Why Do Buddhists Reject the Concept of God?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 13 พ.ค. 2024
- Consider a religion that challenges the concept of God, proposing that the path to Enlightenment lies within our own hearts and minds. Brace yourself as we explore Buddhism, igniting significant controversy over the ages. Greetings seekers of wisdom! Today, we embark on a journey to answer one of the most provocative queries in spiritual history: why do Buddhists not embrace belief in God? This video isn't about advocating any specific agenda or disrespecting anyone's beliefs. Buddhism thrives on free inquiry and questioning, even its own tenets. Whether you're devout, skeptical, or simply intrigued by diverse perspectives, you're in the right place.
Our aim is to delve deep into this topic, challenge assumptions, and expand our minds to new horizons. Let's begin by defining our terms. When we mention God, we typically refer to an omnipotent omniscient Creator governing the universe. However, here's the crux: The Buddha himself seldom dwelled on this notion; his focus was more on alleviating human suffering in the present rather than speculating about ultimate origins. In fact, when questioned about God and cosmos' nature, he often chose silence deeming such inquiries irrelevant to liberation's path.
Fast forward through centuries and witness most Buddhist traditions embracing a non-theistic perspective. Yet this doesn't denote atheism necessarily; some Buddhists uphold belief in various deities and supernatural entities viewing them as symbolic representations of enlightened qualities rather than almighty creators.
#Buddhism #Spirituality
![ทททททททท #27 [หลุยส์ เค โตมายังไง ณ สระบุรี]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CaKoYw_Xmtg/mqdefault.jpg)
![[TH] VCT Masters Shanghai Playoffs DAY 1 // 100T vs FUT | FNC vs GEN](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/erQ7pGChzxA/mqdefault.jpg)
Buddha did the best thing. Instead of telling people what to believe in he emphasized growth through one's own spiritual journey. My greatest respects for all Buddhists!
To find Christ from within, that is to seek to understand yourself and develop a respect and love for yourself and use this as a source of reflection upon how your actions will be perceived and received by others. True understanding of your suffering comes through empathetic reciprocal actions to others, all life forms experience pain just like one another.
Sadness in Buddhism means the risk you are in. You can become an animal next life. After that getting a human life is very hard. You can make money but live without being too attracted to it what Buddhism teaches you because you have to leave them anyway the moment your heart stops beating.
Exactly that one fact sets it apart and head and shoulders above all the other abrahamic religions that rely on a storybook. 😖
Mean every research on this earth in invention of buddha. Then how do you define buddha. As siddharta or???
@@ravindrakini1809 The Buddha, just like Krishna, Christ, the Mahdi, the Mashiach, Odin, Zeus and Ra are acts of existence, not existence itself as is regardless of acts. That's why you never observe them in the real world, because they are references to the observer.
Buddha said explicitly in the Pali Canon: “there is no overlord to protect you. You have to be your own refuge”
You got that wrong
@@tonyg3091one thing is sure, all these man made fictional God doesn't matter,
@@dreamadventure8220 LOL, careful with that, you my be in for a nasty surprise. Brahma (and the Christian equivalent), Mara, Yama etc are all very very real. Lord Buddha said so himself and I have no reason to doubt anything The Buddha has said.
@@tonyg3091 Ya, Buddha twitted that few years back before Elon Musk take-over.
I was raised to pray to God to find Happiness. Buddhism taught me only I can create happiness within myself! Buddhism taught me to be responsible and hold myself accountable for my actions. I still believe in a Greater Power, but Buddhism spoke to me and made me understand how Karma hits you in the face NOW!!
Buddhism neither rejects or accepts the concept of God. To the Buddha it was an unimportant topic that had no direct benefit to one seeking ultimate liberation. He insisted on focusing strictly on reality as it is presented, not how you or anyone else thinks it is.
It is clear that to the Buddha he did not understand that he is nothing without THE creator.
@@mixit247
lf So, why Buddha exist ?
Seems to me that Buddhist agnosticism in practical terms is extremely close to advaita vedanta aka non dualist theism and the most ascetic variants of Shivaism (like Kashmir Shivaism).
In practical terms, both advocate for individual search and direct experience. If you go to a Buddhist country you will see why Buddhism is still considered a religion, as very few practitioners behave differently than typical devotees and every temple has a statue of Buddha that people pray to as if it was a God. But true practitioners of Buddhism, Hinduism, Sufism, Kabbalah, Christian Mysticism, Shamanism are all very similar, and through meditation and direct experience they will eventually reach liberation following different paths but with a very similar pattern.
That's why there are elevated beings (Khrishna, Buddha, Moses, Confucius, Jesus, Mohammed, Ramakrishna, Bill Hicks...) of all religions and cultures
@@mixit247 Buddha stated that he is indeed nothing. The person we call the Buddha, is a false conceptualization of reality.
@@rolandalcid7127 Which Buddha are you attributing the quality you call existence to?
Yes, I agree based on my own experiences. I come coming from Buddhist family; however, as young man I did took serious interest in studies or learn about religion meaning at later times. When I went to United States, especially, country with profound Christian Faith. I introduced to Christian culture; However, I was not feel enlightenment. I said this doesn’t mean disrespect to Christ or people with Christian, but rather, my experiences participated of my own experiences. I found that I rather confess in Buddhist faith than Christian. I feel more free of oneself in Buddhist teachings than Christian. Both religions are complex. Therefore, I respectfully of all faith as long as people practice freely without judging other religions or instigating violent. Thanks for posting this video? Namaste!!! Blessed all faith on earth!
No need to be afraid of discussing other religion in a rational way. Only christianity or monotheistic religion used dogmatic approach prohibit people from even discussing or challenging their blind faith, to claim that faith is a taboo which is not to be discussed or queried or argued or challenged
Buddhism and The Buddha don't actually challenge the concept of God. They simply don't focus on God or gods in general. They do not care if they exist or not because it doesn't matter if you are unable to control your own behavior and mental state to wholesomeness and wisdom. What use is the knowledge that heaven and hell exists, if you don't adopt a pure life in deed and thought? You're in a desert and you walk next to an oasis knowing that there is life saving water... and you keep on walking and even running because you think it's more important to get to some place you have set in your mind... then you die from dehydration and regret that you did not stop to drink during your journey.
Actually, Buddhists do challenge the concept of God. Buddhism is based on the bundle theory of mind, as distinct from the ego theory of mind. So, it's not only that there isn't some massive ego in control of the world, there are also no egos in control of individual humans. All of reality, as with the mind, is an aggregate that is mistaken as a coherent singular thing.
@@MarmaladeINFP - That is not challenging the concept of god(s). What you're writing about is about psychology and the idea that god(s) control everything in the universe vs. the mind controls everything. But in Buddhism, god(s) are merely other life forms in the vast ocean of types in existence in all realms and they too are subject to all mental unwholesome states, they too are impermanent and liable to suffering. So it doesn't matter if they exist or not, if they don't get their act together and work towards liberation from samsara.
@@MarmaladeINFP No Buddhism is all about escaping the reincarnation cycle, that is the very core.
"Buddhists do challenge the concept of God" this is a sect of Buddhism that strays away from Buddha's teachings, they do not do enlightenment.
