The buddhist concept of God

Spirituality Religion
#1

Buddhism differs from the other big religions by not really mentioning God. There’s mention of gods, naturally, there were so many to pick from at the time, but they’re all treated as less important than humans even. In a way one can see already here that buddhism at heart is a mono-theistic religion. With that one exception that it doesn’t really mention God.

:slight_smile:

But just because you choose not to mention something directly in plain words doesn’t mean you deny it. Buddha spoke of the ultimate, of that which isn’t born and does not die. Clearly this is a man who belives in God, in something we could call “the highest” (be it the highest being or the highest state of being).

I think buddhsim was presented in the West by people who had their own (sometimes good) reasons for not liking Christianity and who very much wanted buddhism to be “the religion for atheists”. I was of that opinion myself for a long time. I’ve changed my mind.

One part of that was when I saw buddhsim as it is practiced in Sri Lanka, a country that prides itself of keeping the old, orthodox tradition “as it is”. Here if anywhere you’d find “buddhism in its purest form”, and as such it wouldn’t have any worship or rituals, right? Wrong! It’s a religion just like any other and for the same reason as all the others, we need it to comfort ourselves because most of us live very tough lives.

Another thing that changed my mind was reading Nagarjuna, seeing how he refused to make any certain statement about anything, leaving me with a vision of the universe that was like thin smoke, something that could dissolve in any second, something that didn’t really exist… and yet, there was something so solid about this universe, becasue it was so real, it was there, right in front of me and like Nagarjuna I couldn’t describe it.

How do you describe God? How do you describe that for which we really don’t have any words? Most religions have chosen to give that a name, some even to make it into a person, and buddhism simply chose not to say anything about it because God is what is there when the rest is gone and everyone is silent.

#2

[QUOTE=Terse;52282]How do you describe God? How do you describe that for which we really don’t have any words? Most religions have chosen to give that a name, some even to make it into a person, and buddhism simply chose not to say anything about it because God is what is there when the rest is gone and everyone is silent.[/QUOTE]

This is going to sound very abstract, but firstly, I don’t see why we’d what to deliberately believe in something that we have no real clear evidence for. God is usually brought into one existence via an experience, or an emotional reason… which is very unreliable… however, to climb aboard the hippie train, which I rarely do, I have been beginning to question why reward comes through effort. Why do we have to do painful exercise in order to look attractive, why do we have to eat bland, dry protein, and raw leaves and vegetation to stay healthy. Why is it that all the things we want, requires us to almost go through a test in a sense… anyway, on the Buddhist thing, I do like Buddhism, I like how it can fit in with Atheism, except for the karma and rebirth stuff, oh yeah, and ‘enlightenment’ lol… I do like Buddhist meditation too. It’s like giving your mind a spring clean. I hope some of what I said addressed your question.

#3

[I]Buddhism differs from the other big religions by not really mentioning God. There’s mention of gods, naturally, there were so many to pick from at the time, but they’re all treated as less important than humans even. [/I]

[B]Less Important than Humans? I see this as misconception on your part. The Teaching as I understand it is that Human birth is most precious, more precious than a God, for with the human existence can one achieve liberation. Whereas with the incarnation as a god this is not possible. Thats how I understand it.

Now we must ask. What is Liberation? [/B]

I[I]n a way one can see already here that buddhism at heart is a mono-theistic religion. With that one exception that it doesn’t really mention God.[/I]

[B]Really? Monotheistic? When it mentions all the gods? [/B]

:slight_smile:

[I]But just because you choose not to mention something directly in plain words doesn’t mean you deny it. [/I]

[B]I would tend to agree with this notion. [/B]

[I]Buddha spoke of the ultimate, of that which isn’t born and does not die. Clearly this is a man who belives in God, in something we could call “the highest” (be it the highest being or the highest state of being). [/I]

[B]Clearly? Hmmm again I think perhaps your own notions are clouding your view. That is not to say Buddha didn’t know of God. My hint is to look always at the Buddhas words in the Context of the teachings and it’s aims. [/B]

#4

[QUOTE=YogiAdam;52283]Why do we have to do painful exercise in order to look attractive, why do we have to eat bland, dry protein, and raw leaves and vegetation to stay healthy. [/QUOTE]

Even though you disregard ‘the law of karma’, ‘sewing and reaping’, or as it more perfectly called ‘dependent origination’ within the Buddhadharma as hog wash - you have just clearly stated I do this, that happens.

Which is the workings of the law you refute. LOL

This is because the law is real, whether you refute it or not and a small fraction of it’s workings can be viewed within the material nature. This is the beginning of understanding of cause and effect, the law of karma as some call it.

I do this. That Happens. I don’t do that. That doesn’t occur.

Sound familiar?

#5

Truth is Buddhist can believe in God if they so choose. Many Buddhist do, many do not. But all Buddhists believe suffering is more important that God. God cannot end suffering. Only humans can.

The Buddha felt is was useless to theorize about God. Yet he did not deny God’s existence. The creation of the universe in Buddhism, can be explained through science, not religion. And Buddhists do not believe in a permanent soul that is physical in nature as everything is impermanent.

#6

Great topic. Well said by all. I follow most religions, but do not follow a specific doctrine. Each discription of God can change from one culture to the next. The Infinite can be found not in the differences, but the similarities of the various religions. All the books teach of gods, reincarnation, wisdom, life after death, consequences for actions, and of a Source and Creative Energy that brings life to all things. Heaven is Nirvana. One does not go to heaven, but grows to heaven.
Doctrines can twist one’s perception if not understood independently. It took a combination of eastern discipline, and western faith to truly experience God everyday for me. To each his own. One cannot see what he is not looking for. It goes away quick and is obsorbed by the material world if not sought after everyday. It brings amazing signs and unbelievable coincidences. Dreams become symbolic insight for the true meaning of life.
I find following one religion is like a politician who votes with his party rather than following the constitution. Buddhism hasn’t been altered like most…being so young, and gives a “hands on approach” to Life. My opinion based on my experience.

