Buddhism and Jainism - theistic or non-theistic? or beyond these?

[Rhizomatic]

I'm initially tempted to say beyond, but I'll conditionally say that [many manifestations of] Buddhism and Jainism are non-theistic. Cross-cultural comparisons are tricky, and so a truly thorough and accurate answer would have to look at every manifestation of these broad belief systems and then enter into a largely-unproductive debate about what exactly does or doesn't qualify as a god. When approaching the broad diversity of Buddhism and Jainism as two single religions and trying to give an overall approximation of both it seems to make sense to refer to them as non-theistic, though, as they generally don't spend much time or effort addressing the (non)existence of what one might call a god.

 

[TTCUSM]

Guys,

Please see my comments on the thread "Historical Origins of Jainism" in the Jainism forum. Both religions are atheistic.

 

[xkatz]

Guys,

Please see my comments on the thread "Historical Origins of Jainism" in the Jainism forum. Both religions are atheistic.

Jain Dharma might be atheistic, but w/ Buddha Dharma, beliefs about god seem more or less up to the individual.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

TTCUSM some schools of Buddhism are theistic, so that's not entirely accurate

 

[LuisDantas]

I guess we'll have to disagree on that, Senedjem. Although I can hardly claim to know _every_ school of Buddhism, particularly in the USA, where word reached me that many Pure Land groups decided to follow independent paths.

Doctrinarily, there isn't a legitimate way that I know of for the Buddha Dharma to be made such that it requires belief in deities.

 

[Smoke]

I'm initially tempted to say beyond, but I'll conditionally say that [many manifestations of] Buddhism and Jainism are non-theistic.

Certainly my own Buddhism is non-theistic, and I think even the "theistic" expressions of Buddhism aren't quite theistic in the same way Western religions are. I'm no authority on Jainism, but it's my understanding that Jainism is non-theistic across the board.

 

[TTCUSM]

TTCUSM some schools of Buddhism are theistic, so that's not entirely accurate

Senedjem,
Are you referring to Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism? Both of those schools have been influenced by Hinduism. The following excerpt is from page 159 of Racial Synthesis in Hindu Culture by S. V. Viswanatha:

"The development of the Mahayana school of Buddhism which became permanent and fashionable from the time of Kanishka was in itself a testimony to the varying power of Brahmanical Hinduism. The newer form of Buddhism had much in common with the older form of Hinduism, and the relation is so close that even an expert often feels the difficulty in deciding to which system a particular image should be assigned." The Mahayana or the "Great Vehicle" was a product of Brahmanical influences.

Of all the schools of Buddhism, the Theravada school is probably the closest one to the original teachings of the Buddha.

 

[TTCUSM]

BTW, it was precisely because of these Hindu influences that Buddhism was later "absorbed" back into Hinduism.

 

[LuisDantas]

That too is a bit arguable. In Nepal and India, it may be hard to separate Buddhism from Hinduism, at least in some communities. But Buddhism certainly is not a subset of Hinduism in a general sense.

 

[TTCUSM]

But Buddhism certainly is not a subset of Hinduism in a general sense.

I didn't say that.
I was just saying that some schools of Buddhism have been influenced by Hinduism.

 

[Tathagata]

Buddha about god

Buddha once entered a village. A man in the morning asked him, "Does God Exist?"
Buddha replied, "No, absolutely not!"
In the afternoon, another man approached and posed the same question, "Does God exist?'
Buddha said, "Of course yes!"
In the evening, the third man asked the same question
The enlightened one closed His eyes and remained silent.

So it can be summed up as,
Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist or (silence)

Um, I don't think Buddha actually said that. Can you reference which Sutta? As far as I can tell, it's a myth or parable that OSHO wrote about Buddha. It's not from Buddhist scripture.

Buddha never once said "yes, god exists," or even implied it. He rejected both God and the belief in God on multiple occasions in the Tipitaka and the Mahayana Sutras (i.e. see Tittha Sutta and Lankavatara Sutra).


.

 

[Metempsychosis]

I voted for non-thesitic...because their emphasis on God (at least the personal one) is less.

But theism as such would not be against their philosophy,as devotion towards God would help people to "still" their mind.So,the end goal is the same.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

TTCUSM unless you forget, Buddhism came from Hinduism in a sense, so it only makes sense that it would have some similarities with it. The sect that doesn't share similarities with Hinduism (Theravada) is the one I would call into question. Are we also going to deny that Lord Buddha was raised in Sanatan Dharma and heavily influenced by the Vedas? What about his speaking of Indra and Brahman in the Dhammapada?

 

[Metempsychosis]

TTCUSM unless you forget, Buddhism came from Hinduism in a sense, so it only makes sense that it would have some similarities with it. The sect that doesn't share similarities with Hinduism (Theravada) is the one I would call into question. Are we also going to deny that Lord Buddha was raised in Sanatan Dharma and heavily influenced by the Vedas?

Buddhism in some aspects borrowed a lot from the former Upanishadic movement (from the same part of the world ),although it uses new terminologies to describe the same.

 

[Tathagata]

TTCUSM unless you forget, Buddhism came from Hinduism in a sense, so it only makes sense that it would have some similarities with it. The sect that doesn't share similarities with Hinduism (Theravada) is the one I would call into question. Are we also going to deny that Lord Buddha was raised in Sanatan Dharma and heavily influenced by the Vedas?

Completely and utterly false. Buddhism is the entire opposite of Hinduism. Buddha didn't become great because he simply followed the Vedas. He became great because he negated the old doctrines of his days and made a new one. The Buddha Dharma. One of his core tenets was the denial of the Hindus doctrine of Atman. And NO, Buddha was not raised Sanatan Dharma or any other religion. His father sheltered him from ANY religious teachings. He had no religious knowledge until he left the palace and became an ascetic.