@@jameswatson5807 what?? You are from Buddhist teaching,
@@dreamadventure8220 Not really I have looked deep into Hinduism and Buddhism I do lot of deep meditation I am very near to enlightenment.
I understand why Buddha sees reincarnation to this planet as suffering, but I semi disagree with him he is only looking at it from one point of view.
Yes the human experince can come with a lot of pain and a lot of that depends where an when you reincarnate.
Say you was a African in west Africa and your tribe lost a war, the winners sold you, and the others to say the British.
They put you on ships to be sold in the new world, now that life time will be full of suffering lets keep it real.
But what you do not know many beings would love to incarnate for that human experince, even if it is great suffering.
Because suffering is a illusion that many beings have no clue of, if you were to say ask 6th dimensional being.
About suffering and even pain they cannot tell you they have no experience, the truth is we should be grateful to have this human experince even the illusion of hunger and to satiate then hunger with a wide variety of delicious food.
You might not believe this but there are those that incarnate just to the food, we are all here for different reasons.
Unlike most other religions, Buddhism isn't so much about things to believe, as things to do. It is a technology of mind improvement. This is why Buddhists often refer to themselves as practitioners rather than believers. The Buddha told his students to trust their own experience of the effectiveness of the teachings, and not believe things just because he or somebody else said so. Buddhism does NOT claim to be the one and only valid spiritual path (a teaching known as 'exclusivism' in other belief-systems). It is NOT based on claims of divine authority. Buddha never claimed to be divine or sent from God. His teachings are to be judged by their effectiveness in promoting peace and spiritual realizations, rather than unverifiable claims to their origin. Therefore Buddhism cannot claim to be a religion.
i think our only religion is love; that's what you have before you came here; you've never been created; did you remember the feeling not born nor die;
No this is a nice western cherry picked look at Buddhism, but Buddha believed in reincarnation he saw this as the true nature of stuffing.
The true nature of stuffing is dried bread, herbs, and vegetables. Sometimes apples or raisins are added. Good stuffing can alleviate suffering
Extremely well documented. Thought-provoking. Thank you for motivating me to introspect more🙏
Wonderful video, wish there were more like it. Not overbearing, not in denial, just right, the middle way.
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Would you be so passionate about your God if there was no promise of a glorious life after death?
Would you fear him if there was no threat of an eternity of pain and torment?
What if your God just delivered a message of peace and wisdom and his philosophy on death was eternal peace with no afterlife?
Would you remain faithful to him or would you seek another God who promised bliss or retribution after your demise?
Would you still worship a God who didn't claim the ability to heal all your ills and rescue you from the vagaries and pitfalls of life?
If you decide to discard the old God of the carrot and stick and begin to appreciate the philosophy and wisdom of a new entity who doesn't promise anything but internal peace and understanding then Congratulations, you are on your way to becoming a Buddhist and your new life will be better.
Spot on with your post. I think it's pretty arrogant for one human being to actually proclaim to another human that he/she is going to a place called hell.
@@garlandetheridge9902 Hypothetical
Dmboola is a native African pygmy from the region now called the Republic of Congo, the year is 200BC. Dmboola is married according to native culture and tradition and has a family. Occasionally he has lustful thoughts about his neighbor's young wife but does not progress those feelings into actions because of tribal taboos and laws, the tribe has their own Gods and Demons
After his death Dmboola is brought up before a Middle Eastern God who tells him he must burn in Hell and be tortured for eternity for breaking a commandment he has never heard of, written by a God he has never heard of and who tells him that he loves him, He is a little confused.
Buddha The light of asia.
*Light from Asia
Not sure if this is an actual human who produced this, but definitely some wisdom .
As being born a Buddhist i always thought of myself as an atheist. We dont believe there is a monotheistic creator
Thank you for a wonderful, simple, and respectful explanation of my faith.
The words said in the last 1 minute are the most important👍👍
Buddha got it right
Certainly direct application of wisdom in daily life will always be more important than any abstract speculation about God's nature! Without personal engagement theology is empty and powerless. Thanks for sharing! Prester Bob
This explication of Buddhist thought is indeed profound, enlightening, challenging. I am a person of deep faith. AND I have been exploring Buddhism for almost 11/2 years. This period and practice has been calming, illuminating, morally and intellectually challenging ---and disruptive. I intend to search further---even while I give thanks and pray.
Steve Schulte
Los Angeles
"I left Europe [for India] as a Christian, I discovered I was a Hindu and returned as a Buddhist without ever having ceased to be Christian".
(Raimon Panikkar, Catholic priest)
Budhurajanan whahanse, never challenged any belief. There were so many preachers misguiding people at the time of his birth in Nepal. He traveled through Sansara, living a devoted life refraining from Akusal( actions inflicting bad on others as well as ultimately for yourself) to achieve Nirvana. It’s not something you can touch and feel but can only be felt by himself. His mind was so beautiful and peaceful. He wanted the mankind to achieve the same. Chathurarya Sathya and the Eight Nobel Path was explained to the humankind. Told the followers to follow him if they felt it’s right. To be your own savior to achieve Nirvana.
I think you have the teachings of Buddha....when you say he traveled through samsaara, that is not correct...You need to understand what is samsaara, and you must undestand Anichchaa, and Anatta doctrine....
As long as something inspires us for complete peace,God or no God,self or no self:i think it really shouldn't matter as we will eventually reach to a point where we will realize for ourselves these answers,so relax😊
The connections of all cultural interpretation of God is very distinct of each cultural influence yet together form a beautiful understanding of the law of the universe, the law of the nature of humans.
Buddhism was the first to advocate individualism. 😮
Except it doesn't
@@JaysonT1what do u mean?
@@Happy10201Buddhism focus on reducing greed, anger, and ignorance while individualism usually push those things up
You must take good care of the vassal this body but never forget there is no self
@@triallaga3 Buddhism emphasizes on the development of the individual with responsibility from within not without. The form of individualism you're referring to is dominated by ego, greed and irresponsibility. Material possession is not a Buddhist spiritual goal.🙏🙏🙏🙏✌️
beautiful idea that i was not aware of ..thank you for sharing this. I am finding a way...thank you
What do we do about mosquitoes?
Buddhism is caring about causes and results. But, mostly concerned about causes, why? The religion of Buddha is to release the sufferings if someone causes or made a mistake. That's why Buddha cares about the cause to prevent people from making a mistake(bad outcome). In case of a bad outcome, Buddha would conduct a practice to release the bad outcome (the suffering).
God, as what i have learned, the power of the universe. However, no matter what how many religions are, there would be only one God 🎉❤🎉❤
"At the time of his AWAKENING, all the Gods, Demigods, Demons and other Celestial Beings attending swore an oath to protect the followers of the World Honored One".This passage establishes the concept of "Divinity not Deity". We hold the knowledge of protection from the cosmic entities but are free of worship and slavery to specific gods, some of whom are false and malicious and some are only the creations of their believers.
Believe what you like. Truths are what you think it is.
Maybe it varies per denomination, but based on what Iread about religions, the main denominations of buddhism don't reject other supernatural beings. They bellieve in other realms (like heavenly, human realm, hellish realm ) based on Mahasihananda Sutta they believe that there are six realms of reincarnation which have different category of beings. Also they accept different kind of beings like humans, devas, etc, but still they view nirvana as the main goal.