#7

[QUOTE=The Scales;52286][I]Buddhism differs from the other big religions by not really mentioning God. There’s mention of gods, naturally, there were so many to pick from at the time, but they’re all treated as less important than humans even. [/I]

[B]Less Important than Humans? I see this as misconception on your part. The Teaching as I understand it is that Human birth is most precious, more precious than a God, for with the human existence can one achieve liberation. Whereas with the incarnation as a god this is not possible. Thats how I understand it.

Now we must ask. What is Liberation? [/B]

I[I]n a way one can see already here that buddhism at heart is a mono-theistic religion. With that one exception that it doesn’t really mention God.[/I]

[B]Really? Monotheistic? When it mentions all the gods? [/B]

:slight_smile:

[I]But just because you choose not to mention something directly in plain words doesn’t mean you deny it. [/I]

[B]I would tend to agree with this notion. [/B]

[I]Buddha spoke of the ultimate, of that which isn’t born and does not die. Clearly this is a man who belives in God, in something we could call “the highest” (be it the highest being or the highest state of being). [/I]

[B]Clearly? Hmmm again I think perhaps your own notions are clouding your view. That is not to say Buddha didn’t know of God. My hint is to look always at the Buddhas words in the Context of the teachings and it’s aims. [/B][/QUOTE]

Monotheistic in the sense that the kind of concept of God that buddhism eventually develops (because the Buddha himself didn’t say much about it) is one that points to “the ultimate reality”, one truth, one thing. That’s monotheism to me, monotheism at heart if not in words.

Buddhism just never pointed to one personal God but there are many other concepts of God. I think we often compare too much with Christianity.

Yes, I let my own notions cloud my view. It’s how I roll.

#8

I have always thought that one of the hindrances to moksa according to Buddhists , indeed one of the last fixed ideas to let go of was a beleif in God . Certainly a single creator God , but I will try to find out a source for this , Strangely I have spent most of my adult life being adverse to god although thinking it would be more comfortable to beleive in God , ie life would be more easy to at least to have a faith in God , kind of lets me of the hook. I now feel more comfortable with the word , and if people get sustenance in the belief of this God thing then thats fine by me , I even use the word myself sometimes , but in an energetic/ conciousness/awareness way , I might even be getting a bit fluffy .

#9

[QUOTE=charliedharma;52408]I have always thought that one of the hindrances to moksa according to Buddhists , indeed one of the last [B]fixed ideas[/B] to let go of was a beleif in God . Certainly a single creator God , but I will try to find out a source for this , Strangely I have spent most of my adult life being adverse to god although thinking it would be more comfortable to beleive in God , ie life would be more easy to at least to have a faith in God , kind of lets me of the hook. I now feel more comfortable with the word , and if people get sustenance in the belief of this God thing then thats fine by me , I even use the word myself sometimes , but in an energetic/ conciousness/awareness way , I might even be getting a bit fluffy .[/QUOTE]

The Bold above is what I am thinking (right now) is what they meant by "should be let go of."
That is not to IMPLY nihilism. Nihilism is error.

For the laws of cause and effect, as they say, are never a fraud.

Life would be ‘easier’ i suppose if one made understanding of ‘cause and effect’ (which is in actuality a very deep subject) a topic of much contemplation and focus.

#10

[QUOTE=Terje;52386]Monotheistic in the sense that the kind of concept of God that buddhism eventually develops (because the Buddha himself didn’t say much about it) is one that points to “the ultimate reality”, one truth, one thing. That’s monotheism to me, monotheism at heart if not in words.

Buddhism just never pointed to one personal God but there are many other concepts of God. I think we often compare too much with Christianity.

Yes, I let my own notions cloud my view. It’s how I roll.[/QUOTE]

again I would have to say that “the words of the Buddha” must be analyzed in the context of the buddhadharma’s aim - which is singular.

#11

Its not that they don’t have a conception of “God” (the Divine is a better word to use). Its that they [B]don’t care[/B], so stop trying to define their philosophy for them. Leave them alone and please keep your Westernized biases to yourself.

#12

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;52446]Its not that they don’t have a conception of “God” (the Divine is a better word to use). Its that they [B]don’t care[/B], so stop trying to define their philosophy for them. Leave them alone and please keep your Westernized biases to yourself.[/QUOTE]

Ironic.

#13

[QUOTE=The Scales;52448]Ironic.[/QUOTE]

How so?

#14

[QUOTE=Nietzsche;52466]How so?[/QUOTE]

I knew you would ask that. Before I clicked “'view post.”

Your response “flashed” across my mind.

In response to your query young tiger…

“Your got a decent intellect. Work it out for yourself.”

#15

[QUOTE=charliedharma;52408]I have always thought that one of the hindrances to moksa according to Buddhists , indeed one of the last fixed ideas to let go of was a beleif in God .[/QUOTE]

Having a cincept of God doesn’t mean you have a fixed idea in the form of a belief in Him, expecially since the buddhist concept of God is very, very far from anything that could be called Him or Her or even It. Just because you think there is something that can be called “the ultimate reality” doesn’t mean you start to worship it, but it doesn’t mean either that you ahve to deny it just becasue it is in fact a concept of God, just not in the Christian sense of the word.

Did that make any sense? It’ls late, I’m tired and there’s a revolution going on in Libya, writing about the buddhist concept of God seems sort of silly right now but then again I do a lot of silly things.