[SpyRemo]

Hi,
Since descovering Buddhism I am now questioning my Christian beliefs that were placed on me as a small child and I am trying to compare the two. I am just starting to learn more and read more into Buddhism and I am finding it very difficult to figure out where to begin as well. Its a interesting "fork in the road" area.
Does a Buddhist believe in a "God"?
How were the creators, including man, created/started?
Also completly off topic..Are Buddhists Vegan?
I apologize if you find my questions silly but still they cross my mind.

Thank you,
Krissy

[SetSnonejog]

For your perusal....

What the Buddha Taught
What Buddhists Believe
The Buddha and His Teachings
Good Question, Good Answer
Buddhism for the Modern Skeptic

[fmrcurter]

Thank you very much!

[fruttomma]

Hi Krissy,

In real life, some traditions that developed later on from the teachings of the historical Buddha, recorded in the Pali Canon, and even when they declare that do not believe in God, worship metaphysical entities and believe in metaphysical realms like the Green Tara and the Bardos, for example, in the Tibetan tradition.

Many people that are still under the Christian creed have felt comfortable with the Mahayana tradition because of many similarities that they have found between both religions. To explore all the many traditions is an important step so to chose the one that fits better to your temper.

My recomendation:

"In The Buddha's Words"

[obegeLype]

Hi Krissy and welcome,

No, Buddhists don't believe in a God, nor is there a creation myth. Regarding dietary matters, some Buddhists are vegetarian, others aren't.

You can find more information at the Buddhanet study section linked below :


http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/index.htm

With kind wishes,

Aloka-D

[AntonioXYZ]

Hi Krissy,

Buddhism is mostly ways of personal & spiritual development. Buddhism has a large number & variety of practices so the important starting point is to define your needs. Once an individual defines their needs, then they can choose the appropriate teachings for their situation. Why this is necessary is because some Buddhist teachings can get quite esoteric, which may not be what one is looking for.

Buddhist does not believe in "God". For the most part, the Buddhist teachings are based in natural truth. For example, Buddhism encourages the same ethical or moral frameworks as Christianity. However, these ethical frameworks are not commandments of God. Instead, the Buddhist rationale is moral living abides with non-harming. In Buddhism, refaining from murder, stealing, adultery, dishonesty, etc, leads to a human being not harming themself or harming another. It maintains personal integrity and social trustworthiness.

Similarly, Buddhism, like Christianity, promotes the development & practise of a loving mind, which is called the Four Divine Dwellings, namely, universal love, compassion, appreciation & equinimity. The purpose here is simply that developing these mental attitudes leads to happiness & freedom.

The rationale for every Buddhist teaching is to lead to individual & social happiness & well-being (rather than to conform to the commandments of God).

On a higher level, Buddhism teaches about the nature of suffering. Again, these teachings simply follow scientific or natural psychological principles. For example, Buddhism states human beings suffer because of ignorance and unrealistic expectations. If a human being can free their mind from ignorance and unrealistic expectations, their mind will be free from suffering.

In Buddhism, everything is created by nature, including our mind. More importantly, our happiness & suffering are created by our own mind.

Buddhists are not necessary vegan. Many Buddhists are vegetarian because they see such a mode of food consumption abides with non-harming and respect for all life forms. However, there are not rules in the Buddhism about this. It is a matter of personal choice.

Your questions are not silly.

Thank you for asking your questions


Kind regards

[immelawealecy]

As I Understood (as a total begginer) The Buddha said that speculation on God(s) after-life etc was not helpful. In other words not an outright denial or confirmation was given. These were things 'un-knowable' and as such not worth wasting energy on, or have I misunderstood?

[CULTDIAMONDS]

Sorry, forgot to include this bit! Wasn't this what was behind the 'parable' of the man shot by an arrow who would not have it removed before he knew who had made the arrow etc etc etc?

[Mehntswx]

Hi EG,

It might be helpful to read these 2 suttas...

AN 4.77 - Acintita Sutta: Unconjecturable

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....077.than.html

and MN 63 - Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipit....063.than.html

[Effofqueeno]

The Buddha said that speculation on God(s) after-life etc was not helpful. These were things 'un-knowable' and as such not worth wasting energy on

Hi EinsteinsGhost,

I'm also a relative newcomer to Buddhism and I'm quite interested in what you have written here about what the Buddha said in relation to belief in God(s) and an afterlife etc. and wondered if you can tell me where this is written so I can have a look at it myself?

[ThzinChang]

Hi Aasha.
Your post and Alokas reply more or less coincided so take a look at the links posted. Very interesting. As for where I got this from, it was from countless books I have seen over the years so I couldn't be specific. I need to digest the links myself first but I'm sure others on here will post their views to. Haven't worked out how to add the smily emoticon, so I just take it that I am smiling and wishing you well!

[lXwVlTgO]

Thank you.....