How would you compare Vedanta with Buddhism?
To ask that question looks like you don't understand any of the systems...they are both living systems ...
When you believe in a creator God, you believe in a God who creates a world where beings have to eat other beings.
Amen...,...
Buddhism, which teaches about the mind, also teaches about the universe.
Mahayana Buddhism includes Pure Land Buddhism, Heart Sutra, Lotus Sutra, Esoteric Buddhism, Avatamsaka Sutra, etc.
The Buddhist universe called three thousand worlds has a hierarchical structure which is the same as the real universe.
The principle of cause and effect rules there. And time and space are infinite. The countless Buddha lands (the planets of the enlightened one) exist there like the sand of the Ganges River.
Far beyond planets there is a Pure Land of Paradise.
The Avatamsaka Sutra teaches a universe where one is many and many is one. It is a fractal universe where atoms make up the universe, and the universe makes up an atom.
The Heart Sutra suggests a quantum world in which form is emptiness.
As above, In Buddhism, the flowering of the heart indicates the flowering of the heart toward the universe.
Also, in Esoteric Buddhism, Vairocana, who personifies the universe, preaches the truth of the universe. It is an awakening through compassion (heart) and wisdom (science).
Now, God the Creator created man in his own image.
In other words, human DNA was synthesized. Next, the created man attains enlightenment and becomes a Buddha. Since Buddha is an enlightened one, Buddha of course 100% understands the essence of life, the DNA. When Buddha synthesizes DNA with his wisdom and man appears, Buddha becomes God. Here, the cycle of life is established: God, Man, Buddha, God, Man, Buddha, ... This is an infinite cycle of life in an infinite universe.
Above are my thoughts.
Well done video emphasizing “be a lighted lamp unto yourself”. Perhaps missing is examination of the Second Noble Truth - “the origin of suffering”. The Buddha was clear in pinpointing one thing only - attachment - which brings with it clinging and craving”. People who believe in an all power controlling God who gives or takes become dependent (attached) to this supposed deity. For the faithful this can lead to a “Santa Clause” wish list type of prayer. Self examination and adherence to the Dharma makes prayer of this type 😮irrelevant. God exists or does not exist, it really does not enter into the essence of the teachings of the Buddha.. .
In fact, in the concept of Mahayana Buddhism, the God of the West is Brahma (the god of creation) in Hinduism. The Buddha once said to Brahma that you are not the god of creation. Anyone who is interested can take a look.
The term seems to suggest a person. Buddhists without mentioning a name for god seem to indicate an impersonal system that indirectly suggests godliness. The former is merely faith based. The latter is a conclusion based on relentless enquiry.
THE CREATION OF SELF DEFINITION.
All of life is a process of deciding Who You Are, and then experiencing that.
As you keep expanding your vision, you make up new rules to cover that! As you keep enlarging your idea about your Self, you create new do's and don'ts, yeses and nos to encircle that. These are the boundaries that "hold in" something which cannot be held in.
You cannot hold in "you," because you are as boundless as the Universe. Yet you can create a concept about your boundless Self by Imagining, and then accepting, boundaries.
In a sense, this is the only way you can know yourself as anything in particular.
That which is boundless is boundless. That which is limitless is limitless. It cannot exist anywhere because it is everywhere. If it is everywhere, it is nowhere in particular.
God is everywhere. Therefore, God is nowhere in particular, because to be somewhere in particular, God would have to not be somewhere else - which is not possible for God.
There is only one thing that is "not possible" for God, and that is for God to not be God. God cannot "not be." Nor can God not be like Itself. God cannot "un-God" Itself.
I am everywhere, and that's all there is to it. And since I am everywhere, I am nowhere. And if I am NOWHERE, where am I?
NOW HERE.
The Overcoming of Self
Many people have very confused and erroneous ideas concerning the terms “the overcoming of self”, “the eradication of desire”, and “the annihilation of the personality.” Some (particularly the intellectual who are prone to theories) regard it as a metaphysical theory altogether apart from life and conduct; while others conclude that it is the crushing out of all life, energy and action, and the attempt to idealise stagnation and death. These errors and confusions, arising as they do in the minds of individuals, can only be removed by the individuals themselves; but perhaps it may make their removal a little less difficult (for those who are seeking Truth) by presenting the matter in another way.
The doctrine of the overcoming or annihilation of self is simplicity itself; indeed, so simple, practical, and close at hand is it that a child of five, whose mind has not yet become clouded with theories, theological schemes and speculative philosophies, would be far more likely to comprehend it than many older people who have lost their hold upon simple and beautiful truths by the adoption of complicated theories.
The annihilation of self consists in weeding out and destroying all those elements in the soul which lead to division, strife, suffering, disease and sorrow. It does not mean the destruction of any good and beautiful and peace-producing quality. For instance, when a man is tempted to irritability or anger, and by a great effort overcomes the selfish tendency, casts it from him, and acts from the spirit of patience and love, in that moment of self-conquest he practises the annihilation of self. Every noble man practises it in part, though he may deny it in his words, and he who carries out this practice to its completion, eradicating every selfish tendency until only the divinely beautiful qualities remain, he is said to have annihilated the personality (all the personal elements) and to have arrived at Truth. The self which is to be annihilated is composed of the following ten worthless and sorrow-producing elements:
Lust
Hatred
Avarice
Self-indulgence
Self-seeking
Vanity
Pride
Doubt
Dark belief
Delusion
It is the total abandonment, the complete annihilation of these ten elements, for they comprise the body of desire. On the other hand it teaches the cultivation, practice, and preservation of the following ten divine qualities:
Purity
Patience
Humility
Self-sacrifice
Self-reliance
Fearlessness
Knowledge
Wisdom
Compassion
Love
These comprise the Body of Truth, and to live entirely in them is to be a doer and knower of the Truth, is to be an embodiment of Truth. The combination of the ten elements is called Self or the Personality; the combination of the ten qualities produces what is called Truth; the Impersonal; the abiding, real and immortal Man.
It will thus be seen that it is not the destruction of any noble, true, and enduring quality that is taught, but only the destruction of those things that are ignoble, false and evanescent. Neither is this overcoming of self the deprivation of gladness, happiness and joy, but rather is it the constant possession of these things by living in the joy-begetting qualities. It is the abandonment of the lust for enjoyment, but not of enjoyment itself; the destruction of the thirst for pleasure, but not of pleasure itself; the annihilation of the selfish longing for love, and power, and possessions themselves. It is the preservation of all those things which draw and bind men together in unity and concord, and, far from idealising stagnation and death, urges men to the practice of those qualities which lead to the highest, noblest, most effective, and enduring action. He whose actions proceed from some or all of the ten elements wastes his energies upon negations, and does not preserve his soul; but he whose actions proceed from some or all of the ten qualities, he truly and wisely acts and so preserves his soul.
He who lives largely in the ten earthly elements, and who is blind and deaf to the spiritual verities, will find no attraction in the doctrine of self-surrender, for it will appear to him as the complete extinction of his being; but he who is endeavouring to live in the ten heavenly qualities will see the glory and beauty of the doctrine, and will know it as the foundation of Life Eternal. He will also see that when men apprehend and practise it, industry, commerce, government, and every worldly activity will be purified; and action, purpose and intelligence, instead of being destroyed, will be intensified and enlarged, but freed from strife and pain.
