mayleesl: Can I believe in God and Buddhism @ the same time?
-
mayleesl: Look, I strongly believe in the creator and I love buddhist teaching. Can anyone tell me if there is anything wrong with believing in God and practising buddha teahing?
My answer is that you can start practicing and learning Buddhism with a belief in God, but as you start to deepen your insight and understanding of workings of the universe and life, you will start to see through the notion that there is a 'creator' or agent behind experience.
I am not trying to convince you to change your beliefs now - I am just saying that this is what may automatically happen as you progress in your practice of Buddhism, if you do start practicing. As you practice and gain direct experience on the nature of reality, your view of 'God' may shift from a 'personal God' to an impersonal and transcendental 'Ground of Being', to an interdependently originated universe.
You need to have the courage to suspend all beliefs and look at your direct experience what the nature of reality is... once you stop relying on concepts and beliefs and simply look, insights and realizations of the nature of reality will arise quickly and you will go beyond all doubts about what the Truth is.
You will see that all experiences arise due to an intricate interdependence and there is no one who is behind a particular arising experience... neither is there a 'you' or a 'God' doing or experiencing or making things happen.
Things simply happen due to the supporting conditions... they are empty.
Shunyata (Emptiness) means whatever appears are empty of independent or inherent existence, be it a sound, a form, or any other phenomena. This is because it is the 'interconnectedness' that give rise to the sound or experience (The person, the stick, the bell, hitting, air, ears, etc, i.e. the conditions).
Thus, whatever arises interdependently is vividly clear and luminous, but empty of any *independent* or *inherent* existence. The entire universe is empty.Therefore, it is the doctrine of interdependent origination that removes the view of there being an agent or self or God behind experiences.
For more info please read this well-written article http://nichirenscoffeehouse.net/dharmajim/DharmaView.html
quote:
2.8 Monotheism
This is the big one, the view that concerns most westerners. There is a long and venerable history of discussion between the monotheistic tradition and Buddhism. This dialogue between the two traditions often centers on whether or not at core these two traditions have a common understanding. The need for this dialogue appears because at a certain obvious level Buddhism simply does not have a supreme being, what the monotheistic tradition generally means by God.
I distinguish two components of ultimacy that are unique to the monotheistic tradition. Given that the monotheistic tradition believes in the existence of only one God, the monotheistic tradition conceives of God as the ultimate; furthermore God in this tradition is the creator of all existence and also bears moral responsibility for the activities which occur in this existence.
Both of these components are absent from the Buddhist tradition. The Buddhist tradition lacks a being who has created existence. Instead, from the perspective of Interdependent Transformation, Buddhism conceives of existence as always existing, without beginning and without end. Furthermore, from the perspective of Interdependent Transformation, there is no specific locus of creation, no specific being is responsible for bringing existence into existence. Rather, creativity is an aspect of all existing things and therefore the source of existence is the things of existence, spread out over all of existence, throughout all space, throughout all time.
John Reynolds, among western scholars I am familiar with, has written with clarity on this issue:
As for the existence of God, of the Creator of heaven and earth, this is the concept central to religion as we know it in the West. Was the Buddha an atheist or an agnostic in relation to the existence of a Supreme Being or God? ...
In the Suutras there is found a Buddhist account of Genesis. [This account appears in several sources both in the Mahayana and the Theravada Canons.] In reply to questions from His disciples, the Buddha explained that the humanity found on this planet earth once inhabited another planetary system. Ages ago when the sun of that world went nova and the planet was destroyed in the ensuing solar eruptions, the bulk of its inhabitants, as the result of their arduously practicing the Dharma for ten thousand years, were reborn on one of the higher planes of the Form World or Ruupedhaatu, a plane of existence known as Aabhaasvara or “clear light.” Here they enjoyed inconceivable bliss and felicity for countless aeons. Then, when their great store of past karma came onto maturity, our own solar system and planet earth began to evolve and some among their numbers were reborn on the lower planes of the Ruupadhaatu in the vicinity of the nascent earth. This plane of existence where they found themselves reborn is known as Brahmaaloka. The first of these beings to reawaken and be reborn, upon seeing the solar system evolving below him, exclaimed in his delight, “I am the Creator!” In this way, he came to believe that he was the actual creator of the universe which he saw about him, for he did not remember from whence he came and was born without any parents. But in actuality the manifestation of this universe was due to the collective karma of all in that company and his own individual manifestation, which was a case of apparitional birth, was due to his own great stock of meritorious karma coming into maturation at that time because the requisite secondary conditions were present.
( Self-Liberation Through Seeing With Naked Awareness, translated by John Myrdhin Reynolds, Snow Lion, Ithaca, NY, 2000, pages 97-99.)
The principle here, derived from the core insight of Interdependent Transformation, is that all things appear from a causal base. This understanding is extended to the existence of entire universes or world systems. The Dalai Lama makes this same point in his commentary on Shantideva’s Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life, the Ninth Chapter on Wisdom. Verse 124 speaks directly to this discussion:
124. ... [I]f Creation were dependent upon conditions, the complete collection of those causal circumstances would be the cause, and not Ishvara [Note: Ishvara was a common name for God in ancient India, similar to Yahweh.] If the complete conditions were assembled, Ishvara would be powerless not to create; and if they were absent, there would be no creation.
The Dalai Lama’s Comment:
If creation and destruction are dependent upon a collection of causal conditions, the totality of those conditions would be the cause, and not a God who is independent of and uninfluenced by events. If the causal conditions were assembled, Ishvara would be powerless not to create the resultant phenomena; and if they were not assembled, those phenomena would not be produced.
( Transcendent Wisdom, the Dalai Lama, translated by B. Alan Wallace, Snow Lion, Ithaca, New York, 1998, page 93.)
Both of the above quoted passages are rooted in the understanding of existence as a causal matrix, the view of Intedependent Transformation. It is somewhat astonishing to think of God as deluded, as Reynolds suggests. God thinks he has created this world system because, due to his karma, he was the first conscious being in this world system. Unaware of his past karma which created the conditions for his rebirth in this world system, and not observing any other conscious beings in this world system, God then concludes that he is the creator of this world system. Unaware that there are other world systems, incalculably numerous, God/Ishvara concludes that he is the creator of all of existence.
It takes some time to take in all the implications of such a world view. It is breathtaking in scope and rich in implications. One of the implications is that being reborn as God is not, from a Buddhist perspective, a fortunate rebirth. It is not a rebirth that will lead to liberation, to nirvana, and the cessation of all sorrow because such a rebirth re-enforces the idea that there is something that exists independently, and it is this very idea/belief/feeling that is the source of sorrow.
It might seem that this is the end of the story; Buddhism doesn’t believe in a creator Deity that bears moral responsibility for existence while the monotheistic tradition has this view at its core. The two traditions, therefore, diverge.
However, God has many names and many meanings and Interdependent Transformation has many facets. Though the view of Interdependent Transformation does lead to a view of existence that in some respects differs from that of the monotheistic tradition, we should not stop at this conclusion. I have previously mentioned in the discussion on the basic implications of Intedependent Transformation that this core view of the Buddha means that all things exist dependently. Because the monotheistic tradition regards God as the creator of all existing things and of existence itself, the monotheistic tradition views all things as existing dependently, as in a totally dependent state. From this perspective, the perspective of dependence, the Buddhist and Monotheistic tradition share a common insight into the transcendent nature of all existing things.
Or take the view that God is love. It is out of God’s love that existence emerges. Existence is an expression of the generosity and benign nature of God. In the Buddhist tradition it is the realization that all things exist interdependently that gives rise to the blossoming of the compassionate heart. Love and Compassion are always present, but they are covered over by ignorance, self-concern, and distraction. I think that these two insights are very close for they both proclaim that in some sense love and compassion are the true nature of existence, that love and compassion blossom when we comprehend the transcendental.
What I am suggesting is that even if I put aside the idea of a Creator Being, even if I put aside the idea of a Being who bears moral responsibility for existence, there are still significant, broad areas for dialogue between the two traditions because there is more to the idea of God than the idea of a Creator. From a Buddhist perspective, the most important aspects might lie outside of the Creator view.
How do we access this broader understanding that lies at the core of the monotheistic tradition? I would suggest using those traditions centered on positive theology. Positive theology is that theology which explores the Divine Names and Attributes of God. For example, Dionysius the Areopagite wrote a theological work called The Divine Names. I think it would be an excellent place to start making such a comparison. For example, Dionysius writes:
... Since it is the underpinning of goodness, and by merely being there is the cause of everything, to praise this divinely beneficent Providence you must turn to all of creation. It is there at the center of everything and everything has it for a destiny. It is therefore ‘before all things and in it all things hold together.’ Because it is there the world has come to be and exists. All things long for it. The intelligent and rational long for it by the way of knowledge ...
Realizing all this, the theologians praise it by every name ... they give it many names, such as “I am being,” “life,” “God,” the “truth.” These same wise writers, when praising the Cause of everything that is, use names drawn from all the things caused: good, beautiful, wise, beloved, God of gods, Lord of Lord, Holy of Holies, eternal, existent, Cause of the ages. They call him source of life, wisdom, mind, word, knower, possessor beforehand of all the treasures of knowledge, power, powerful, and king of Kings, ancient of days, the unaging and unchanging, salvation, righteousness and sanctification, redemption, greatest of all and yet the one in the still breeze. They say he is in our minds, in our soul, and in our bodies, in heaven and on earth, that while remaining ever within himself he is also in and around and above the world, that he is above heaven and above all being, that he is sun, star, and fire, water, wind, and dew, cloud, archetypal stone, and rock, that he is all, that he is no thing.