[casefexas]

Hi,
Since descovering Buddhism I am now questioning my Christian beliefs that were placed on me as a small child and I am trying to compare the two. I am just starting to learn more and read more into Buddhism and I am finding it very difficult to figure out where to begin as well. Its a interesting "fork in the road" area.
Does a Buddhist believe in a "God"?

The Buddha did not teach belief in a god, nor did he hang his ethics on beliefs in a god, heaven or hells. He presented a sort of "Golden-Rule-Zilla" based on reason, which is a much stronger foundation than superstition.



How were the creators, including man, created/started? Not sure completely what you mean, but the Buddha refused to speculate on such matters as part of his own teaching of liberation.

Also completly off topic..Are Buddhists Vegan? No. Vegans are vegan. Veganism is almost a religion in itself...


I apologize if you find my questions silly but still they cross my mind.

Thank you,
Krissy NOt at all, and welcome :-)

[gundas]

Hi EinsteinsGhost,

I'm also a relative newcomer to Buddhism and I'm quite interested in what you have written here about what the Buddha said in relation to belief in God(s) and an afterlife etc. and wondered if you can tell me where this is written so I can have a look at it myself?

I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then, as Ven. Malunkyaputta was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in his awareness: "These positions that are undeclared, set aside, discarded by the Blessed One — 'The cosmos is eternal,' 'The cosmos is not eternal,' 'The cosmos is finite,' 'The cosmos is infinite,' 'The soul & the body are the same,' 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' 'After death a Tathagata exists,' 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist' — I don't approve, I don't accept that the Blessed One has not declared them to me. I'll go ask the Blessed One about this matter. If he declares to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,' that 'The cosmos is not eternal,' that 'The cosmos is finite,' that 'The cosmos is infinite,' that 'The soul & the body are the same,' that 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' that 'After death a Tathagata exists,' that 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' that 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' then I will live the holy life under him. If he does not declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,'... or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' then I will renounce the training and return to the lower life."

Then, when it was evening, Ven. Malunkyaputta arose from seclusion and went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "Lord, just now, as I was alone in seclusion, this train of thought arose in my awareness: 'These positions that are undeclared, set aside, discarded by the Blessed One... I don't approve, I don't accept that the Blessed One has not declared them to me. I'll go ask the Blessed One about this matter. If he declares to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist," then I will live the holy life under him. If he does not declare to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist," then I will renounce the training and return to the lower life.'

"Lord, if the Blessed One knows that 'The cosmos is eternal,' then may he declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal.' If he knows that 'The cosmos is not eternal,' then may he declare to me that 'The cosmos is not eternal.' But if he doesn't know or see whether the cosmos is eternal or not eternal, then, in one who is unknowing & unseeing, the straightforward thing is to admit, 'I don't know. I don't see.'... If he doesn't know or see whether after death a Tathagata exists... does not exist... both exists & does not exist... neither exists nor does not exist,' then, in one who is unknowing & unseeing, the straightforward thing is to admit, 'I don't know. I don't see.'"

"Malunkyaputta, did I ever say to you, 'Come, Malunkyaputta, live the holy life under me, and I will declare to you that 'The cosmos is eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,' or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?"

"No, lord."

"And did you ever say to me, 'Lord, I will live the holy life under the Blessed One and [in return] he will declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,' or 'The cosmos is not eternal,' or 'The cosmos is finite,' or 'The cosmos is infinite,' or 'The soul & the body are the same,' or 'The soul is one thing and the body another,' or 'After death a Tathagata exists,' or 'After death a Tathagata does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist,' or 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'?"

"No, lord."

"Then that being the case, foolish man, who are you to be claiming grievances/making demands of anyone?

"Malunkyaputta, if anyone were to say, 'I won't live the holy life under the Blessed One as long as he does not declare to me that "The cosmos is eternal,"... or that "After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,"' the man would die and those things would still remain undeclared by the Tathagata.

"It's just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends & companions, kinsmen & relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a priest, a merchant, or a worker.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me... until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short... until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored... until I know his home village, town, or city... until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow... until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated... until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird... until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.' He would say, 'I won't have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.' The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.

"In the same way, if anyone were to say, 'I won't live the holy life under the Blessed One as long as he does not declare to me that 'The cosmos is eternal,'... or that 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,' the man would die and those things would still remain undeclared by the Tathagata.


--MN 63 Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta

[bitymnmictada]

MN 63 Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta

....and this is one of the 2 suttas in the links I gave #9

.

[Daleman1984]

Does a Buddhist believe in a "God"?

No, there is no need for a believe in a God.

[Cydayshosse]

No, there is no need for a believe in a God.

Hi Kaarine,

Yes, I do agree with you that there is no need to believe in a God. I feel we all have everything we need deep within ourselves and it’s the journey inward to discover and bring out those best qualities that we should focus on, and that is what Buddhism is all about for me and why I‘ve always been drawn towards it I suppose. It brings with it an incredible feeling of peace.

