-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Is Brahman same as Buddhist void(sunyata)
- Thread starter Metempsychosis
- Start date
OK. Thank you!
Last edited:
Metempsychosis
Reincarnation of 'Anti-religion'
Dorje
Ri-me
No, Buddhist Shunyata and Brahman are NOT the same. In Zen Shunyata is seen as a vast void, and this is the same in other Buddhist traditions. But, in Hinduism, Brahman is the universal reality, the Cosmic Consciousness from which all arises from. Ramana Maharshi once said that Matter is a projection and Consciousness is the screen, which one is real? But, we are not saying that matter is a projection or false, we are saying its empty of INHERENT EXISTENCE. But, me being a New Kadampa or Gelugpa, I also disagree with the Zen form of emptiness. Its not a void in any sense. What is being said here is that Shunyata means that everything is created by my mind and that nothing exists outside of my mind. Everything is a concept, when your deluded you only perceive concepts. But, when you realize your own mind created the delusion, the conceptual material world, your able to see past the concepts to whats really there, which is beyond conceptualization. I think Shakyamuni Buddha used the term Shunyata, or Emptiness to describe it for a lack of a better word, and the word nothing isnt a good substitute.
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Dorje,
Experince of Sunyata / void by any human will remain the same.
If one is trying to create differences between the experiences of two persons then the person himself lacks experience or understanding.
Kindly remember *Truth once spoken is falsified* though it has been spoken by and written as that of Lao Tzu, is an universal Truth which many buddhas before him and buddhas to come will realize as an universal truth. Words are just labels be they used by Shakyamuni or Ved Vyasa or anyone are nothing but pointers towards an understanding. Those who understand are enlightened like them.
Love & rgds
Experince of Sunyata / void by any human will remain the same.
If one is trying to create differences between the experiences of two persons then the person himself lacks experience or understanding.
Kindly remember *Truth once spoken is falsified* though it has been spoken by and written as that of Lao Tzu, is an universal Truth which many buddhas before him and buddhas to come will realize as an universal truth. Words are just labels be they used by Shakyamuni or Ved Vyasa or anyone are nothing but pointers towards an understanding. Those who understand are enlightened like them.
Love & rgds
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Anti-religion,
Thanks for those links.
It appears that the book is currently out of print.
The file that you have uploaded has been downloaded twice but cannot open it as tried it with word, adobe, but failed; could you intimate which type of file you have uploaded spo that using the same can view it.
Love & rgds
Thanks for those links.
It appears that the book is currently out of print.
The file that you have uploaded has been downloaded twice but cannot open it as tried it with word, adobe, but failed; could you intimate which type of file you have uploaded spo that using the same can view it.
Love & rgds
Hi Zenzero,
I was interested in this quote you have written. I have never heard of it and I cannot say that I agree with it. Who spoke this? Why would a truth spoken become false? What is the deeper meaning in this saying? I tend to come from a perspective that can find truth in every thought and in every spoken idea. I would much appreciate if you could explain to me further what the quote is really saying.
Thank you,
Madhuri
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Madhuri,
from the void a slight feeling of vibration itself is great and all words are vibrating like hell.
For your understanding: when you will read the story of Lao Tzu who also is supposed to be a form taken by an Indian sage [friend Anti-religion mentioned in some post - if memeory serves right] you will learn that Lao Tzu was an enlightened man living in China. Though he lived an ordinary life he was well known as a buddha and the ruler of the time also was aware of this buddha. He never preached or stat his WAY and when he was old to retire he started walking towards the Himalayas where as you know is a place for meditators. The word of his travel spread fast and reached the ears of the ruler who immediately sent orders to the border police to stop him from leaving the boundary until he writes what he knows. So the story goes that when he was at the border he was caught and was arrested on the grounds of smuggling; yes smuggling TRUTH out of the country. However Lao Tzu reluctantly became compassionate to dictated *81* verses called Tao Te Ching. From then on TAO became a religion which is still followed and slowly become popular world over, since it is not about any practice like all other religions BUT simply an UNDERSTANDING. These mere 81 verses contain the essence of all religions be it contained in sanatan dharma texts or buddhism and the first verse is this:
1
The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gateway to all understanding.
Which when translated could also be understood as that TRUTH is one that cannot be spoken of and speaking of TRUTH is making it a THING etc. etc.
Now, friend Madhuri kindly also understand that there have been and are many many buddhas like Lao Tzu who never spoke a word simply because it makes no difference to TRUTH and its manifestation whether it is spoken off or not.
Love & rgds
from the void a slight feeling of vibration itself is great and all words are vibrating like hell.
For your understanding: when you will read the story of Lao Tzu who also is supposed to be a form taken by an Indian sage [friend Anti-religion mentioned in some post - if memeory serves right] you will learn that Lao Tzu was an enlightened man living in China. Though he lived an ordinary life he was well known as a buddha and the ruler of the time also was aware of this buddha. He never preached or stat his WAY and when he was old to retire he started walking towards the Himalayas where as you know is a place for meditators. The word of his travel spread fast and reached the ears of the ruler who immediately sent orders to the border police to stop him from leaving the boundary until he writes what he knows. So the story goes that when he was at the border he was caught and was arrested on the grounds of smuggling; yes smuggling TRUTH out of the country. However Lao Tzu reluctantly became compassionate to dictated *81* verses called Tao Te Ching. From then on TAO became a religion which is still followed and slowly become popular world over, since it is not about any practice like all other religions BUT simply an UNDERSTANDING. These mere 81 verses contain the essence of all religions be it contained in sanatan dharma texts or buddhism and the first verse is this:
1
The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.
Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gateway to all understanding.
