The article doesn't say that. You're wishing it would, and i guess you're expecting us to not read the article. Because i'm quite sure you read it and are understanding that you're pulling this conclusion out of your backside. It's comments like this that lead me to believe, with enough certainty, that you are being deceptive on purpose. This sure can't be an accident.
Guess that means all those hippies must be really smart for all the incense they keep burning. (sarcasm)
Atheism is the lack of belief in gods at its most simplistic meaning. Buddhism doesn't encourage belief in gods. For that matter, it also doesn't encourage lack of belief in gods, but at its simplest meaning, atheism is merely the lack of belief in god. And it does lack that.
The only such teachings that i can remember off the top of my head are actually about such belief being a hindrance if one's goal is to remove attachments.
What do you mean, "they?" Are you trying to imply that you, as an outsider, know more about my religion than myself? What gives you that picture?
As for the "what i think they are meditating on", it can be anything. Even gods, but for you to give out the idea that they're just an example to justify YOUR faith, then you are seriously mistaken here. Most likely, Buddhists would mediate as part of the path towards Nirvana. But it can be something as small as gaining concentration and insight into an issue.
Buddhist meditation - Wikipedia
You probably should have used conservapedia. And you should probably read your link further. Because none of the text you quote mined there actually supports what you're saying: That "Part of it is reverence and thankfulness to the deities." While many Buddhists would venerate such spirits and deities, what purpose would meditating on them serve?
"Devas are divine beings, though they are not all necessarily wise or on the Buddhist path and hence not final objects of refuge. They have very long lives which have much less suffering than humans, but are not immortal or immune from suffering. " From your link.
Oh and:
Deva (Buddhism) - Wikipedia
Devas and Yakshas are both considered lesser beings compared to Buddhas. They are of Samsara. Like ALL other "gods" in Buddhism. This is both much more complex than you seem to understand, and not as important as you seem to imply: The deities are not the point of Buddhism. At best they are used as examples, or metaphors. At worst, some of the mentions are merely criticisms of Hinduism.
You believe you have shown this. You are welcome to continue believing that.
So this is a bit like your logic in your previous threads such as a scientist believing in god = "creation scientist." If he did not teach about gods, then what part do gods serve in Buddhism? APART from a single Buddhist's personal beliefs, which you are merely assuming here.
Can you demonstrate which part?
I think you need to read more about the things you are making claims of before making such claims. This just makes you come off as judgmental without having the means to even understand what you're arguing.
And you don't think that's rational? I mean, if a religion has nothing to do with gods or deities, then...? You still think it's theistic?
First paragraph of your article: "The Six Realms are a description of conditioned existence, or samsara, into which beings are reborn. Although sometimes they are described as "real" places, more often these days they are appreciated as allegories."
And here's a Zen Buddhist's interpretation:
"In Buddhism, both naraka (infernal states) and deva state (angelic states) have not the same sense as in other religions. In Vedic religions which preceded Buddhism, for example, these states had the same meaning as in Catholicism. Still retains this meaning to some unenlightened Buddhists and can be seen even today buddhic images that resemble the gruesome descriptions of hell and paradise. But a true understanding of Buddhism gives to these states a mood status. Especially in Zen, these states [along with the other four realms and the states of Śrāvaka, Pratyekabuddha, Bodhisattva and Buddha - the ten spiritual realms] are explained as different stages that are unfolded during the practice of zazen."
-Taisen Deshimaru
From:
Desire realm - Wikipedia
The IMPORTANT point here is that these realms are part of Samsara.
That's a blog site. In fact, it's a common story that goes around the internet with slight variation. And in fact, that blog is the original source. And there are no references whatsoever. But even so:
"The Dalai Lama was telling everyone there that belief in God or religion doesn't ground one in the direct experience of the truth. To experience that truth, one must have a clear, calm, and tranquil mind, and this mind must be turned inward. Sadhana is the practice of turning inward. "Upon protection of the mind, the whole world is protected, and upon its destruction, the whole world is destroyed", say the scriptures. Cultivating a virtuous mind, then, is our dharma."
He was simply affirming that people can believe in gods. Nothing more.
Karma is not judgement.
So there is no judge, quite literally? Are you saying that the natural laws are judging us? If not, then why would you say that cause and effect are judging us? They aren't. You might not get rewarded for a good deed. In fact, you might even cause suffering by it. THAT is the nature of karma. It takes no sides in this regard.
A person with a well developed "sense of karma" can work to predict events based on careful consideration of all events and phenomena. Even then, he or she might not be entirely successful.
So, you are proposing belief in god to be the answer to dukkha, or suffering? Talk about using another religion to try and justify your own. Your misappropriation here has to be one of the least respectful i've seen in a LONG time.
You are trying to use the view of another religion to justify YOUR view. This lessens both your view and the view you are appropriating.
Last edited:
