Do Buddhist believe in god?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Post Reply
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Cittasanto »

Something noted early on in the thread that meaning can have a wide scope or a narrow scope, and an individual preference has already been accomodated in what I have said.
Remember my Theist in the Broadest sense means a belief that at least one god exists? the same would be applied to atheist and the scope.
unfortunately all Buddhists would by definitions you have used be atheists, or monotheistic-buddhists with a belief in one god, but as pointed out there are gods so to apply the term would create ambiguity, as it would apply to all gods.
if an individual is atheistic that is one thing, but as a describer of Buddhism it is not portraying the scope in areas such as rebirth, and the texts.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:Something noted early on in the thread that meaning can have a wide scope or a narrow scope, and an individual preference has already been accomodated in what I have said.
Remember my Theist in the Broadest sense means a belief that at least one god exists? the same would be applied to atheist and the scope.
unfortunately all Buddhists would by definitions you have used be atheists, or monotheistic-buddhists with a belief in one god, but as pointed out there are gods so to apply the term would create ambiguity, as it would apply to all gods.
if an individual is atheistic that is one thing, but as a describer of Buddhism it is not portraying the scope in areas such as rebirth, and the texts.
This is less than clear. And please try not to ascribe to me things I have not said.

You might want to try rewriting this again and trying make it a bit more clear.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:And now you know.
yes now you know it is ambiguous to start with.
which created more explanations than neccesary.
But this fair amount of variation doesn't include the existence or inclusion of any god.
According to you.
any should be "a" and god should be god/s sorry
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:Something noted early on in the thread that meaning can have a wide scope or a narrow scope, and an individual preference has already been accomodated in what I have said.
Remember my Theist in the Broadest sense means a belief that at least one god exists? the same would be applied to atheist and the scope.
unfortunately all Buddhists would by definitions you have used be atheists, or monotheistic-buddhists with a belief in one god, but as pointed out there are gods so to apply the term would create ambiguity, as it would apply to all gods.
if an individual is atheistic that is one thing, but as a describer of Buddhism it is not portraying the scope in areas such as rebirth, and the texts.
This is less than clear. And please try not to ascribe to me things I have not said.

You might want to try rewriting this again and trying make it a bit more clear.
so you didn't say about the monotheistic god being refuted by the Buddha? You spent quite allot of time refuting that one idea.
don't ascribe to yourself that which is not ascribed to you!
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by tiltbillings »

Cittasanto wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:
Cittasanto wrote:Something noted early on in the thread that meaning can have a wide scope or a narrow scope, and an individual preference has already been accomodated in what I have said.
Remember my Theist in the Broadest sense means a belief that at least one god exists? the same would be applied to atheist and the scope.
unfortunately all Buddhists would by definitions you have used be atheists, or monotheistic-buddhists with a belief in one god, but as pointed out there are gods so to apply the term would create ambiguity, as it would apply to all gods.
if an individual is atheistic that is one thing, but as a describer of Buddhism it is not portraying the scope in areas such as rebirth, and the texts.
This is less than clear. And please try not to ascribe to me things I have not said.

You might want to try rewriting this again and trying make it a bit more clear.
so you didn't say about the monotheistic god being refuted by the Buddha? You spent quite allot of time refuting that one idea.
don't ascribe to yourself that which is not ascribed to you!
The problem is, Cittasanto, in reading your writing it is not always easy getting what you are trying to say. Also, you are simply going around in circles with all of this, which is your choice, but it is kind of a waste of time. The fact of the matter is that "atheism" does not have a hard and fast definition that would not allow us to talk about Buddhist athesim in the ways I have indicated above.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Way~Farer
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:38 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Way~Farer »

tiltbillings wrote:This is a contradiction you are importing into the Buddha-Dhamma. You are turning truth into a thing, which the Buddha did not do.
No sir I am not doing that. Leave you with it.
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by tiltbillings »

sunyavadin wrote:
tiltbillings wrote:This is a contradiction you are importing into the Buddha-Dhamma. You are turning truth into a thing, which the Buddha did not do.
No sir I am not doing that. Leave you with it.
Then what are you doing? You seem to be talking about Dhamma as an agent that upholds, supports or maintains the regulatory order of the universe.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Way~Farer
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:38 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Way~Farer »

I said, 'dhamma is conceived as a moral law', followed by a number of dictionary definitions of same. The Sanskrit root, dhr, means 'to hold', and can be interpreted as 'uphold'. That is certainly what it means in Indian culture, generally, and what it means in relation to Buddhism. It underwrites the whole theory of dependent origination, kamma, rebirth and liberation. This is not 'reifying' anything. It is what the word means.

The original context for my point was simply that the kinds of arguments atheism directs at the existence of God, can also be directed at 'dhamma', insofar as it is a moral law - there is no 'scientific' way of proving that it exists. (Not that I personally think that matters.)
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by tiltbillings »

sunyavadin wrote:I said, 'dhamma is conceived as a moral law', followed by a number of dictionary definitions of same. The Sanskrit root, dhr, means 'to hold', and can be interpreted as 'uphold'. That is certainly what it means in Indian culture, generally, and what it means in relation to Buddhism. It underwrites the whole theory of dependent origination, kamma, rebirth and liberation. This is not 'reifying' anything. It is what the word means.
You used the word Dhamma thus: "Dhamma, 'that which upholds supports or maintains the regulatory order of the universe'." But when asked to provide sutta texts to uphold, support, and maintain your claim of this "Dhamma, 'that which upholds . . . .", none were forth coming. I do not believe that the word Dhamma is used in the suttas in that way. Dhamma is not, in this context, a thing that upholds. It is a word – Dhamma/Truth -- that simply refers to the way the “world” works, paticcasamuppada, from the perspective of the Buddha. If you want to see the Truth/Dhamma then one must see the interdependent causal rise and fall of the "world." There is no truth other than that and it is a truth that only has actual meaning for the individual who sees the truth of the "world."
The original context for my point was simply that the kinds of arguments atheism directs at the existence of God, can also be directed at 'dhamma', insofar as it is a moral law - there is no 'scientific' way of proving that it exists. (Not that I personally think that matters.)
Dhamma is not a matter existence, and it is certainly not a matter of existence that is most often claimed of god, and certainly not an existence as an agent.