🙏
Gautama Buddha was not an atheist. This does not mean that Gautama Buddha was a theist or an agnostic. He was neither an atheist, nor a theist and not even an agnostic. We cannot really brand Gautama Buddha into any category. He belonged to none of these “camps”.
Unfortunately our lexicon has no fourth word to explain what the Buddha was except to say he was enlightened. Human intelligence doesn’t have the capacity to comprehend anything other than atheist, theist and agnostic.
Atheist is a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings. This is based on belief (emotional intelligence) and reasoning (intellectual intelligence), and not on “knowing” (intuitive intelligence).
Theist is a person who believes in one God as the creator and ruler of the universe, without rejection of revelation. He is a person who believes in the existence of a god or gods. This is based purely on belief (emotional intelligence), and not even intellectual intelligence, though theists often apply their intellectual intelligence quite miserably to justify their belief in God.
Agnostic is a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable. These are people who have gone to a state beyond emotional intelligence and use their intellectual intelligence.
The Buddha had an order of intelligence that was far higher or greater than either emotional intelligence or intellectual intelligence. He never needed to use these inferior forms of intelligence, even though they were at his disposal. His much higher intelligence (about which I will soon explain) had made his emotional intelligence as well his intellectual intelligence develop to their respective ultimate levels. But to understand the level of intelligence of a Buddha, we need to understand the hierarchy of intelligence and what it means.
Let us understand the hierarchy of intelligence, and before that, the context in which I have used the term “intelligence”.
There is life all around us, and we are a living being too. There is vegetable or plant life, animal life, human life, super human life and many other kinds of life about which we do not know. Life means consciousness and consciousness is associated with an intelligence of some kind. As there is a hierarchy of life. Vegetable life, animal life and human life are like three levels in the hierarchy of life. Vegetable life is at a low level, then animal life and human life is at a higher level in the hierarchy. Accordingly there is a hierarchy of consciousness and therefore a hierarchy of intelligence. It is in this context I speak of the hierarchy of intelligence. They are intelligence of different kinds.
The three types of intelligence we deal with in human life are physical intelligence, emotional intelligence and intellectual intelligence.
Physical intelligence covers the intelligence of inanimate or lifeless objects because of which they are able to respond to the laws of physics.
Emotional intelligence is that intelligence which results in things like feelings, faith, devotion, beliefs and things of that kind. This form of intelligence first comes into being in the vegetable kingdom and develops in the animal kingdom and develops much more in the human kingdom.
Intellectual intelligence is that intelligence which stands at a higher level than emotional intelligence. This type of intelligence is altogether missing in the vegetable kingdom, but begins in the animal kingdom and develops much more in the human kingdom.
So trees and plants have physical intelligence and emotional intelligence while animals have greater physical intelligence, greater emotional plus some intellectual intelligence. Human beings have even more of all three types of intelligence, a new type of intelligence which we can say is abstract intelligence. Abstract intelligence helps us to further intellectual intelligence and deal with abstraction. While animals can think logically too, what makes us quite different from animals is our capacity for abstraction, which in turn helps us to use all the other 3 types of intelligence quite optimally.
While we (human beings) have both emotional intelligence and also intellectual intelligence, it depends on how much we apply which type of intelligence for arriving at a conclusion. This is why the entire world is divided into different groups called atheists, theists and agnostics.
Spiritual evolution helps us to evolve new and higher types of intelligence. So animals are a result of spiritual evolution of plants and trees, and human beings are a result of spiritual evolution of animals. When we evolve spiritually and develop new and higher types of intelligence, the field of our awareness called consciousness increases tremendously at every stage. With the coming in of a new type of intelligence, our consciousness expands too. But someone (or a life) without the new type of intelligence cannot even recognise what the new type is and how very different and potent it is. For example, a tree (or any member in the vegetable kingdom), how hard it may try, just cannot comprehend what intellect is and how it can result in far greater awareness.
Beyond intellectual intelligence (and abstract intelligence), there is yet another type of intelligence at a higher rung in the hierarchy. It is called intuitive intelligence. This is not the intuition or hunch some of us have, but something of a far superior quality because of which we come into instant perception with hundred percent perfection. This results in “knowing”. This is the result of “enlightenment”. We become enlightened when we are able to develop intuitive intelligence in us. It is because of intuitive intelligence, we become free from the cycle of death and rebirth and become omniscient too. We understand things instantly without have to believe or think.
Gautama Buddha had this intelligence because of his enlightenment. So he did not need to use emotional intelligence or intellectual intelligence, and therefore he was neither an atheist nor a theist nor an agnostic. He simply “knew” it. Anyone who becomes enlightened will also have this intuitive intelligence.
Now let me say something more about Gautama Buddha in particular. His illumination was of such a kind he was not only enlightened or illuminated (in the sense we understand the word), he had gone to the next stage, and even to the stage beyond that! That’s what a Buddha is. In the stage after intuitive intelligence, there comes spiritual intelligence which is so very superior and exalted, we cannot imagine it. The stage after that, which actually makes a Buddha is known as monadic intelligence. This is something which even spiritual intelligence cannot understand. Incidentally, the enlightenment he got in his last earth-life was the Buddha level of illumination and not enlightenment or nirvana in the way we know if it. It is nirvana of a very exalted level. According to my study, he was also an enlightened or super enlightened being even when he was born, but attained his Buddhahood in this life. What Buddha is, none of us can really imagine. It is too, too, too exalted.
Good stuff
Very interesting. Thank you so much for taking the time to explain this.
Is Buddhism a Philosophy for the Personal Journey to understand the Essence of Consciousness? Is Religion based on the control of the mind reinforcing a concept of separation from the Creative Consciousness , whereas Buddhism is a pathway of freeing one’s self from the Duality? All life contains the essence of the Universe. We create the paths to understanding that Truth?
Mantap penjelasannya, salam dari kota Jambi (pulau sumatra, indonesia)
This is where you got it wrong atheist don’t denies or disbelief the concept of a god they simply observe the world as it is ! like factually speaking there’s not one evidence that the god you believe in exist outside of your holy books and imaginations ! if you encounter someone who have not been indoctrinated in the fairytales of god or religion would you call them athiest or simply a person who lives in reality not fantasy? 🤔
We are god .. always have been and always will be..
He liberation them self from suffering
He believe strength and good effort to enlighten..
Buddhist concept based on strength effort liberation equality train to make distance from bad mindset.
In my search of truth, I read different scriptures from different religions. I've find out that all religions have their valid points. So in able to see the truth in ocean of deception s. I've question everything and experience the truth within my self. Not knowing I'm using the method of budhha. BECAUSE TO KNOW THE TRUTH WE NEED TO WITNESS AND EXPERIENCE IT BY OURSELVES.
Buddhists do not reject God. It says that to stop sin it is not necessary to believe in God. Stop lying.
Spot on
Deity and God, are not the same meaning...
Please read Digha Nikaya, especially about 62 wrong views.