I read the two suttas that Aloka-D gave the links to in his posting. I agree with the message conveyed in them that there is no need to waste precious time and energy worrying or thinking endlessly about something that can’t be proven one way or the other and its ’now’ that we should be concerned with because this life is all we can be sure about...Death and Taxes and all that!!!! I’ve always had difficulty believing in God but I have an enquiring mind and like to read up on things. That is why I’m enjoying reading ‘Living Buddha, Living Christ’ because it raises a lot of questions about whether early Christians did in fact view Jesus in the way they do today. There is a line in the book that says ‘Our true home is in the present moment’ which I really like.

I read what you were saying about your Zazen meditation practice on the other thread. You described it really well, in words that I could understand, so thank you. A lot of the postings are very difficult to follow and go right over my head. I want to ask a couple of questions about what you've written if that's ok, but I’ll do it on the other thread a bit later on and stick to the rules.

[iNYZgxNC]

Yes, I do agree with you that there is no need to believe in a God. I feel we all have everything we need deep within ourselves and it’s the journey inward to discover and bring out those best qualities that we should focus on, and that is what Buddhism is all about for me and why I‘ve always been drawn towards it I suppose. It brings with it an incredible feeling of peace.

Thanks Aasha. Please be patient with my usual rants, here, with Gods and Religions...

I was through Bhikkhu Buddhadasa's "Keys to Natural Truth" where he has written a special chapter called "Two Kinds of Language" where he explains some mundane words that have a different meaning when they are about the Buddha Dhamma.

About "Religion" he tells that in Dhamma language it means:

In terms of Dhamma language, the religion is "the sublime or Excellent Way of Life" (brahmacariya), that is to say, life lived in accordance with Dhamma. It is this exalted way of living which is "glorious in its beginning, middle, and end." By Sublime Way of Life the Buddha meant the way of practice that can really extinguish dukkha (suffering). and also he states that Buddhism has a kind of impersonal God with which, as you can guess, I do not agree, but here is it:

Now we consider the word "God". In everyday language, "God" refers to a celestial being with various creative powers. This is the God of everyday language. The "God" of Dhamma language is rather different. It is a profound and hidden power, which is neither human being, nor celestial being, nor any other kind of being. It has no individuality or self, and it is impersonal. It is natural and intangible. It is what we call the Law of Nature, for this Law is responsible for creation and for the coming into existence of all things. Natural Law governs all things. Natural Law has power over all things. Hence in Dhamma language, the word "God" means, among other things, the Law of Nature, what Buddhists call Dhamma. In the Pali language, the Law of Nature was referred to simply as "Dhamma". Dhamma, just that one single word, implies all of the Law of Nature. So Dhamma is the Buddhist God. In his "Natural Cure for Spiritual Disease" he insists in his concept but he gives an example:

If you prefer to call it "God," you should understand that Buddhism has the law of nature as its God. The Law of Nature -- for example, the law of idappaccayata, which is the law of causality and conditionality -- is the Buddhist God. idappaccayata means:

With this as condition, this is; Because this arises, this arises. Without this as condition, this is not; Because this ceases, this ceases.5

This is the Supreme Thing in Buddhism; this Law of Nature is the Buddhist God. In Buddhism there isn't a personal God; its God -- the Law of Nature -- is an impersonal God. Because Buddhism, in fact, has a God, it is a religion. Anyway I do not see where is the need for calling Natural Law, God... or to say "Religion" to a Sublime or Excellent Way of Life. IMO, a Sublime Way of Life when it is lived as it is, it is a Sublime Way of Life and a Natural Law when it is understood it is a Natural Law. When I go through the Pali Dhamma, the Buddha never states about Gods and Religions when asking to develop wisdom, tranquility of mind, insight and a sublime way of life. However, other terms that are exposed, like "birth", can bring light into what is meant in Dhamma language.

I want to ask a couple of questions about what you've written if that's ok, but I’ll do it on the other thread a bit later on and stick to the rules. Sure Aasha, it is ok!

[theatadug]

Please be patient with my usual rants, here

Rants are fine Kaarine….I do enough of them myself sometimes!

I actually quite like these interpretations of Bhikkhu Buddhadasa ...now don’t get angry. I’ve been trying to find a way of thinking about the terms ‘God’ and ‘Religion’ in a way that sits a bit more comfortably with me, and yes, this sounds pretty good to me.

However, other terms that are exposed, like "birth", can bring light into what is meant in Dhamma language. What does 'birth' mean in Dhamma language then?

I’ll need to check out these two books you’ve mentioned and also do a bit of thinking about it and get back to you on this. Yes, very interesting.

Oh, and what does IMO stand for? I’ve seen this written quite a bit in postings

[TeLMgNva]

...now don’t get angry.

No way... :hug:

What does 'birth' mean in Dhamma language then? It is told in "Two Kinds of Language" at "Keys to Natural Truth"; Birth is about arising, not the physical Birth. As soon as you get into the Pali, many terms that are given in that chapter, will be helpful to get a proper idea of what Buddha is teaching.

Oh, and what does IMO stand for? IMO = In My Opinion; also, IMHO = In My Honest Opinion.