Buddhism and God: What's the problem?

AfterGlow · Mar 13, 2011

I'd like to know people's thoughts on why the Buddha taught that belief in God is a hindrance to enlightenment.

I'm assuming that it is because belief in God normally goes hand-in-hand with belief in an immortal soul, and that is why the Buddha would have suggested it is a detrimental belief.
I can't see any other problems with holding a belief in God myself.

Engyo · Mar 13, 2011

Generally, I find it to be that one will tend to place reliance on god or gods rather than ones self, and will also place responsibility for one's life and choices on god or gods, rather than ones self. Since ones own choices are what determine karma, if one is placing responsibility elsewhere, it is a good bet that dukkha will be increased.

AfterGlow · Mar 13, 2011

Engyo said:
Generally, I find it to be that one will tend to place reliance on god or gods rather than ones self, and will also place responsibility for one's life and choices on god or gods, rather than ones self. Since ones own choices are what determine karma, if one is placing responsibility elsewhere, it is a good bet that dukkha will be increased.

Ah, that makes a great deal of sense. Thank you.

Ok, so if a person believed in a god but not in an immortal soul and didn't believe their god was responsible/controlling their actions. What else would there be for a Buddhist to find issue with?

LuisDantas · Mar 13, 2011

AfterGlow said:
I'd like to know people's thoughts on why the Buddha taught that belief in God is a hindrance to enlightenment.

I'm assuming that it is because belief in God normally goes hand-in-hand with belief in an immortal soul, and that is why the Buddha would have suggested it is a detrimental belief.
I can't see any other problems with holding a belief in God myself.

There is some controversy on this matter, but it is generally believed that the original teachings of the Buddha include that of being one's own reference. Belief in God is generally speaking not very useful to that end. It is my understanding that there are exceptions.

Copernicus · Mar 13, 2011

Did Buddha specifically argue against belief in gods or just worship of them?

Breathe · Mar 13, 2011

AfterGlow said:
I'd like to know people's thoughts on why the Buddha taught that belief in God is a hindrance to enlightenment. <<snip>>
I can't see any other problems with holding a belief in God myself.

Theistic Buddhist [among other things] here. We're a minority, but I don't see much of a problem with it, obviously. There are some texts slightly more, well, open to the idea of a "God" of sorts, really:

"I am the core of all that exists. I am the seed of all that exists. I am the foundation of all that exists. I am the root of existence. I am 'the core', because I contain all phenomena. I am 'the seed', because I give birth to everything. I am 'the cause', because all comes forth from me. I am 'the trunk', because the ramificationsof every event sprout from me. I am 'the foundation', because all abides in me. I am called 'the root', because I am everything." - Samantabhadra, Kulayalaraja Tantra.

"For instance, Mahāmati, Indra is [sometimes known as] Śakra, [sometimes? as] Purandara; hand is hasta, kara, paṇi; the body is tanu, deha, śarīra; the earth is pṛithivī, bhūmi, vasuṁdhara; the sky is kha, ākāśa, gagana; all these objects each in its way are designated with many names, synonymously used and discriminated; but on account of these different names different objects are not to be imagined, nor are they without their self-nature. The same, Mahāmati, can be said of myself, for I come within the range of hearing of ignorant people, in this world of patience, under many names, amounting to a hundred thousand times three asaṁkhyeyas, and they address me by these names not knowing that they are all other names of the Tathagata. Of these, Mahāmati, some recognise me as the Tathagata, some as the Self-existent One, some as Leader, as Vinayaka (Remover), as Pariṇāyaka (Guide), as Buddha, as Rishi (Ascetic), as Bull-king, as Brahma, as Vishṇu, as Īśvara, as Original Source (pradhāna), as Kapila, as Bhūtānta (End of Reality), as Arishṭa, as Nemina, as Soma (moon), as the Sun, as Rāma, as Vyāsa, as Śuka, as Indra, as Balin, as Varuṇa, as is known to some; while others recognise me as One who is never born and never passes away, as Emptiness, as Suchness, as Truth, as Reality, as Limit of Reality, (193) as the Dharmadhātu, as Nirvana, as the Eternal, as Sameness, as Non-duality, as the Undying, as the Formless, as Causation, as the Doctrine of Buddha-cause, as Emancipation, as the Truth of the Path, as the All-Knower, as the Victor, as the Will-made Mind." - Siddhartha Gautama (Shakyamuni Buddha), Lankavatara Sutra [tr Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki].

I'll add my two cents below:

However, in some cases, it can be unhelpful to believe in God, since many "cling" to God. I don't. I rely on myself for "salvation", not gods or God; they can't implement it for me.

Abrahamic angry sky daddy god-concepts, I don't think these are really that compatible with Buddhism. More mystically-inclined ones, like panentheistic ones, not as difficult.

However, I'm very skeptical about whether or not Buddha said it was, since there was no real notion of "God" in Buddhas times: the devas of Buddhas time were not things that could really be considered as a God in the Western/Abrahamic sense, as they're.. well, not really: devas fought, battled, displaced asuras, and so on. Even Brahma cannot be, since Brahma will one day according to Hindu philosophy, die. Hinduism was still a baby at the time, so the more mystical side hadn't caught on.

This is, of course, excluding the Buddhist texts recorded. We don't know if they are what he said or not, since his teachings were not preserved for a minimum of five hundred years after his death, and there were between ten and twenty large schools of Buddhism for the longest time. We can't know for sure what he said, and how much of it is bunk, how much is fraud, how much of it is skewed, the meaning lost, and so on. All we can do is implement it.

I've been practicing Buddhism since I was 13/14-ish. Am I not Buddhist? Well, there's one member on here who wouldn't think so, and is an anti-theist. I have him on ignore, though, and don't care what he says [:angel2:]. Some people won't accept you doing it, others will. Yet, I accept, and attempt to practice:

The Three Marks of Existence
Eightfold Path
Four Noble Truths
Five Precepts

So, I have no reason to see why I can't be a Buddhist, even if my interpretations are a little more, well, very heterodox, allowing me a type of "soul" and God [not a white ghost and man on a cloud kind of thing though, lol], even if they are a bit different from the way most in the West interpret them and then knee-jerk in reaction to them.

If you wanted to be a Buddhist and believe in a [more mature] God-concept, I don't see a problem. I've been doing it for a long time. Some may not like it, though, but meh - it's your sadhana [spiritual practice], not theirs.

Just this buddhu's two cents.
Hoping the orthodox community don't mind it too much.

Tathagata · Mar 13, 2011

AfterGlow said:
I'd like to know people's thoughts on why the Buddha taught that belief in God is a hindrance to enlightenment.

Let's let the Buddha answer that:

the Buddha: "Others think that God is free creator of all things; clinging to these foolish notions, there is no awakening." [Lankavatara Sutra]
^^^
Here he is saying that God-belief is a notion that one clings to. It violates both the doctrine of non-attachment as well as his teachings on self-responsibility and self-reliance.

the Buddha: "In this same class the disciples are the earnest disciples of other faiths, who clinging to the notions of such things as, the soul as an external entity, Supreme Atman, Personal God, seek a [belief] that is in harmony with them. ...But none of these, earnest though they be, have gained an insight into the truth of the twofold egolessness and are, therefore, of limited spiritual insights as regards deliverance and non-deliverance; for them there is no emancipation. They have great self-confidence but they can never gain a true knowledge of Nirvana." [Lankavatara Sutra]
^^^^
Here he says that God-believers have limited spiritual insight, have no chance of emancipation, and will never gain a true knowledge of Nirvana.

the Buddha: “This position rises the question of a first cause which the philosophers meet by asserting that their first cause, God and the primal elements, are un-born and un-annihilate; which position is without evidence and is irrational.” [Lankavatara Sutra]
^^^^
Here he says that God-belief is irrational. And irrational things are contrary to Enlightenment, so all irrational notions must be abandoned.

I'm assuming that it is because belief in God normally goes hand-in-hand with belief in an immortal soul, and that is why the Buddha would have suggested it is a detrimental belief.

No, that's not why. Perhaps, that's one of the reasons he rejects the existence of God, but that's not why he opposes God-belief.

I can't see any other problems with holding a belief in God myself.