Buddhism rejects the concept of self. This suggests that our entire framework of thinking about reality is wrong. We think of different objects, and then name one object self, and another entity we name God. God in order to be God, must be the absolute to which everything else is relative. If our way of naming entities is itself flawed, naming God makes the absolute reality into a thing and thus erroneous. I don't think Buddha rejects the concept of God, Buddha rejects the concepts of entities altogether. Naming and conceptualizing the absolute truth obscures the truth. Buddhism can be reconciled with theism quite easily actually. That which we name God can only be the absolute reality. The Buddha taught enlightenment. The name of God is that which is known in enlightenment. But this is entirely different than all the concepts we have. Buddha wants us to shift paradigm. The very question about God might be based on the old paradigm, Buddha wants us to leave.
From a hyper-theistic view it might be that every attempt at conceptualizing God is a blasphemy. It's the prideful attempt at relativizing the absolute. I am obviously engaging in that blasphemy myself in this comment.
God or no God: Meditate and cultivate loving kindness.
I don't think Buddha rejects the concept of self, but instead, try to make us understand that we are connected eventually, so we should love and help each other. Enlightenment is the way to connect with God
Very good, up to "knowing" something at enlightenment. Enlightenment is not about knowing an ultimate reality - liberation is not only from entities, but also concepts
Most of theist people are commenting here without even watching the whole video,
Because they are SMART!
This energy - this pure, unseen, unheard, unobserved, and therefore unknown-by-anyone-else energy - chose to experience Itself as the utter magnificence It was. In order to do this, It realized It would have to use a reference point within.
It reasoned, quite correctly, that any portion of Itself would necessarily have to be less than the whole, and that if It thus simply divided Itself into portions, each portion, being less than the whole, could look back on the rest of Itself and see magnificence.
And so All That Is divided Itself - becoming, in one glorious moment, that which is this, and that which is that. For the first time, this and that existed, quite apart from each other. And still, both existed simultaneously. As did all that was neither.
Thus, three elements suddenly existed: that which is here. That which is there. And that which is neither here nor there - but which must exist for here and there to exist.
It is the nothing which holds the everything. It is the non-space which holds the space. It is the all which holds the parts.
I'm going to go further. Now this nothing which holds everything is what some people call God. Yet that is not accurate, either, for it suggests that there is something God is not - namely, everything that is not "nothing." But I am all things - seen and unseen - so this description of Me as the Great Unseen - the No-Thing, or the Space Between, an essentially Eastern mystical definition of God, is no more accurate than the essentially Western practical description of God as all that is seen. Those who believe that God is All That Is and All That Is Not, are those whose understanding is correct.
Now in creating that which is "here" and that which is "there," God made it possible for God to know Itself. In the moment of this great explosion from within, God created relativity - the greatest gift God ever gave to Itself. Thus, relationship is the greatest gift God ever gave to you, a point to be discussed in detail later.
From the No-Thing thus sprang the Everything - a spiritual event entirely consistent, incidentally, with what your scientists call The Big Bang Theory.
As the elements of all raced forth, time was created, for a thing was first here, then it was there - and the period it took to get from here to there was measurable. Just as the parts of Itself which are seen began to define themselves, "relative" to each other, so, too, did the parts which are unseen. God knew that for love to exist - and to know Itself as pure love - its exact opposite had to exist as well. So God voluntarily created the great polarity - the absolute opposite of love - everything that love is not - what is now called fear. In the moment fear existed, love could exist as a thing that could be experienced.
It is this creation of duality love and its opposite which humans refer in their various mythologies as the birth of evil, the fall of Adam, the rebellion of Satan, and so forth.
Just as you have chosen to personify pure love as the character you call God, so you have chosen to personify abject fear as the character you call the devil.
This mythology has been mankind's early attempt to understand, and tell others in a way they could understand, a cosmic occurrence of which the human soul is deeply aware, but of which the mind can barely conceive.
In rendering the universe as a divided version of Itself, God produced, from pure energy, all that now exists - both seen and unseen.
In other words, not only was the physical universe thus created, but the metaphysical universe as well. The part of God which forms the second half of the Am/Not Am equation also exploded into an infinite number of units smaller than the whole. These energy units you would call spirits.
In some of your religious mythologies it is stated that "God the Father" had many spirit children. This parallel to the human experiences of life multiplying itself seems to be the only way the masses could be made to hold in reality the idea of the sudden appearance - the sudden existence - of countless spirits in the "Kingdom of Heaven."
In this instance, your mythical tales and stories are not so far from ultimate reality - for the endless spirits comprising the totality of Me are, in a cosmic sense, My offspring.
BUddha himself didn't really answer this question.
Purely by devotion many from different faiths have reached what Budhdha achieved.
So many paths same destination.
Budha just arrived without agency?
All creation happens without intelligence?
The concept of god is a human construct and the belief in a god is another way of saying "I don''t Know" After all one wouldn't say "I believe I have two hands" instead one would say " I have two hands "or "I know I have two hands"
Contrary to what some commenters claim, Buddhists do challenge the concept of God. Buddhism is based on the bundle theory of mind, as distinct from the ego theory of mind. So, it's not only that there isn't some massive ego in control of the world, there are also no egos in control of individual humans. All of reality, as with the mind, is an aggregate that is mistaken as a coherent singular thing. The ego is an illusion that can be observed and understood through meditation. There is no self anywhere, not a human self or a divine self. No self. Period.
Do the Buddhists say why?
Buddhism is development of the mind.
Philosophy separated “thought” from the brain, and represented it either as an ether filled with knowledge (Vladimir Vernadsky and his noosphere), or as an “aura” around a person’s head. But experiments with psychics did not give a clear result: sometimes mediums showed amazing effects, but often they could not do anything, and many also turned out to be magicians. And all this time, strangely, quantum mechanics remained on the sidelines. It is strange - after all, it is it that operates with “consciousness” from the very beginning. Let’s take a closer look at this. Quantum mechanics appeared at the beginning of the 20th century. Unlike the theory of relativity, which was created by one person, Albert Einstein, this is a collective creation. Despite its “weirdness”, it instantly and forever became the basis of physics, because it incredibly accurately explains what is happening around us. Quantum mechanics says that normally matter and energy are in an indefinite state. So, light is both a wave and a set of particles (photons). But as soon as the observer (human) intervenes, matter is “determined”: light, for example, becomes either a wave or a particle, depending on what is “expected” of it. This is the collapse of the wave function (the term is unfortunate, but everyone is used to it). Radical researchers say that the world does not exist at all until we look at it. Others claim that the whole world is filled with consciousness and is an “observer”: both wood and stone have consciousness. Despite the obvious oddity, the collapse of the wave function is easy to see in experience, which is even shown in advanced physics classrooms in high schools. So there is no doubt. But what is it about consciousness that it changes the universe? Why is the observer so important? The physicist and mathematician Roger Penrose of Oxford, a member of the Royal Society of London, was the first to suspect that consciousness has a quantum nature. Hameroff has been working with Penrose for 30 years and wants to understand exactly how it works. The fact is that the quantum theory of consciousness is a bit … unscientific, and allows telepathy, mind reading, communication with the ancient oak and the spirits of ancestors, that is, everything that mystics indulge in. And this is somehow not good, because there is no sense in mystics. If you postulate such incredible things, you need to scientifically explain it. And here’s what he did. Penrose realized that every particle of the universe is just a curvature in Einstein’s space-time. When such a curvature or “bubble” bursts, quantum collapse occurs and consciousness emerges. But in his model, consciousness was born as if spontaneously and could not give rise to meaning and memory. The universe was clearly “thinking”, but like a schoolboy who looks out the window at the lesson: first about one thing, then about another. Hameroff suggested that brain neurons organize these bubbles of space-time so that their pops form something like music. This music contains thought, memory, information. The philosopher Pythagoras in the 6th century BC said almost the same thing. How did he know? Let’s leave this question. Hameroff’s hypothesis was greeted with skepticism: the quantum computers that exist today operate at ultra-low temperatures in a sterile environment; Can quantum transitions take place inside a warm and humid brain? Now Hameroff was able to resolve all doubts. And here’s what he gets. Light itself is consciousness. It used to be thought that a conscious observer “forces” matter to make a decision. Now it is clear that the opposite is true: the quantum transition, on the contrary, generates consciousness. “Ancient traditions characterized consciousness as light. Religious figures were often depicted with glowing “halos” or auras. Hindu deities - with luminous blue skin. In many cultures, those who have “awakened to the truth” are “enlightened ones,” writes Hameroff in his latest article. Hameroff presented a complete breakdown of how this works at the level of photons, atoms, molecules and neurons, what chemical reactions and substances are involved in the “creation” of consciousness. The most important conclusion follows from his theory: consciousness preceded life. “Conventional science and philosophy suggests that consciousness emerged at some point in evolution, perhaps as recently as the advent of the brain and nervous system. But Eastern spiritual traditions, panpsychism, and Roger Penrose’s theory of objective reduction suggest that consciousness preceded life,” writes Hameroff. And these traditions turned out to be right (again, how did the ancients know? ). Hameroff describes in detail the early universe, filled with the light of the Big Bang - the universe was then a megamind. But then the substance became cloudy, and a period of unconsciousness set in. When it ended, complex molecules began to appear. With their help, the Universe began to “think” more clearly and precisely. Thus, the entire universe is conscious because consciousness follows directly from quantum mechanics and relativity. Man is “more conscious” than stone only because the neurons of the brain are a more convenient environment for quantum transition than the crystalline structure of stone or wood fibers, but man is definitely not the only, and certainly not the first thinking being. Just by thinking something, we turn on (not “we”, it turns itself on) a quantum transition that connects us to any point in the Universe and to any complex mind that exists anywhere. Gospel of Thomas (50) Jesus says: (1) “If they say to you: ‘Where do you come from?’ (then) say to them: ‘We have come from the light, the place where the light has come into being by itself, has established [itself] and has appeared in their image.’ (2) If they say to you: ‘Is it you?’ (then) say: ‘We are his children, and we are the elect of the living Father.’ (3) If they ask you: ‘What is the sign of your Father among you?’ (then) say to them: ‘It is movement and repose.’” (51) (1) His disciples said to him: “When will the of the dead take place, and when will the new world come?” (2) He said to them: “That (resurrection) which you are awaiting has (already) come, but you do not recognize it.” 24) (1) His disciples said: “Show us the place where you are, because it is necessary for us to seek it. (2) He said to them: “Whoever has ears should hear! (3) Light exists inside a person of light, and he shines on the whole world. If he does not shine, there is darkness.” 29) Jesus says: (1) “If the flesh came into being because of the spirit, it is a wonder. (2) But if the spirit (came into being) because of the body, it is a wonder of wonders. (3) Yet I marvel at how this great wealth has taken up residence in this poverty.” (30) Jesus says: (1) “Where there are three gods, they are gods. (2) Where there are two or one, I am with him.” 43) (1) His disciples said to him: “Who are you to say this to us?” (2) “Do you not realized from what I say to you who I am? (3) But you have become like the Jews! They love the tree, (but) they hate its fruit. Or they love the fruit, (but) they hate the tree.” (44) Jesus says: (1) “Whoever blasphemes against the Father, it will be forgiven him. (2) And whoever blasphemes against the Son, it will be forgiven him. (3) But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit, it will not be forgiven him, neither on earth nor in heaven.”
A maintenance manual for the Mind(and soul). The Dhamapada said it all, everything else is commentary.
They don't (well, depending on the sect - there are quite a few different 'schools' of Buddhist thought!).
What they challenge is the idea of a God 'out there'; as there is only THIS moment = ALL IS MIND.
Why would a Buddhist need to accept or reject God? It’s an honest question, I don’t have an answer.
You cannot reject or accept something thats beyond everything.
I believe Jainism seeks to eradicate all suffering, human and otherwise. Why would a creator put in place a form of life that is dependent on predation for continuity?
The mind is the creator of all
Why does this feel like an AI made essay? Not that the information isn’t good, but still it’s trippy 😮
Awakened Intelligence = AI
The highest philosophy of Buddhism emphasizes "no distinction". This no distinction is wisdom, Tao, and the truth of the universe. However, the ultimate God of the West has "differentiation", which means that all living beings are different from Him. This is the greatest difference.
You are correct 100 %
Buddhism is not different in substance from Sanatan Dharma. In both way of living, individual alone is responsible for his happiness and liberation. In both, believing in existence of God is neither necessary nor sufficient condition for moksha.
Magic...
I do not agree that Buddhists do not believe in GOD or a Creator God. It’s more that God is Universal and no One is separate from God and no One needs a human mediary. But I believe this was also what Jesus/Yesua taught. It’s still there for any Christian to find as well. LOVE to ALL😇💜🙏
Buddha didn't reject God, he said, 'there are as many truths as the number of leaves fallen under the tree, I have picked only one leaf, which is under my grasp,' which may also mean 'there maybe God.'
I think the universe has it's own laws and the law of karma is one of them. Whether God exists or not exists, the laws of the universe can be taken as God.
There is much more to it
In Buddhism, there is no ultimate God of the universe, only the eternal Tao. This Tao (Truth) is not an individual God but is both everything (beings) and nothing (emptiness).This is the most famous passage in the Heart Sutra. Mind, Buddha, and sentient beings are equal and have no distinction.
The illuminated life is a life of non-discrimination. No longer does one say, "This is good and that is bad," for one is beyond pleasure and pain, reward and threat. He who has crossed over loves all men indiscriminately, without regard to intent or action. Thieves and murderers stand with bishops and kings in the cast of characters which act out the drama before us. Why should one love the one more than the other? Are they not all united in that one light?
From the vantage point of those who have crossed over all human judging is both ludicrous and tragic. It is ludicrous because it is invariably but an example of one blind man attacking another because the latter cannot see. The whole human comedy is one of delusion and ignorance in which the actors flail about in the darkness.
At the same time, it is tragic because every ego-action has its deleterious effects. The more one judges, the more one is entangled in the illusion of good and evil, the more the ego feels threatened by judgment. Every sneer at another is a sneer at oneself, for ultimately all men are one. Like the Indian doctrine of karma, Yeshua's teachings emphasize that built into the cosmos is a law of retribution. The judgement you give is the judgement you get. Each ego constitutes it's own hell.