( Pseudo-Dionysius, The Complete Works, translated by Colm Luibheid, “The Divine Names”, Paulist Press, Mahway, New Jersey, 1987, pages 54-56.)
Now, turn to the Buddhist tradition and uncover the names that the Buddha in the Discourses uses for nirvana. He uses such terms as the “cessation of suffering”, “the non-clinging”, “peace”, “serenity”, “the lovely”, “the unconditioned”, “love”, “the unborn”, “the deathless”, etc.. Just as the core view of the monotheistic tradition is multi-faceted, so also the ultimate goal and core notion of the Buddhist tradition has many facets and many names. Once I move away from a fixation on the idea of God as a creator of existence, I am actually able to find a lot of similarity between these core views, many overlaps. It is useful to compare these two because how they arrive at these core understandings, such as dependence, differs, but often the core understandings themselves are amazingly similar. Thus, both traditions are mutually enriched by broadening their understanding.
This is not the place to go into a systematic treatment of these two core views. It would require a book in and of itself. I believe what would be required is to compare and contrast the facets of ultimacy that each tradition has lived with down through the centuries. In addition to comparing and contrasting, I would also suggest comprehending how each tradition arrives at this understanding.
I believe the result of such a project would produce a mosaic of overlapping and divergent understandings. From the perspective of a particular facet X, the two traditions have a shared view. From the perspective of facet Y, the two traditions diverge. From the persective of how they arrive at the same view X, there will also appear similarities and contrasts. When engaging in this project it is also important to keep in mind that monotheism is not a uniform tradition; it is actually more accurate to say “monotheisms”, and the same applies to Buddhism. The personalism of Christianity, for example, is something not shared by Judaism or Islam. Similarly, the view of the ontological status of suffering is quite different in different Buddhist traditions. Though this complicates the task, I do not consider it an insurmountable obstacle as long as one maintains a broad focus.
This may seem like a lot of work, but I believe the results of such a project would be an ability to speak clearly to each other, from the views that each tradition holds, and come to a genuine and deep mutual understanding and appreciation. A good way to start such a project would be to compare two specific core texts, such as The Divine Names with something like the Udana in the Buddhist tradition. This may seem to narrow the focus from the broad focus I just suggested. However, the virtue of taking two specific works and comparing them is that it grounds the investigation in a specific work and tradition so that it reduces mere speculation.
The dialogue between monotheism and Buddhism has been going on for a long time. I believe such an exchange can prove fruitful for both traditions. I would hope that such an exchange of views could be expanded to include other traditions as well, such as the western philosophical tradition, the secular humanist tradition, and the many spiritual traditions in the world today. With a good heart, mutual respect, and the capacity to perceive all people as equal, such an endeavor will help all concerned.
-
Practicing buddhism is helpful for achieving the heavenly being to those who having a strong constitution on the external creator of God, as least these followers did not carry a contempt deeply in them. So far, there is no proven record on attainment of these followers. Their claim is based on book, not personal attainment on record as like Buddhism or Jesus himself, having alot of remarkable achievements.
-
Thank you all for your invaluable info. Meantime, i'll carry on with meditation. I love meditation as it helps me to achieve inner peace. Hopefully, I am able to better manage my anger and patience through meditation. Do you guys have anything to share with me on deeper meditation?
May
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
Thank you all for your invaluable info. Meantime, i'll carry on with meditation. I love meditation as it helps me to achieve inner peace. Hopefully, I am able to better manage my anger and patience through meditation. Do you guys have anything to share with me on deeper meditation?
May
There are two kinds of meditation... one is calm abiding meditation, which trains in one pointedness/concentration and developing calmness. The other is vipassana which is insight meditation which trains in awareness of the nature of reality. Both must be developed for enlightenment.
As for anger and patience, calmness from shamatha/calm-abiding practice can develope through meditation and this may be useful, metta meditation/loving-kindness meditation also is of great help, but if you want to remove the three poisons of craving, anger and ignorance forever, you have to reach deep enlightenment. In other words calmness itself is not enough to remove the 3 poisons.
If you're interested, you can sign up for a meditation course at http://www.kmspks.org/education/index.htm
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
Thank you all for your invaluable info. Meantime, i'll carry on with meditation. I love meditation as it helps me to achieve inner peace. Hopefully, I am able to better manage my anger and patience through meditation. Do you guys have anything to share with me on deeper meditation?