Also, mentioning names known in Hinduism doesn't mean Buddha advocated it.

If you actually read Buddhist scripture, you will see that Buddha doesn't approve of god/deva/Brahma-worship.

Buddha [Kevaddha Sutta]: "Whereas some priests and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, maintain themselves by wrong livelihood, by such lowly artsas: ... worshipping Great Brahma ...promising gifts to devas in return for favors; fulfilling such promises; ...offering sacrificial fires ... he abstains from wrong livelihood, from lowly arts such as these."

[FONT=&quot]"Let us, then, surrender the heresies of worshipping Ishvara and praying to him[/FONT]." - 02_3

What about his speaking of Indra and Brahman in the Dhammapada?

"In Buddhist texts, Śakra is the proper name and not an epithet of this deity; conversely, Indra in Sanskrit and Inda in Pali are sometimes used as an epithet for Śakra as "lord".
In Buddhist texts, Śakra's myth and character are very different from those of the Vedic Indra. According to G.P. Malalasekara, "Sakka and Indra are independent conceptions. None of the personal characteristics of Sakka resemble those of Indra. Some epithets are identical but are evidently borrowed, though they are differently explained."

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%9Aakra_%28Buddhism%29

.

 

[Arav]

Buddha about god

Buddha once entered a village. A man in the morning asked him, "Does God Exist?"

Buddha replied, "No, absolutely not!"

In the afternoon, another man approached and posed the same question, "Does God exist?'

Buddha said, "Of course yes!"

In the evening, the third man asked the same question

The enlightened one closed His eyes and remained silent.

So it can be summed up as,

Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist or (silence)


Mahavira about god.

Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist
perhaps god is not
perhaps god exists and is indefinable
perhaps god is not that is indefinable
perhaps nothing can be said, only that is indefinable.

what can be concluded?

It depends on what kind of god you talk about. If it is a creator god, then we do not believe in such a thing, if you talk about yourself being your own god, or your Atma being god, then that is ok. Most of us Jains say that god is Parmatma, or the perfect soul that has shedded all karma and is in a state of Keval Gyan. So it depends on how you want to look at it. That is why Mahavir said that in some ways there is a god and in someways there is not, that is the philosophy of Anekantavada. So, in theory, it is impossible for Jains to answer the questions and vote on the poll. Because its not that we are beyond this, its just that in someways god is there and in some ways he is not, just different perspectives, but not beyond. We see things at different perspectives becauase of our karmas, but when we attain Keval Gyan we see it as it is.

 

[Mr Orange]

Buddha about god

Buddha once entered a village. A man in the morning asked him, "Does God Exist?"

Buddha replied, "No, absolutely not!"

In the afternoon, another man approached and posed the same question, "Does God exist?'

Buddha said, "Of course yes!"

In the evening, the third man asked the same question

The enlightened one closed His eyes and remained silent.

So it can be summed up as,

Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist or (silence)


Mahavira about god.

Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist
perhaps god is not
perhaps god exists and is indefinable
perhaps god is not that is indefinable
perhaps nothing can be said, only that is indefinable.

what can be concluded?

To me beyond- there is nothing that is self creating including a god. a creator god might exist like in christianity- but it is not relavant. This moment that we live is relavant. There are many gods in different realms. Siddhartha Gautama is a great teacher.

 

[Engyo]

Buddha about god

Buddha once entered a village. A man in the morning asked him, "Does God Exist?"

Buddha replied, "No, absolutely not!"

In the afternoon, another man approached and posed the same question, "Does God exist?'

Buddha said, "Of course yes!"

In the evening, the third man asked the same question

The enlightened one closed His eyes and remained silent.

So it can be summed up as,

Yes, god exists.
No, god does not exists.
yes and no, god exists and does not exist or (silence)

Given the Buddha's predilection for teaching in various ways depending on the capacities of his students, I might be tempted to surmise that each of these people needed to hear the Buddha's specific answer to them in order to progress on their own individual paths towards awakening.

By this I mean that perhaps there is not one single answer to a given question that is always correct, but rather a situational answer that applies to a specific questioner and time, and not to a different person asking that question at a different time. For that matter, if the same person were to ask the Buddha the same question five years later, they might receive a very different answer (which is appropriate to them at that specific point in time).

 

[Mahacandra]

I voted "beyond" theistic and non-theistic, in the sense that one can be either and still be a Buddhist/Jainist.
Western Therevadans almost never accept the existence of God(s). Eastern Therevadans may recognize their existence, but not recognize their importance. Mahayanans, however, have a pantheon of deities and celestial Bodhisattvas. You can accept or not accept the existence of God, it is not an essential part of the Dhamma.

 

[Wannabe Yogi]

Completely and utterly false. Buddhism is the entire opposite of Hinduism. Buddha didn't become great because he simply followed the Vedas. He became great because he negated the old doctrines of his days and made a new one.

I agree Buddha is great. Here are a few points I disagree.

It is opposite of some forms of Hinduism and is a lot like other forms. In the past on RF I have shown how many of Buddha ideas are supported by some of the earlier scriptures of the Hindu's. He did put his ideas together in a whole new way. I bow to him for that. This might be the reason that it took so long for Buddhist to leave the Hindu fold. In many ways in this at this time many argue that Hindus did not differentiate between Hinduism and other religions. In the same way we do to day.

He rejected the Vedas so he is not an orthodox Hindu. That is the only requirement for being a member of the orthodox club. Some Hindu's use the terms Orthodox Hindu and Non Orthodox Hindu. Its important to remember that Hindu's Invented Atheism. In fact many say that one of the creation hymns of the Vedas is Agnostic in nature.