Lamb of God
Jeremias makes the further observation that the Hebrew word 'talia' means both "lamb" and "boy" or "servant." In the first instance, then, the Baptist may have meant his words as a reference to the Servant of God who bears the sins of the world by his vicarious atonement. But this reference also identifies him as the true Passover Lamb who expiates and wipes away the sin of the world: "The Savior, dying on the Cross, went to his vicarious death patiently like a sacificial lamb. By the expiatory power of his innocent death he blotted out.....the guilt of all mankind" (TDNT, 1, p.340). If at the extreme hour of Israel's oppression in Egypt, the blood of the Paschal lamb had been the key to its liberation, now the Son who became a servant - the shepherd who became a sheep - no longer stands just for Israel, but for the liberation of the world - for mankind as a whole.
This brings us to the great theme of Jesus' universal mission. Israel does not exist for itself; its election is rather the path by which God intends to come to all men. This idea of universality will turn up again and again as the real core of Jesus' mission. By referring to the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world, the Fourth Gospel places this idea right at the beginning of Jesus' journey.
The reference to the Lamb of God interprets Jesus' Baptism, his descent into the abyss of death, as a theology of the Cross, if we may so express it. All four Gospels recount in their different ways that, as Jesus came up from the water, heaven was "torn open" (Mk 1:10) or "was opened" (Mt 3:16; Lk 3:21); that the Spirit came down upon him "like a dove"; and that in the midst of all this a voice from heaven resounded. According to Mark and Luke, the voice addresses Jesus with the words "Thou art...."; according to Matthew, the voice speaks about him in the third person, saying, "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased" (Mt 3:17). The image of the dove may be a reminiscence of what the creation account says about the Spirit brooding over the waters (Gen 1:2); the word 'like' ("like a dove") suggests that it is "a simile for something that ultimately cannot be described" (Gnilka, Matthausevangelium, 1, p.78). The same heavenly voice sounds out again at the Transfiguration of Jesus, though with the addition of the imperative to "listen to him."
Buddhism is the most practical religion in the world. It tries to logically explain the universe yet there is some place beyond logic in it.
Nothing is beyond logic and rationality , it depends on your range of "logic and rationalizing"
Here’s the crux, Behold The Cross
Everyone has their own version of god, so in essence one’s ego is connected to god even if one is wholesome. God could be an inanimate object called the “moon” for all we know without it, life would not be possible. An omniscient god seems very unlikely as his interventions cause human suffering because non-sinners still suffer. Personally I have buddhist practices but still believe in god, it’s a win-win situation
Do I watch thi8s?
Buhdists aknowledge god but the unamable doesn't warrent egoic concepts
It’s only that people’s perspective … after all there is only one supreme creator.
Nice video. Wish it wasn’t AI.
I think there is a misunderstanding here. There is no rejecting the concept of god at all. In fact, the Budda list all kinds of gods in the Buddhist sutra.
There are 3 realms which are the desire realm, the form and the formlessness realm, and in all these 3 realms, there are a variety of gods SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the Buddhist sutra.
So there is no denying of gods in Buddhism. However gods are still in the process of incarnation just like human, they are of course higher beings and much more intelligent then human obviously.
It's just that the Buddha and the Arhats (level 4 of saints) are TEACHERS of both gods and human.
The purpose of the Buddha is to teach human how to become saint in order to liberate from incarnation. that's right, you have to become Level 4 saint (Arhat) to be able to completely liberate from incarnation. Gods (doesn't matter if they are in desire realm/form/formlessness) still in the process of incarnation.
If you want to know about these gods, you need to read Khuddaka Nikāya. it is a chain of many small stories which wil take many hours to finish.
That's right. The gods are full of suffering, and are subject to old age, sickness, and death
Seems to me that Buddhist agnosticism in practical terms is extremely close to advaita vedanta aka non dualist theism and the most ascetic variants of Shivaism (like Kashmir Shivaism). The Upanishads say Brahman=Atman (The Ultimate Reality, Universal Consciousness, the Universe....God if you want EQUALS the Soul, your inner individual consciousness...meaning that divinity is mere consciousness in its infinite forms, same as a drop in the ocean is as much ocean as the whole ocean itself).
Buddhism goes a step further saying that these equal terms are both actually Maya, Illusion...or at least as.the video explains that it doesn't really matter. In practical terms, both advocate for individual search and direct experience. If you go to a Buddhist country you will see why Buddhism is still considered a religion, as very few practitioners behave differently than typical devotees and every temple has a statue of Buddha that people pray to as if it was a God. But true practitioners of Buddhism, Hinduism, Sufism, Kabbalah, Christian Mysticism, Shamanism are all very similar, and through meditation and direct experience they will eventually reach liberation following different paths but with a very similar pattern.
That's why we have elevated beings in all religions and philosophical schools.
Not reject, just think that God should not be the center point of your life. That question about God's existence is not one of the most important questions of life
I actually used Buddhism to find the true god. As well as other things ofc. Where Buddhism helped to embolden my awareness of the beyond self. This quite literally is the aspect of as above so below and as within so without. Can't make this shit up tbh. It's all a path. Jack of all trades, master of none, but oftentimes better than a master of one
Buddhism is a psychological discipline coherent and complimentary with those who follow a religion, but it is not a religion. Fear not.
western atheist view
@@jameswatson5807 not at all…
@@heavenstomergatroyd-ou8fx It is all these videos about Buddhism not believing in a god. This is a western view Buddha spoke about other beings in other levels of reality.
He said very little about them yet westerners keep on making these videos Buddhist don't blieve in a god I am curious why this is.
@@jameswatson5807 I have no idea either. I have found tremendous value in Buddhism and do not find a conflict with my Judeo-Christian beliefs. I listen to a lot of dharma talks by Jack Kornfield and Joseph Goldstein, who also offer many direct and positive references to Christ, among others. I also find it interesting that frequently the Buddha is clearly referred to as 'a man', not God, enlightened and reverential as he was. I concur with your comment about 'other levels of reality', a humbling notion with existence proofs. 🙏
@@heavenstomergatroyd-ou8fx Yes it does conflict with your Judeo-Christian beliefs, westerners don't really understand Buddhism, at the core of Buddhism is reincarnation.
Enlightenment is all about escaping the reincarnation cycle, this is exactly what Buddhism is about.
What Buddha was stating that to worship god or other beings, does not get you out of the reincarnation cycle, you have to save yourself via Enlightenment this is why he did not say much about god.
To him there was no point this is his belief, people won't tell you this straight they will just go round and round with some hippy crap.
Now this does not line up with roman christinaity but before the bible was put together by the romans
Early Christians believed in reincarnation, even much older Jewish sect believed in reincarnation, westerners think it is only Hindu, but many traditional African and Amazonian all believed in reincarnation.
Because they are not brainwashed. By what a story book of lies tells them 🤷♂️
Maybe because both believe in doing good. Just Buddhism is an extreme religion. It follows nature and natural law, they believe in the words of Buddha to the extreme.