I am not talking about the issue here of scientific proof. The point I am looking at is the question of an omniscient, omnipotent, permanent, independent, unique cause of the cosmos from a Buddhist perspective. I am not arguing if that perspective is or is not true from a scientific point of view. I am simply pointing out that the Buddha presents a form of atheism that is worth considering.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Way~Farer
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:38 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Way~Farer »

Tiltbillings wrote:when asked to provide sutta texts to uphold, support, and maintain your claim of this "Dhamma, 'that which upholds . . . .", none were forth coming
The fact that the word 'dharma' (or dhamma) is derived from the root dhr - meaning, 'to hold', and is generally translated as 'moral law', is not something in the Buddhist scriptures. It is the meaning of the term. There is also the word 'adhamma', which means contrary to the dhamma.

As for 'the dhamma upholding and supporting the teaching', the Buddha said at the time of the awakening: "What if I were to dwell in dependence on this very Dhamma to which I have fully awakened, honoring and respecting it?" (SN 6.2) (as distinct from any Brahmas, Maras, Devas, and so on.)
User avatar
tiltbillings
Posts: 23046
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by tiltbillings »

sunyavadin wrote:
Tiltbillings wrote:when asked to provide sutta texts to uphold, support, and maintain your claim of this "Dhamma, 'that which upholds . . . .", none were forth coming
The fact that the word 'dharma' (or dhamma) is derived from the root dhr - meaning, 'to hold', and is generally translated as 'moral law', is not something in the Buddhist scriptures. It is the meaning of the term. There is also the word 'adhamma', which means contrary to the dhamma.
How a word means is based upon how the word is used, which is in the suttas.
As for 'the dhamma upholding and supporting the teaching', the Buddha said at the time of the awakening: "What if I were to dwell in dependence on this very Dhamma to which I have fully awakened, honoring and respecting it?" (SN 6.2) (as distinct from any Brahmas, Maras, Devas, and so on.)
That certainly does not support your contention.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:The problem is, Cittasanto, in reading your writing it is not always easy getting what you are trying to say. Also, you are simply going around in circles with all of this, which is your choice, but it is kind of a waste of time. The fact of the matter is that "atheism" does not have a hard and fast definition that would not allow us to talk about Buddhist athesim in the ways I have indicated above.
circles? you should realize I am responding to what you say, so look at yourself first.

although just to correct myself I also realised I used the term pantheist which is something different to a polytheist which I meant to use.

However I do believe I have found a compromise, and one I was unaware of/forgotten about & not known it being used in regard to Buddhism
Non-theistic
its benefit is that it does away with one aspect of theism (namely the connotations of theology which not all theistic religions have in the way christianity does) and doesn't sugest that there are no gods in Buddhism, and as the wiki article quotes Pema Chödrön
The difference between theism and nontheism is not whether one does or does not believe in God.[...] Theism is a deep-seated conviction that there's some hand to hold [...] Non-theism is relaxing with the ambiguity and uncertainty of the present moment without reaching for anything to protect ourselves [...] Nontheism is finally realizing there is no babysitter you can count on.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by daverupa »

tiltbillings wrote:How a word means is based upon how the word is used, which is in the suttas.
This is worth emphasizing, as it pertains to the word 'deva' as well as 'dhamma' and a host of others.

For example, suppose we didn't know English, but we had some text fragments and we were puzzling over the word "interesting". The definition of this word, which we don't know, in this case happens to be "drawing attention" due to how it is used. But if we were to look at the word origin from Latin, we would see "interesse", lit. 'to be between', from interess 'a thing between'.

Now, going from "between" to "drawing attention" is possible, but arcane and liable to mistake without essential context clues. Word origin is only part of the story with words.

(A useful rule of thumb is to consider that it is never words which have good translations, but sentences.)
  • "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

    "And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.

- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6646
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Cittasanto »

tiltbillings wrote:
sunyavadin wrote:The fact that the word 'dharma' (or dhamma) is derived from the root dhr - meaning, 'to hold', and is generally translated as 'moral law', is not something in the Buddhist scriptures. It is the meaning of the term. There is also the word 'adhamma', which means contrary to the dhamma.
How a word means is based upon how the word is used, which is in the suttas.
not to mention the root doesn't always indicate the precise meaning, dhṛ also means support, and is not generally translated as 'moral law' that is only one of the possible translations for Dhamma, "thing" "reality" "phenomena" "teaching" "scriptures" are all possible translations.
Roots also do not give the precise meaning of a word, they only give an indication, the context a word is in would also influence what is being meant by the word.
although the PED points us to Dhāreti which means
1. to carry, bear, wear, possess; to put on, to bring, give
2. to hold back, restrain
3. to bear in mind, know by heart, understand:
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.

He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
User avatar
Wesley1982
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:22 pm

Re: Do Buddhist believe in god?

Post by Wesley1982 »

It seems like Buddhism is polytheistic...
Post Reply