This here maybe one of his more elaborate explanations:

the Buddha: "Is it true that you hold that whatever a person experiences is all caused by a Supreme Being's act of creation? Then in that case, a person is a killer of living beings because of a Supreme Being's act of creation. A person is a thief, unchaste, a liar, a divisive speaker, a harsh speaker, an idle chatterer, greedy, malicious, a holder of wrong views because of a Supreme Being's act of creation. When one falls back on creation by a Supreme Being as being essential, there is no desire [motivation], no effort [at the thought], 'This should be done. This shouldn't be done.' When one can't pin down as a truth or reality what should & shouldn't be done, one dwells bewildered & unprotected. One cannot righteously refer to oneself as a contemplative. This was my second righteous refutation of those priests & contemplatives who hold to such teachings, such views." [Tittha Sutta]

.

Copernicus · Mar 13, 2011

Tathagata, I see no clear statement in those passages to indicate that gods were non-existent beings, only that certain beliefs surrounding gods were false or misleading. I can see where many believers in gods could find enough wiggle room to retain belief in gods but still consider themselves Buddhists. A certain amount of vagueness or ambiguity makes sense, as early Buddhists were seeking converts from theistic traditions. It is one thing to deny the existence of gods. It is another to declare gods irrelevant and get away with it. That makes it less difficult to attract new converts who might otherwise be inclined to dismiss atheism.

Tathagata · Mar 13, 2011

Copernicus said:
Tathagata, I see no clear statement in those passages to indicate that gods were non-existent beings, only that certain beliefs surrounding gods were false or misleading.

That's because I wasn't asked to. This is about God-belief, not God's existence. But if you want me to give you Buddha quotes rejecting God's existence, I have those too.

the Buddha : "All such notions [of a] ...personal soul, Supreme Spirit, Sovereign God, Creator, are all figments of the imagination and manifestations of mind." [Lankavatara Sutra]

^^^
Notice he is sure to say "All such notions." This statement here makes it clear that ALL notions of God are figments of the imagination.

"After taking his seat Anathapindika expressed a desire to hear a discourse on some religious subject.

"The Blessed Lord responding to his wishes raised the question, Who is it that shapes our lives? Is it God, a personal creator? If God be the maker, all living things should have silently to submit to their maker's power. They would be like vessels formed by the potter's hand. If the world had been made by God there should be no such thing as sorrow, or calamity, or sin; for both pure and impure deeds must come from him. If not, there would be another cause beside him, and he would not be the self-existent one. Thus, you see, the thought of God is overthrown.
^^^^
(There he just refuted the Personal version of God.)

"Again, it is said that the Absolute cannot be a cause. All things around us come from a cause as the plant comes from the seed; how can the Absolute be the cause of all things alike? If it pervades them, then certainly it does not make them.
^^^^
(And here he refutes the Panentheistic God, the God who pervades through all things.)

"Again, it is said that the self is the maker. But if self is the maker, why did he not make things pleasing? The cases of sorrow and joy are real and objective. How can they have been made by self?

"Again, if you adopt the argument, there is no maker, or fate in such as it is, and there is no causation, what use would there be in shaping our lives and adjusting means to an end?

"Therefore, we argue that all things that exist are not without a cause. However, neither God, nor the Absolute, nor the self, no causeless chance, is the maker, but our deeds produce results both good and evil.

"The whole world is under the law of causation, and the causes that act are not un-mental, for the gold of which the cup is made is gold throughout.

"Let us, then, surrender the heresies of worshiping God and praying to him; let us not lose ourselves in vain speculations of profitless subtleties; let us surrender self and all selfishness, and as all things are fixed by causation, let us practice good so that good may result from our actions."

[Culla Vagga 6:2]

I can see where many believers in gods could find enough wiggle room to retain belief in gods but still consider themselves Buddhists. A certain amount of vagueness or ambiguity makes sense, as early Buddhists were seeking converts from theistic traditions. It is one thing to deny the existence of gods. It is another to declare gods irrelevant and get away with it. That makes it less difficult to attract new converts who might otherwise be inclined to dismiss atheism.

There is no vagueness or ambiguity. I don't think he could be any more clear on the matter.

.

Copernicus · Mar 13, 2011

Tathagata said:
There is no vagueness or ambiguity. I don't think he could be any more clear on the matter.

Well, I am mindful of the fact that most practicing Buddhists in the world seem to believe in the existence of spiritual beings that include gods, and those passages certainly seem open to the possibility that gods exist. There is certainly a denial of a Creator God or God in the more conventional sense that we find in the Hindu tradition, but there is a concept of monism that seems to pervade dharmic points of view. So I can see where one might claim that the gods exist in the same sense that lots of illusory beings and things exist. You can interact with them, but it would be a deviation from the path to enlightenment. (Just playing Devil's Advocate here. I can see where non-theistic Buddhism would gain inspiration from these passages, too.)

zenzero · Mar 13, 2011

Friends,

Though am not a follower of buddhism but what is understood that Gautama realised that the word *god* is a label to understand that what ever is seen or unseen are the one and the same and so this whole existence including the human form are all one but seen in parts and so there is never a separation between God and the self and the separation as seen is the illusion and once the delusion is clear there remains only nothingness or everythingness.

Love & rgds

SageTree · Mar 14, 2011

ZZ nailed it.

Words CAN be a hindrance and God often seems to lead people down the road of Duality and Externalizing their power.

God is a word, and putting the Universe on the back of 3 letters is bound to lead to people having wondering and touching its 'meaning' in different ways....

For instance, In Islam there is 99 names for Allah:

Read these, consider if these are also qualities in yourself, that you wish to embody more purely, your True/Buddha Nature?

Are most of these not words about how we live: think, perceive, act, process the world or strive to be in all that is?

1 Allah (الل&#1607 The Greatest Name (which I understand to be 'no form, full of mystery, the named Nameless')
2 Ar-Rahman (الرحم&#1606 The All-Compassionate
3 Ar-Rahim (الرحي&#1605 The All-Merciful
4 Al-Malik (المل&#1603 The Absolute Ruler
5 Al-Quddus (القدو&#1587 The Pure One
6 As-Salam (السلا&#1605 The Source of Peace
7 Al-Mu'min (المؤم&#1606 The Inspirer of Faith
8 Al-Muhaymin (المهيم&#1606 The Guardian
9 Al-Aziz (العزي&#1586 The Victorious
10 Al-Jabbar (الجبا&#1585 The Compeller
11 Al-Mutakabbir (المتكب&#1585 The Greatest
12 Al-Khaliq (الخال&#1602 The Creator
13 Al-Bari' (البار&#1574 The Maker of Order
14 Al-Musawwir (المصو&#1585 The Shaper of Beauty
15 Al-Ghaffar (الغفا&#1585 The Forgiving
16 Al-Qahhar (القها&#1585 The Subduer
17 Al-Wahhab (الوها&#1576 The Giver of All
18 Ar-Razzaq (الرزا&#1602 The Sustainer
19 Al-Fattah (الفتا&#1581 The Opener
20 Al-`Alim (العلي&#1605 The Knower of All
21 Al-Qabid (القاب&#1590 The Constrictor
22 Al-Basit (الباس&#1591 The Reliever
23 Al-Khafid (الخاف&#1590 The Abaser
24 Ar-Rafi (الراف&#1593 The Exalter
25 Al-Mu'izz (المع&#1586 The Bestower of Honors
26 Al-Mudhill (المذ&#1604 The Humiliator
27 As-Sami (السمي&#1593 The Hearer of All
28 Al-Basir (البصي&#1585 The Seer of All
29 Al-Hakam (الحك&#1605 The Judge
30 Al-`Adl (العد&#1604 The Just
31 Al-Latif (اللطي&#1601 The Subtle One
32 Al-Khabir (الخبي&#1585 The All-Aware
33 Al-Halim (الحلي&#1605 The Forbearing
34 Al-Azim (العظي&#1605 The Magnificent
35 Al-Ghafur (الغفو&#1585 The Forgiver and Hider of Faults
36 Ash-Shakur (الشكو&#1585 The Rewarder of Thankfulness
37 Al-Ali (العل&#1609 The Highest
38 Al-Kabir (الكبي&#1585 The Greatest
39 Al-Hafiz (الحفي&#1592 The Preserver
40 Al-Muqit (المقي&#1578 The Nourisher
41 Al-Hasib (الحسي&#1576 The Accounter
42 Al-Jalil (الجلي&#1604 The Mighty
43 Al-Karim (الكري&#1605 The Generous
44 Ar-Raqib (الرقي&#1576 The Watchful One
45 Al-Mujib (المجي&#1576 The Responder to Prayer
46 Al-Wasi (الواس&#1593 The All-Comprehending
47 Al-Hakim (الحكي&#1605 The Perfectly Wise
48 Al-Wadud (الودو&#1583 The Loving One
49 Al-Majid (المجي&#1583 The Majestic One
50 Al-Ba'ith (الباع&#1579 The Resurrector
51 Ash-Shahid (الشهي&#1583 The Witness
52 Al-Haqq (الح&#1602 The Truth
53 Al-Wakil (الوكي&#1604 The Trustee
54 Al-Qawiyy (القو&#1609 The Possessor of All Strength
55 Al-Matin (المتي&#1606 The Forceful One
56 Al-Waliyy (الول&#1609 The Governor
57 Al-Hamid (الحمي&#1583 The Praised One
58 Al-Muhsi (المحص&#1609 The Appraiser
59 Al-Mubdi' (المبد&#1574 The Originator
60 Al-Mu'id (المعي&#1583 The Restorer
61 Al-Muhyi (المحي&#1609 The Giver of Life
62 Al-Mumit (الممي&#1578 The Taker of Life
63 Al-Hayy (الح&#1610 The Ever Living One
64 Al-Qayyum (القيو&#1605 The Self-Existing One
65 Al-Wajid (الواج&#1583 The Finder
66 Al-Majid (الماج&#1583 The Glorious
67 Al-Wahid (الواح&#1583 The One, the All Inclusive, The Indivisible
68 As-Samad (الصم&#1583 The Satisfier of All Needs
69 Al-Qadir (القاد&#1585 The All Powerful
70 Al-Muqtadir (المقتد&#1585 The Creator of All Power
71 Al-Muqaddim (المقد&#1605 The Expediter
72 Al-Mu'akhkhir (المؤخ&#1585 The Delayer
73 Al-Awwal (الأو&#1604 The First
74 Al-Akhir (الأخ&#1585 The Last
75 Az-Zahir (الظاه&#1585 The Manifest One
76 Al-Batin (الباط&#1606 The Hidden One
77 Al-Wali (الوال&#1610 The Protecting Friend
78 Al-Muta'ali (المتعال&#1610 The Supreme One
79 Al-Barr (الب&#1585 The Doer of Good
80 At-Tawwab (التوا&#1576 The Guide to Repentance
81 Al-Muntaqim (المنتق&#1605 The Avenger
82 Al-'Afuww (العف&#1608 The Forgiver
83 Ar-Ra'uf (الرؤو&#1601 The Clement
84 Malik-al-Mulk (مالك المل&#1603 The Owner of All
85 Dhu-al-Jalal wa-al-Ikram (ذو الجلال و الإكرا&#1605 The Lord of Majesty and Bounty
86 Al-Muqsit (المقس&#1591 The Equitable One
87 Al-Jami' (الجام&#1593 The Gatherer
88 Al-Ghani (الغن&#1609 The Rich One
89 Al-Mughni (المغن&#1609 The Enricher
90 Al-Mani'(المان&#1593 The Preventer of Harm
91 Ad-Darr (الضا&#1585 The Creator of The Harmful
92 An-Nafi' (الناف&#1593 The Creator of Good
93 An-Nur (النو&#1585 The Light
94 Al-Hadi (الهاد&#1610 The Guide
95 Al-Badi (البدي&#1593 The Originator
96 Al-Baqi (الباق&#1610 The Everlasting One
97 Al-Warith (الوار&#1579 The Inheritor of All
98 Ar-Rashid (الرشي&#1583 The Righteous Teacher
99 As-Sabur (الصبو&#1585 The Patient One

So then What IS God after all?

:namaste
SageTree

zenzero · Mar 14, 2011

So then What IS God after all?