Which when translated could also be understood as that TRUTH is one that cannot be spoken of and speaking of TRUTH is making it a THING etc. etc.
Now, friend Madhuri kindly also understand that there have been and are many many buddhas like Lao Tzu who never spoke a word simply because it makes no difference to TRUTH and its manifestation whether it is spoken off or not.
Love & rgds
Last edited:
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Seyorni,
The statement could be more qualified :
Sanatan Dharma have both no-thingness and thingness as WAYS to enlightenment and also that thingness ends in no-thingness, finally.
Gautama took the no-thingness route straight way which [so called]* most followers of sanatan dharma are still unable to grasp as not only it has not been popularized but made to appear that it is incorrect by even throwing out buddhism from india.
Love & rgds
* [so called] because every human being is a follower of sanatan dharma whether he knows it or not; as that is the actual reason to label it such i.e. the eternal path.
The statement could be more qualified :
Sanatan Dharma have both no-thingness and thingness as WAYS to enlightenment and also that thingness ends in no-thingness, finally.
Gautama took the no-thingness route straight way which [so called]* most followers of sanatan dharma are still unable to grasp as not only it has not been popularized but made to appear that it is incorrect by even throwing out buddhism from india.
Love & rgds
* [so called] because every human being is a follower of sanatan dharma whether he knows it or not; as that is the actual reason to label it such i.e. the eternal path.
Metempsychosis
Reincarnation of 'Anti-religion'
Then you mean to say Buddhism is Nihilist?If there is no consciousness,Why did Buddha said that he is "awake"?IMHO,Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism require dropping of all thoughts,they are pure experience which cannot be put in words like "asti"-- It is and "nasti"-- It is not.The so called consciousness also contains non-consciousness.You should understand though Brahman is everything it is empty like space.
Regards,
Half of the blame goes to Buddhists,they are the ones who dont accept every thingness.LOL.Imho.Buddhism does not cater to the devotional aspect of human nature,which Hinduism and Sikhism does successfully.This aspect is easier for many people rather than the difficult meditative practices.
The one who has not thought it out has the thought of it.
The one who has thought it out does not know it.
It is not understood by those who understand it;
it is understood by those who do not understand it.
KENA UPANISHAD
Water from the ocean contained in a pot can neither be called an ocean nor a non-ocean, but simply a part of ocean. Similarly, a doctrine, though arising from absolute truth can neither be called a whole truth nor a non-truth.Similarly,A doctrine, though arising from absolute truth can neither be called a whole truth nor a non-truth.
Experience cannot be "told".We cannot say how sweet sugar is.You can read
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/1846629-post31.html.
Ones you say who you are ,you are talking about untalkable.Hence Netineti--not this,not this.
Last edited by a moderator:
zenzero
Its only a Label
Friend Anti-religion,
It always takes two hands to clap; however am sure no one likes to be thrown out of their own houses besides in every household where there are more than one sibling there are fights but they have love and understanding such that those fights get overshadowed.
Love & rgds
It always takes two hands to clap; however am sure no one likes to be thrown out of their own houses besides in every household where there are more than one sibling there are fights but they have love and understanding such that those fights get overshadowed.
Love & rgds
godnotgod
Thou art That
Isn't 'mind' self-created? And once one sees, without mind, beyond the illusory mind, the 'material' world is then seen for what it actually is? It appears to me that this direct 'seeing' into the true nature of Reality, without mind, is even beyond any idea of whether the seeing itself is of the nature of Brahman or of Sunyata. IOW, when this seeing comes into play, all distinctions become blurred and merge as a single Reality.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
That is the same as Brahman in Hinduism. However, Buddha did not say anything about it. His focus was on other things and he was right in his own way. How does contemplation on that helps anybody? Buddha did say that things are without 'atta'. That was his 'sunyata'. 'Sunya' (bereft) of any 'atta' (permanence), 'anicca' (impermanent), therefore 'anatta'. Hope my understanding is correct.
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
That's right. Sunyata is basically "emptiness", which means empty of inherent existence, ie dependently arising and conditional, insubstantial. The Heart Sutra is worth a look.
So Brahman is not the same as sunyata, and Hinduism is not the same as Buddhism.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rick O'Shez
Irishman bouncing off walls
There is a "positive side" to sunyata, that of interconnectedness. The Zen teacher Thich Nhat Hanh refers to this as "interbeing".
Most Buddhist schools have devotional practices, so I'm not sure what you mean here.
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
That's right. Sunyata is basically "emptiness", which means empty of inherent existence, ie dependently arising and conditional, insubstantial. The Heart Sutra is worth a look. So Brahman is not the same as sunyata, and Hinduism is not the same as Buddhism.
I do not think you are getting 'my sunyata' (or are avoiding it). Empty of what? That does not necessarily mean 'nihilism' - that nothing exists in the world. Buddha was against that. I have my understanding but have not read the 'suttas' in detail or remember them. Buddha was non-committal about that. Only that the nama-rupa is without any permanence and is circumstantial. Hindus too say that in 'advaita'. Therefore, I do not think Hinduism and Buddhism are far apart. And who knows, Brahman could actually be 'nothingness', 'absolute nothing'? Perhaps there is a relationship between existence and non-existence as mentioned in the 'Nasadiya Sukta' of RigVeda. Science has yet to pronounce on it.
Some do not need it. Buddha did not need it. I do not need it. But, yes, many people need it, that is why 'Buddham Sharanam Gacchami'. Otherwise there was no need to seek refuge in Buddha (as they say and I will never say, as Buddha is one of my gurus - Kill Buddha ...). All religions accept it, otherwise there would not have been any temples or Gurudwaras.
Last edited: