The universe is without a refuge, without a Supreme God.

[tiltbillings]

I just did yet again above. But nevermind im not getting answers. Thank you for your time.

Give us a little more time here. (And thanks for the above explanation.)

[acinteyyo]

This whole thread reminds me of a letter of Ñánavìra Thera to Mr. Samaratunga on 20. August 1963

European thought cannot be understood until it is realized that every European is asking himself, consciously or unconsciously, whether God exists. Everything hinges on the answer to this question; for the problem of good and evil, and of personal survival of death ('the immortality of the soul'), are one with the problem of God's existence. It is this fact that makes the Buddha's Teaching incomprehensible to the European - 'How' he asks 'can there be Ethics ans Survival of Death if ther is no omnipotent God?' The European will passionately affirm God or passionately deny God, but he cannot ignore God. Sir Francis Younghusband, commenting on the fact that there is hadly any reference to an omnipotent God (Issaranimmána, 'Creator God') in the Suttas, attributes the omission to the supposed fact that the Buddha had far too much reverence for God ever to presume to speak of him. What other explanation could there be? The idea of a moral but Godless universe is quite foreign to European thought.

and imho not only to european thought...

best wishes

[appicchato]

...will passionately...

That's (part of) the problem for many/most (but not limited to) Caucasians...everyone's (just) got to be 'passionate' about something...the Buddha (in complete contrast) advised dispassion...all the way...

[Ngawang Drolma.]

The Dalai Lama is often quoted as saying that if someone has a spiritual path that they like, then he does not want to encourage them to change to Buddhism. But as far as I can see he doesn't say that those path are the same.

Metta
Mike

[Ngawang Drolma.]

It appears that Namu Butsu is poking his head in here, interested in Buddhist ideas.

It is not easy to let go of the God idea. It took me a while. For example when I was just a kid my parents died. I immediately replaced them with God, my parent-in-space. Just like letting go of them (the parents), letting go of God was a rough road. Eventually, as the Dalai Lama says, if you're going to be a Buddhist you do need to make a choice about this. And the Dalai Lama emphasizes that choosing your religion is a serious thing. But letting go of the God idea is not easy or instant for some.

I think that if someone is peeking in, wondering about Buddhism, it would be generous to show a bit of gentleness.

As long as we're so forthcoming with opinions in this thread, there's mine

Best,
Drolma

[christopher:::]

Hi Drolma. Sorry to hear that, about the loss of your parents at such a young age. I'm glad that you have found refuge, guidance and support with the 3 jewels.

This whole thread reminds me of a letter of Ñánavìra Thera to Mr. Samaratunga on 20. August 1963

European thought cannot be understood until it is realized that every European is asking himself, consciously or unconsciously, whether God exists. Everything hinges on the answer to this question; for the problem of good and evil, and of personal survival of death ('the immortality of the soul'), are one with the problem of God's existence. It is this fact that makes the Buddha's Teaching incomprehensible to the European - 'How' he asks 'can there be Ethics ans Survival of Death if ther is no omnipotent God?' The European will passionately affirm God or passionately deny God, but he cannot ignore God. Sir Francis Younghusband, commenting on the fact that there is hadly any reference to an omnipotent God (Issaranimmána, 'Creator God') in the Suttas, attributes the omission to the supposed fact that the Buddha had far too much reverence for God ever to presume to speak of him. What other explanation could there be? The idea of a moral but Godless universe is quite foreign to European thought.

and imho not only to european thought...

best wishes

Good point, acinteyyo. People need to believe there is a meaningfulness and order to life, i think, and a well-lit path for us to follow. Otherwise all the chaos and dukkha can overwhelm one.. Buddhists have the 3 jewels. NonBuddhists do not. For hundreds of millions a belief in God and/or a Higher Cosmic Order plays an essential role...

[Namu Butsu]

It appears that Namu Butsu is poking his head in here, interested in Buddhist ideas.

It is not easy to let go of the God idea. It took me a while. For example when I was just a kid my parents died. I immediately replaced them with God, my parent-in-space. Just like letting go of them (the parents), letting go of God was a rough road. Eventually, as the Dalai Lama says, if you're going to be a Buddhist you do need to make a choice about this. And the Dalai Lama emphasizes that choosing your religion is a serious thing. But letting go of the God idea is not easy or instant for some.

I think that if someone is peeking in, wondering about Buddhism, it would be generous to show a bit of gentleness.

As long as we're so forthcoming with opinions in this thread, there's mine

Best,
Drolma

Namaste Drolma,

Thank you for the response and personal story. It was very tough for me to originally put away my concepts of God after I gave up my religious dogma before. I cannot imagine how it would be so young and having your parents die. Ofcourse we due to our fears and sorrows need to cling to some imaginary deity. I bet it was even worse for you to let go of God.

Recently I had let go of God, this ofcourse shocked my wife ofcourse because we had both converted to islam. However, we soon left the concept though left the door open to possibly there is a God but were unsure. I ofcourse was exploring going to different buddhist temples and centers and meditating. The concept had left me, but then I learned about the Hindu view of God and it made me ponder perhaps there way of thinking is a bit better. It certainly is better than abrahamic faiths. However, I still do not believe in a God though sometimes I may imagine so, but I have many doubts about it. Though learning about the Hindu concepts makes me ponder the question more deeply. The reason being as suggested in my above posts is that the God of hinduism is way different from western religions in which God is some individual being far away from us who "Created" the universe. Instead hinduism is about an immanent pulsating energy that Manifested the creation with the big bang theory etc... The hindu concept of God can best described by the film called (What the Bleep Do we Know) if you have watched it and got to the section where the scientist are speaking about God etc... then that is what I am pondering. When they speak of that essence which they cannot describe, then this is my delimma. Either way I am continuing to meditate and I read my buddhist library and plus hindu books I have. I am currently restudying "The Wise Heart" By Jack Kornfield and doing the practices in it. So I will keep an open mind. My desires make me want to be buddhist, but I know if I jump in without pondering the Eastern concept of God (in Hinduism) then I will not be doing the subject any justice.

[tiltbillings]

western religions in which God is some individual being far away from us who "Created" the universe.

That is a very unsophisticated presentation of the Christian god, just as one can find equally unsophisticated presentation of the Hindu god(s).

The reason being as suggested in my above posts is that the God of hinduism is way different from western religions in which God is some individual being far away from us who "Created" the universe. Instead hinduism is about an immanent pulsating energy that Manifested the creation with the big bang theory etc...

But what does such a god notion really explain? And if such a god existed, what does its creation/manifestation/pulsating immanent emanation tell us about it really is?

[Namu Butsu]

It explains the unborn, indestructable, beyond time and space, our true nature that we are not separate from.

[tiltbillings]

It explains the unborn, indestructable, beyond time and space, our true nature that we are not separate from.

That really does not answer the question. You have given us a string of words, but what do they mean, what do they have to do with day-to-day life, what do they have to do with why we suffer? And how do you know there is an unborn whatever other than wishful thinking?

The question: But what does such a god notion really explain? And if such a god existed, what does its creation/manifestation/pulsating immanent emanation tell us about it really is? We look at the creation/manifestation/pulsating immanent emanation of the supposed god as it plays itself out among human beings on this planet in this solar system in this galaxy. We have a universe that function via impersonal principles. We could easily be wiped out in short order by the play of these principles, not to mention the increasing population and the subsequent increasing in human misery, so what does this tell us about the supposed creation/manifestation/pulsating immanent emanation god, be it Hindu or anyone else's? In face of death and disease and suffering and raging uncertainty, we want something that will make it all better, be a loving god or it is just an illusion, you are part of the real reality or whatever.

[Namu Butsu]

Its another way to free us from suffering. According to the hindus when the Yogi realizes that he is not seperate from God then the yogi experiences liberation. There is no such thing as death and rebirth. It is identical to nirvana. So perhaps its the same thing. This is what I am pondering.

[tiltbillings]

Its another way to free us from suffering. According to the hindus when the Yogi realizes that he is not seperate from God then the yogi experiences liberation. There is no such thing as death and rebirth. It is identical to nirvana. So perhaps its the same thing. This is what I am pondering.

Why bother to free oneself from suffering since it is no different from the god, since it is no more than god's emanation, since it is an illusion, having no reality?

[christopher:::]

Its another way to free us from suffering. According to the hindus when the Yogi realizes that he is not seperate from God then the yogi experiences liberation. There is no such thing as death and rebirth. It is identical to nirvana. So perhaps its the same thing. This is what I am pondering.

Why bother to free oneself from suffering since it is no different from the god, since it is no more than god's emanation, since it is an illusion, having no reality?

Tibetan and Zen Buddhists sometimes talk about how samsara is nirvana, how everyone is really a Buddha. Ajahn Chah has said that everything is Dhamma. That doesnt change our situation though, in a magical way, for those who are suffering. We still need a path, a way, methods of practice.

Liberation is a process, no?

The Abrahamic concept is there is a God individual being who "created" the universe and rules over from a throne in heaven (some Islamic concepts place God Above the 7 heavens on a throne that is over those heavens). The islamic deity isnt known in terms of anthropomorphically. Though the christian and jewish may be. But the Muslims still accept an Individual Deity somewhere out there that with magical powers produced the universe.

In Sanatana Dharma (Hinduism) in particular the Shaivite path God is Immanent and transcendent. God is dual and non dual, within us and outside of us. There is only one reality (monism). That means that all this around us the maya is illusion because the onlything that exist is God. We are part of that God we just dont realize it and thus is why we suffer. Siva is looked at as Absolute reality, Pure Consciousness, and Primal soul. From dancing with Siva the book it states that Siva is unmanifests, unchanging and transcendent, the Self God, Timeless, formless and spaceless. As pure consciousness, Siva is the manifest primal substance, pure love and light flowing through all form, existing everywhere in time and space as infinite intelligence and power. As Primal Soul, Siva is the five-fold manifestation: brahma, the creator; vishnu the preserver; Rudra the destroyer; Mahesvara the Veiling Lord, and Sadasiva the revealer.

Siva's unamnifest reality is something that must be realizd. It does not exist yet exist. It is basically Formelessness, unborn, indestructable, beyond time and space, without qualities, that we are apart of and is our nature.

Makes sense to me. I've tried to explain this to fellow Buddhists here and elsewhere though, numerous times. For some reason the Hindu view just doesnt make sense to many, as the anthropomorphic doesnt make sense to most of us here.

[Ceisiwr]

Makes sense to me. I've tried to explain this to fellow Buddhists here and elsewhere though, numerous times. For some reason the Hindu view just doesnt make sense to many, as the anthropomorphic doesnt make sense to most of us here.

And what does this One/Spark/Principle/Element/Origin do?

[Ceisiwr]

It explains the unborn, indestructable, beyond time and space, our true nature that we are not separate from.

You have said a lot of words here without actually saying anything


What is this true nature? What does it do?


Also, why do you posit such a thing?

Why is this an attractive idea to you?