Obviously another label to understand the *WHOLE* like the 108 names for Krishna:

Achala - Still Lord
Achyuta - Infallible Lord
Adbhutah - Wonderful God
Adidev - The Lord Of The Lords
Aditya - The Son Of Aditi
Ajanma - One Who Is Limitless And Endless
Ajaya - The Conqueror Of Life And Death
Akshara - Indestructible Lord
Amrit - Heavenly nectar or elixir
Anandsagar - Compassionate Lord
Ananta - The Endless Lord
Anantajit - Ever Victorious Lord
Anaya - One Who Has No Leader
Aniruddha - One Who Cannot Be Obstructed
Aparajeet - The Lord Who Cannot Be Defeated
Avyukta - One Who Is As Clear As Crystal
Balgopal - The Child Krishna, The All Attractive
Balkrishna- The Child Krishna
Chaturbhuj - Four-Armed Lord
Danavendra - Granter Of Boons
Dayalu - Repository Of Compassion
Dayanidhi - The Compassionate Lord
Devadidev - The God Of The Gods
Devakinandan - Son Of Mother Devaki
Devesh - Lord Of The Lords
Dharmadhyaksha - The Lord OF Dharma
Dravin - The one who has no Enemies
Dwarkapati - Lord Of Dwarka
Gopal - One Who Plays With The Cowherds, The Gopas
Gopalpriya - Lover Of Cowherds
Govinda - One Who Pleases The Cows, The Land And The Entire Nature
Gyaneshwar - The Lord Of Knowledge
Hari - The Lord Of Nature
Hiranyagarbha - The All Powerful Creator
Hrishikesh - The Lord Of All Senses
Jagadguru - Preceptor Of The Universe
Jagadisha - Protector Of All
Jagannath - Lord Of The Universe
Janardhana - One Who Bestows Boons On One And All
Jayantah - Conqueror Of All Enemies
Jyotiraaditya - The Resplendence Of The Sun
Kamalnath - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi
Kamalnayan - The Lord With Lotus Shaped Eyes
Kamsantak - Slayer Of Kamsa
Kanjalochana - The Lotus-Eyed God
Keshava - One Who Has Long, Black Matted Locks
Krishna - Dark-Complexioned Lord
Lakshmikantam - The Lord Of Goddess Lakshmi
Lokadhyaksha - Lord Of All The Three Lokas (Worlds)
Madan - The Lord Of Love
Madhava - Knowledge Filled God
Madhusudan - Slayer Of Demon Madhu
Mahendra - Lord Of Indra
Manmohan - All Pleasing Lord
Manohar - Beautiful Lord
Mayur - The Lord Who Has A Peacock Feathered-Crest
Mohan - All Attractive God
Murali - The Flute Playing Lord
Murlidhar - One Who Holds The Flute
Murlimanohar - The Flute Playing God
Nandakumara - Son of Nanda
Nandgopala - The Son Of Nand
Narayana - The Refuge Of Everyone
Navaneethachora - makan (butter) chor
Niranjana - The Unblemished Lord
Nirguna - Without Any Properties
Padmahasta - One Who Has Hands Like Lotus
Padmanabha - The Lord Who Has A Lotus Shaped Navel
Parabrahmana - The Supreme Absolute Truth
Paramatma - Lord Of All Beings
Parampurush - Supreme Personality
Parthasarthi - Charioteer Of Partha - Arjuna
Prajapati - Lord Of All Creatures
Punyah - Supremely Pure
Purshottam - The Supreme Soul
Ravilochana - One Whose Eye Is The Sun
Sahasraakash - Thousand-Eyed Lord
Sahasrajit - One Who Vanquishes Thousands
Sakshi - All Witnessing Lord
Sanatana - The Eternal Lord
Sarvajana - Omniscient Lord
Sarvapalaka - Protector Of All
Sarveshwar - Lord Of All Gods
Satyavachana - One Who Speaks Only The Truth
Satyavrata - The Truth Dedicated Lord
Shantah - Peaceful Lord
Shreshta - The Most Glorious Lord
Shrikanta - Beautiful Lord
Shyam - Dark-Complexioned Lord
Shyamsundara - Lord Of The Beautiful Evenings
Sumedha - Intelligent Lord
Suresham - Lord Of All Demi-Gods
Swargapati - Lord Of Heavens
Trivikrama - Conqueror Of All The Three Worlds
Upendra - Brother Of Indra
Vaikunthanatha - Lord Of Vaikuntha, The Heavenly Abode
Vardhamaanah - The Formless Lord
Vasudev - All Prevailing Lord
Vishnu-All Prevailing Lord
Vishwadakshinah - Skillful And Efficient Lord
Vishwakarma - Creator Of The Universe
Vishwamurti - Of The Form Of The Entire Universe
Vishwarupa - One Who Displays The Universal Form
Vishwatma - Soul Of The Universe
Vrishaparvaa - Lord Of Dharma
Yadavendra - King Of The Yadav Clan
Yogi - The Supreme Master
Yoginampati - Lord Of The Yogis

Or the 1000 names of Vishnu; appears as food to the delusional mind to remain delusive???

Love & rgds

SageTree · Mar 15, 2011

zenzero said:
Obviously another label to understand the *WHOLE* like the 108 names for Krishna:

Or the 1000 names of Vishnu; appears as food to the delusional mind to remain delusive???

Love & rgds

Now we're cooking with fire

zenzero · Mar 15, 2011

Friend sage,

That was just a play and like all games one has to develop a knack to play to enjoy as winning/losing are part and parcels of all games and irrelevant to one'e enjoyment.

Existence has provided pointers and labels too are pointers which existence have provided through mediums/reflectors/enlightened ones and needs to be understood.

Love & rgds

SageTree · Mar 15, 2011

As Carl Sagan put it "The Universe experiencing Itself"..... so to speak, would be apt here to say.... no pun or play intended on 'Self'

Twilight Hue · Mar 15, 2011

Belief such as that found in an anthropomorphous God more often than not causes a notable distraction and hindrance due to common tendency for some persons to cling to such beliefs by the manner in which its viewed, and therefore cannot be comfortably and or easily let go due to the influencing nature of such a belief.

God should die as the Buddha. Kill them all.

zenzero · Mar 15, 2011

Friend sage,

As Carl Sagan put it "The Universe experiencing Itself"..... so to speak, would be apt here to say.... no pun or play intended on 'Self'

TRUE!
however being a form which is part and parcel of existence/universe itself the play on the word *ITSELF* is self evident!

Love & rgds

zenzero · Mar 15, 2011

Friend Nowhere Man,

Belief such as that found in an anthropomorphous God more often than not causes a notable distraction and hindrance due to common tendency for some persons to cling to such beliefs by the manner in which its viewed, and therefore cannot be comfortably and or easily let go due to the influencing nature of such a belief.

God should die as the Buddha. Kill them all.

Here the viewer is a separate entity and so *God* as label is never the problem; it is the MIND itself that is viewing itself to be a separate entity from that *whole* which is also labelled *god*.

To kill someone, first one has to give birth to such an entity; here it is the MIND itself that is giving birth, so it is the mind that needs to be STILLED!

Love & rgds

Twilight Hue · Mar 15, 2011

zenzero said:
Friend Nowhere Man,

Here the viewer is a separate entity and so *God* as label is never the problem; it is the MIND itself that is viewing itself to be a separate entity from that *whole* which is also labelled *god*.

To kill someone, first one has to give birth to such an entity; here it is the MIND itself that is giving birth, so it is the mind that needs to be STILLED!

Love & rgds

Basically its a way of letting go of such concepts as passing clouds such as God and Buddha hence killing the "permanency and substance" each distraction respectively brings. Stilling the mind is certainly good advice of which all perceptions arise from, more so is dropping of mind without need for "the"!

Been awhile good friend Zenzero. :O)

Buddhism and God: What's the problem?

Invisible Puffle

Prince of Dorkness!

Invisible Puffle

Aura of atheification

Industrial Strength Linguist

Hostis humani generis

Freethinker

Industrial Strength Linguist

Freethinker

Industrial Strength Linguist

Its only a Label

Spiritual Friend

Its only a Label

Spiritual Friend

Its only a Label

Spiritual Friend

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

Its only a Label

Its only a Label

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.