We must ask why some have long life,short life,rich,poor,dumb,intelligent some died in mother womb unable to see world only Buddhism can explained
Dear God, I follow Buddhism
You are our own savior
Please note that; Its wrong to say that buddha kept silent when inquired about existence of god. Infact the buddha denyed and rejected the idea of such mythical supreme being who created the universe, in a ridiculous way. The buddha said that it can not be (supreme or otherwise) a being who has created the universe but it should be a type of vagina.
Besides, seemingly Its (butha and pretha) spirits who are behind the concept of this mythical supreme god for their own interests to use human and human body. So, better not to fall pray to spirits who are behind this concept of god.
The esoteric teachings of Yeshua is similar to Buddhism. Happy birthday Buddha!
So have you mastered Buddha's teaching for you to make such comparisons?
@@rajwarnakulasuriya5935 read the esoteric gospels so you may know.
Are you sure you don't mean bushido different from buddhism the first is a Japanese fighting spirit
The kingdom of heaven lies within. Christ taught this, and so do Buddhists, just using different terminology. I believe the God referred to in every single religion is the same God. It is just explained differently by humans from different cultures at different times and comes from their limited human understanding. When you study all faiths, look for the ties that bind them together, and you will see the pattern. I wish humans would stop getting caught up in dogma and terminology.
Good is god.
Who said they reject the concept of God?? They worship the idol of Buddha, who represents the nineth incarnation of lord Vishnu!!
But surely it's Hindus who would find that important. As a Western Buddhist, I consider it to be an educational system rather than a faith. When ever I hear of someone worshipping a Buddha image I ask, 'What is that statue going to do for you that you can't do for yourself?'
Also, the more I think about the Christian god, the more I consider him to be an unenlightened being. Wasn't the Buddha considered the teacher of gods?🙏
Living in the confines in a palace surrounded by luxuries he realize his conception was thru an Animal Diety one of the many AVAILABLE...he took upon himself to embark on a journey of self "Imortality as a Mangod" thru Nirvana...
OVERULING all Deiteis AVAILABLE
Buddhism is the only religion that said people who did good things will go to Heaven and those who did evil things will go to Hell, regardless their religion.
All other religions must believe their religion to go to Heaven, otherwise they go to the Hell.
The logic question is if you are born in a specific religion community, how can you know other religion?
The technology is here now to say the prayer dear good
Say what your needs are the good is out there in humanity
End prayer with
all men .
This is the rub, God is not an external deity, God is inside of you, as your own original nature. The Buddha never said there is no soul, this is a common misnomer.
Not self (anatta) means we are not our thoughts, emotions, memories, perceptions (aggregates). The aggregates are not myself. The Buddha never said there was no soul, but that these aggregates are not the self.
We often self identify with our suffering, not realizing that these painful experiences do not define who we are, they are not myself.
The Buddha imo refused to answer these question on the existence of God / soul because they would merely lead to more beliefs. It's better to meditate and reveal the truth to yourself.
An atheist and theist are the same, they both deal in beliefs, one has beliefs, one lacking beliefs. What is lacking is wisdom (jnana). Neither one knows for sure if there is God / soul or not.
Rather than adding beliefs, the Buddha proposed a methodology of self discovery, where these truth could be revealed experientially, rather than as mere beliefs.
In truth, self nullification (anatta) is how a person actually is able to realize the soul / God. This is a type of self-sacrifice spoken about in many traditions by many names. Judaism calls it bittul hayesh, Islam calls it fana.
Anatta is the cypher used for he revelation of God / soul.
In fact Lord Buddha did say there is no soul. It is one of the core concepts of the Dhamma. Anatta or No -soul.
@@dilipaweeratunga No he actually didn't. Anatta means not self or no self. It doesn't mean no soul.
The Buddha was asked if the soul is real, and he was silent, he did not answer, same when he was asked about God.
You are mistaken.
@@adim00lah Aththa( pali) in other traditions by the time was described as the self which is transmitted from a body to body after each death. While the word indeed means self, it had been used synonymously with athma (which is in sanskrit). It is this aththa which lord Buddha have debunked. How do we know? By his further elaborations. "Na tha so, na tha agngnuu" when a person is reborn it is not the one from the previous life (as if there is a Athma/ Aththa) nor it is someone else; as the new train of Chiththa has resulted from the previous/it is just a continuation of a train of chiththa. There is no soul/ essence/ identity/ spirit like being.... which is being born again and again. There is no 'soul' or essence in the living , we are just a bunch of Roopa, Vedana , Sagngnaa, Sankhara, Vigngnaana.
@@dilipaweeratunga I think you are misinterpreting anatta. It doesn't mean no-soul or no-self but not-self.
The a 5 aggregates are not the self (anatta). The Buddha never said there was no self, have you read the Pali canon? Please read SN 44.10
In this verse Vacchagotta the wanderer asked The Buddha if there is a self or no self. The Buddha was silent, and refused to answer the question.
If Buddha taught that there was no self, why did he refuse to answer his question?
Thanissaro Bhikkhu who is the abbot of Metta Forest Monastery in San Diego wrote a wonderful article on this called:
“There is no self.”
“Nope, never said that, either.”-The Buddha
Anatta means not-self, not no-self. You emotions, your thoughts, your body, your money this is anatta, not myself.
"“Therefore, bhikkhus, any kind of form whatsoever, whether past, future, or present, internal or external, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, far or near, all form should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self (anatta)." - Saṁyutta Nikāya 22.59
Many people misinterpret these teachings to say the Buddha taught there was no soul, which is 100% incorrect.
@@adim00lah what wachchagoththa had asked is as follows (pali language written in sinhala text);
කො නු ඛො භො ගොතම, හෙතු, කො පච්චයො, යානිමානි අනෙකවිහිතානි දිට්ඨිගතානි ලොකෙ උප්පජ්ජන්ති. සස්සතො ලොකොති වා, අසස්සතො ලොකොති වා, අන්තවා ලොකොති වා, අනන්තවා ලොකොති වා, තං ජීවං තං සරීරන්ති වා, අඤ්ඤං ජීවං අඤ්ඤං සරීරන්ති වා, හොති තථාගතො පරම්මරණාති වා, න හොති තථාගතො පරම්මරණාති වා, හොති ච න ච හොති තථාගතො පරම්මරණාති වා, නෙව හොති න න හොති තථාගතො පරම්මරණාති වාති.
he had not asked about a soul, but about a being. I don't know who taught you to interpreted it as a soul.
Word ' being' is a broad term which can be used even when there is an uncertainity about the presence of a soul. I also don't know why people think Lord Buddha did not answer his questions, as the great teacher answered him while pointing out the faults in his questions.
As for the topic of soul, one can not use this as an evidence for accepting/ not accepting soul. Also certainly one can not state that Lord Buddha ignored the question about soul based on this because what wachchagotta asked was not about supposed soul/essence of a being, in his words JEEWA. So,his q is wrong because he had came up with it with the assumption of a soul.
So, this set of suttas in wachchagotta sanyutta can not be used as evidence for your claim.
What can we use as evidence in this topic? Lord Buddha's second sermon the Anantha Lakkhana Sutta.
I suggest you to study that sutta too
Buddha told already that the truth is very hard to explained. There is no god . Only emptiness remain. When inner changes starts you will see a black hole. And the cosmic dance.
There is no one and only God, God's are everywhere