impression is that it's a whole lot more than that.
Yes, I think there is a lot of this going on: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism
People have many different conceptions of "God", everything from hard-core Abrahamic monotheism through to nice woolly pantheism, which is sort of theism-lite or in some cases closet atheism.
I'm afraid I really don't bother investigating God at all, one way or another.
personally, having been brought up a RC and then not believing a word about this entity we were supposed to worship and respect, subsequently moving to Buddhism, I have learnt that cogitating on the unknowable is for me, a total waste of time, better spent doing more constructive things.
God exists? I'm not bothered.
God doesn't exist? I'm not bothered.
We shall see.
Until then, I have beans to plant and a lemon cake to bake....
I think everyone needs to learn how to forgive their god(s). And for my money, that forgiveness comes through practice.
By "forgive their gods," I mean that anyone interested in spiritual endeavor (or even not) begins with beliefs and concepts. It's not good or bad, it's just a lifelong habit to believe and conceive and explain and find meaning.
Beliefs and concepts are items that separate individuals from what they believe or conceive ... man from god, this from that, holy from unholy, etc. So the very technique used to draw things together and disperse doubt actually holds them at bay and foments doubt.
OK, pick your god, pick your concept, pick your path to relief and salvation. How else is anyone to set foot on the path? Never mind guys like the old Zen teacher Obaku who would excoriate the "concepts" and "beliefs" his student monks might ask him about. Everyone begins at the beginning. So ... concepts and beliefs ... god, money, one-night stands, intellectual prowess.
In practice, concepts and beliefs inspire at first and only later create nooses of sorrow and confusion. Practice -- my preference is meditation -- nourishes a body of experience that has less and less truck with that which separates or distinguishes or doesn't separate or doesn't distinguish. Experience is fershur where beliefs and concepts, no matter how gussied up they may be, invariably shudder like aftershocks in Nepal.
Bit by bit, practice after practice, the willingness and capability to forgive the gods of the past grows up. It's OK ... how, save through foolishness, could anyone establish their wisdom? So it seems to me we can bless the gods we've chosen even if we learn a thing or two about relying on them.
If any of that makes much sense.
None of those lead to a universal creator though.
I'm like an omnitheist sometimes whereas I can see every god that was ever imagined to exist existing on some level.
I do enjoy exploring these avenues even if they turn out to be nothing more than happy distractions.
Telling me not to ponder the great mystery is like telling me not to smell the roses.
Or eat some forbidden fruit
Dear @yagr: you have very elegantly and succintly explained my own definiton of God.
Most people I know with a strong Christian belief in God don't even really believe they are suffering. It is all God's will, and no matter how much they do suffer, they refuse to acknowledge it as such because all is God's will and will have a good outcome (heaven) no matter what.
Also, just an observation, but most people I know are very distracted by God. Their religious practices and belief in God is a huge distraction from reality and I think that is part of why they cling so strongly. They have moments of what they refer to as "weakness" when they feel a sense of injustice (loved one dies of cancer, or whatever) but they correct quickly and go back to their "God is good. We don't always know His ways, but we don't have to because He loves us" way of thinking.
Good luck.
My fear of the existence of a God propelled me to search for truth, I knew even if I stopped believing in one it doesn't mean a creator doesn't exist, and I didn't know which God exists, whether it was the Christian God or the Muslim God, I eventually I found the Buddha and his teachings, I discovered the teaching of Anatta, and my worries and fear melted away, I discovered that there is not a self to be found, therefore no soul, and no God, it was through directly seeing for myself.
It is funny when i think about how it all started for me, I heard a family member say about someone, so and so is a God fearing man, and I think to myself well if he was so afraid of a God then that fear should have made him want to search for truth, to see if there is such a thing.
I knew from an early age I couldn't worship the cruel and vindictive God of Abraham and Job, even if he was real. It always puzzled me how such a being could love you, and then condemn you to eternal torture for refusing to worship him. These issues, and hypocrisy in the various churches I ran across made me turn to atheism for a long time, and caused a general loathing of Christianity in me. I now view this as a hindrance, and am working on "forgiving my god", though I'm not sure that's exactly what @genkaku meant.
My beliefs contrast sharply with my fiancee, who is Wiccan and believes that the "universe loves her". Though she does not worship one deity in particular, she believes that she can appeal to the universe (in the form of various deities, or perhaps archetypes) for aid in troubled times. This seems to be the sort of "God" that the original poster is referring to. However, I believe in an uncaring universe that regards me not, and has no sentience or feelings about what becomes of my life. To be honest, I'm not sure how this squares with the numerous deities and boddhisatvas that exist in Buddhist belief. I think a man like Stephen Batchelor would agree with my world view, but I don't necessarily think the Dalai Lama would. However, I also believe that it really doesn't matter to the end game - overcoming dukkha.
Nicely written, nakazcid.
I think, as far as I have been made to understand, that these are representations of specific qualities, rather than solid, 'in-their-own-right' deities themselves....
Mind training tools so to speak
It it her who 'loves the universe' through the intermediary of deities. The Tantrists do something similar. The difference is in Buddhist Tantra the deities are visualised and dismissed as skilful and temporary conjugations ... mmm ... not so different from 'the Wyrding Way'
OM TARE TUTARE TURE SOHA (Buddhist Gal Power)
My teacher believes that the universe comes to us from its own side as part of the refuge. So awakening is the nature of the universe rather than a funny thing random happening in smarter chimps.
I met a lot of Tibetan Buddhists who thought of them as being real.
Yes. I think it's a bit like the different Realms of Existence..... different PoVs....
Yeah, it's basically traditional v. secular.
People want both.
For whatever reason, and I am on the "truth" side of the argument (who's truth) people have a need for meaning and transcendence, something beyond this mortal coil. The plain truth that we are evolved creatures living in a very uncaring universe is too hard a proposition for most.
In terms of truth, what is considered truth in terms of one's life?
"as you think so you become" that is truth to me. So I may hold a "comforting fiction" as true, what does it matter if this notion is empirically true as long as it strengthens my life and motivates me? I could believe in rebirth, not falsifiable by any means, and yet this belief may be a springboard to do good works, to be ethical and noble in conduct and in acting this way my life and those around me will benefit.
You iz liar @Theswingisyellow - that's the truth ... and we haz plan!
As an atheist trancendist, I believe Cod is beyond her own non-existence. A sort of fishyness without scales to weigh The Way.
In other words believe not in what you know, like the Hinayana little wheelies but believe in a Nothing that is full of 'its' emptiness.
Or as the Mahayana paradoxically say, 'Emptiness is form and form is Gone Beyond the Emptiness' ...
"GOD" is just a yardstick to measure( or co-opt) the human condition.
Just imagine how different our history might have been had we
understood that " God", was just another word for selflessness.
My understanding from reading the Dharma is that this is how the Buddha viewed it too.
First get the arrow out, then maybe our god questions would have been a answered.
Some people say enlightenment is meeting god. Papaji says God is not the object. God is the subject.
I lol'd. Nice reference
"Thus in the [Pali Canon] Kevaddha Sutta he relates how a monk who was puzzled by a metaphysical problem applied to various gods and finally accosted Brahma himself in the presence of all his retinue. After hearing the question, which was "Where do the elements cease and leave no trace behind?"
"Brahma replies, "I am the Great Brahma, the Supreme, the Mighty, the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Controller, the Creator, the Chief of all, appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all that are and are to be." "But," said the monk, "I did not ask you, friend, whether you were indeed all you now say, but I ask you where the four elements cease and leave no trace." Then the Great Brahma took him by the arm and led him aside and said, "These gods think I know and understand everything. Therefore I gave no answer in their presence. But I do not know the answer to your question and you had better go and ask the Buddha."
^^^ @Jayantha wot are those Hinayanists teaching you!
Is this monk humour? Perhaps propaganda against Hindu superstition replaced with dharma upmanship?
Maybe God is no use for anything? Seems about right ... only for the post-godly ...
As I said to the Buddha only this morning, 'never talk with your mindful'
It matters if one is serious about pursuing the truth.
Concerning the creator deity/first cause argument I can see no evidence of such a thing and much for the contrary.
If there was nothing but God then there must still be nothing but God for where else would the raw materials come from except from God? That's more like an assigning of roles than a creating.
If there was a time of nothing then there was no potential for anything and there would still be nothing.
-It seems to me believing in a first cause flipper of the switch and being a Buddhist are not necessarily mutually exclusive...
Who's truth? Good luck in chasing that phantasm , in my experience we all arrive at our own " comforting fiction" and call it truth.
Buddhist practice is about seeing things how they really are, not grasping at comforting truths.
"If a person has conviction, his statement, 'This is my conviction,' safeguards the truth. But he doesn't yet come to the definite conclusion that 'Only this is true; anything else is worthless.' To this extent, Bharadvaja, there is the safeguarding of the truth. To this extent one safeguards the truth. I describe this as the safeguarding of the truth. But it is not yet an awakening to the truth."
Canki Sutta from Access to Insight
To me the 4NTs are really the truth, but there are obviously many folks who wouldn't agree with me.
@Theswingisyellow, that is an important point.
It's all to easy for people to say they have an "open mind" or that they are "seeking the truth", and yet then they close off certain avenues of exploration all too easily. Despite changes in the way Americans are viewing religion, 90% of Americans still believe in God. And it isn't restricted to Americans.
One of the most interesting studies done on world attitudes toward God was done by the Pew Research Center, and can be read about here: http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/03/13/worldwide-many-see-belief-in-god-as-essential-to-morality/.
I disagree totally with the underlying premise that a belief in God is essential to morality. But it does seem as if all societies do base (and need to base) their moral system on something.
I remember my first visit to Thailand when I became fascinated with how Buddhism dominates Thai life, to the point that 95% of the Thais profess a belief in Buddhism (that's 63,000,000 people). And I was further fascinated that some awfully poor people seemed content in their lives due to Buddhism. And, I knew, vaguely, that Buddhism was found in various regions of Asia, and not just restricted to Thailand. So, I wasn't about to dismiss this religion that was pretty-much new to me. I wanted to actually learn more. Eventually I came to accept many of the basic teachings of Buddhism.
Later, due to family considerations, I tried to learn about Islam. But, after wading through a big part of the Qur'an, I learned that I could not accept many basic premises there. That doesn't mean that I reject out of hand all teachings of Islam, but I haven't found any that are personally helpful to me.
I have no problem with atheism. What I have a problem with is atheists who denigrate through snide remarks a belief in god, or gods, or any other religion, particularly when they do so while in hiding behind an imaginary and anonymous non-identity...and then are insulted when someone does the same basic thing regarding their own beliefs/religion. I'm not talking about discussing or critiquing in a respectful manner. I'm not even talking about out-and-out disagreeing in a respectful manner.
So I go back to part of your comment: "asserting what one knows what one does not and cannot know", which is really what agnosticism is all about -- that "the view that the truth values of certain claims – especially metaphysical and religious claims such as whether or not God, the divine, or the supernatural exist – are unknown and perhaps unknowable". That seems like a perfectly valid viewpoint, and one that I admire.
it's always interesting to me how countries cling to their supposed moral codes, and then practice such immoral things on a regular basis. Yet they (individuals as well as country identities as a whole) don't see them as conflicting at all.
Very true, @karasti. But I also see that happening with the 5 Precepts.
I think it comes down to that few things in life are "easy" or "simple". There are complexities that muddy the waters.
When I was principal, we had a faculty advisory council. It was very interesting to watch how the teachers operated. Amazing how even with dealing with children there was very much a crime and punishment attitude. And if something came up where there wasn't already a "rule", they wanted to add a new rule. There was an inability to relax and an obsession with control. Sorta like most religions. And then there was an obsession with following the rules to the letter, even when it made no sense. I remember that the faculty advisory council developed an Honor Code when I was vice principal. Overall it was good, but a little heavy on the punishment side of things. One day a teacher (who I later decided was Asperger) turned the first child in under the new honor code...a boy named Jerome. He swore up and down that he wasn't cheating. The teacher swore up and down that he was. Convicted! The boy got a zero and it went on his record, but it ruined his 2 years of junior high. A couple years later, the faculty advisory council was reviewing the Honor Code (wanting to make it tougher!), and the same teacher recalled Jerome's case and said, "I don't really think he was technically cheating. I think he asked the girl next to him for a kleenex. But, if you talk during a test, you are cheating." How I kept my head from exploding, I don't know. But I reamed that teacher out because talking during a test may deserve a consequence, but it is not cheating. But everyone in every society -- including the society of the school -- brings their own baggage to the table.
Sure, it's difficult, but clinging to irrational beliefs like God makes it even more difficult.