May
There's a very popular and good book called 'The Power of Now' by Eckhart Tolle found in most bookstores (it is a bestseller). You should get it if you see... it will be of great help.
-
why do they charge for meditation session? I don't find it cheap at all. Infact, I am always thinking the fee makes it hard for those who really want to achieve enlightenment. Anyway, the courses are interesting and I didn't know there are serveral types of meditation.So what I have been attending are the basic ones. I will get the book. I just finished reading "the monk who sold his ferrari" and later did i find out that it was all fiction:).
Thank you so much and i will come back to you again. Guess I have lots of questions for you:).
May
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
why do they charge for meditation session? I don't find it cheap at all. Infact, I am always thinking the fee makes it hard for those who really want to achieve enlightenment. Anyway, the courses are interesting and I didn't know there are serveral types of meditation.So what I have been attending are the basic ones. I will get the book. I just finished reading "the monk who sold his ferrari" and later did i find out that it was all fiction:).
Thank you so much and i will come back to you again. Guess I have lots of questions for you:).
May
Are you referring to meditation in the temple or commercial meditation centre ? I know a few temples which charge as low as about $10 a month for meditation.
-
Hi Mayleesl,
I hope you can continue to believe and have faith in God and at the same time continue to practice diligently on meditation. The kind of effect it has on a meditator is unbelievable and no words can describe it. I believe meditation will make us a better, calmer, peaceful and happier person. It is important for us to radiate this positive to aura to other ppl, trying to make this world a better one =)
I understand that some meditation centers do charge for a meditation session. There are generally about 2 types of meditation centers.
1) The first one does not base on the teachings of Buddhism, it is more of commercialized meditation.
2) The second types are those open by Buddhist or conducted in temples. These instructors/teachers/monks need money to run their daily operations and to provide more beneficial lessons. I personally know one Buddhist layperson who is doing this for a living. However, he still gives free meditation courses on request by Buddhist Societies/organization as part of sharing.
They centers are catered for people who does not believe in Buddhism or people who feel uncomfortable about stepping into a monastery. Through this centers, they are still able to learn about meditation and benefit from it.
If you happen to go to these centers and if you feel that the teacher is someone worth respecting, someone who is knowledgeable and passionate about guiding people to advance in their meditation practices, do help out. The very first lesson is Buddhism is the heart of generosity. It makes one happier, less stingy and open-hearted. This is the very basis to develop kindness, wisdom and all the important foundation of meditation practices.
May you be well and happy and may your practice continue to grow! Hope I did answer to your question. =)
-
Hi Mayleesl
Actually there is nothing wrong with believing in God and practising buddha teaching?
As Buddhist teaching is about being compassionate and manifesting that quality in our daily life. Beside, in the new testament, Jesus always display this compassionate quality to the people during his earthly ministry. See Mark 8:2.
In the West, it is quite common for people to embrace both Christianity and Buddhism. Sometime they embrace the former out of upbringing and family, the latter out of personal spiritual endeavor.
In fact, if you can get hold of the late Thomas Merton author's book which is available in the National Library for some reading. It will be great. As he was a Catholic priest and a zen practitioner who wrote about his meditiation experience.
Gassho
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
why do they charge for meditation session? I don't find it cheap at all. Infact, I am always thinking the fee makes it hard for those who really want to achieve enlightenment. Anyway, the courses are interesting and I didn't know there are serveral types of meditation.So what I have been attending are the basic ones. I will get the book. I just finished reading "the monk who sold his ferrari" and later did i find out that it was all fiction:).
Thank you so much and i will come back to you again. Guess I have lots of questions for you:).
May
You can meditate on Om Mani Padme Hum or Amitofo or God of Mercy at home, while walking, sitting, lying down. Is free.
-
Hi reborn76 & Amitayus48,
Thank you so much. Actually my intention is out to those who would love to learn and could not afford it. It has nothing to do with stingy or even generousity.
Yes, I will keep my faith in God as always and mediating at the same time:).
Thank you so much guys.
May
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
Hi reborn76 & Amitayus48,
Thank you so much. Actually my intention is out to those who would love to learn and could not afford it. It has nothing to do with stingy or even generousity.
Yes, I will keep my faith in God as always and mediating at the same time:).
Thank you so much guys.
May
I'm just curious, what happens one day while you are meditating, you see Buddha, Amitabha, Goddess of Mercy etc. or your past life. Will you believe in Buddhism ?
-
Mayleesl: Many monotheistic religions exist today (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, some strains of Hinduism, etc) - each have their own story, idea, depiction of what God is.
Which one is true? Which one do you believe? How can they be so contradictory in their depiction?
Or perhaps we should look beyond man made texts and look into direct experience? What 'God' is... this is what the mystics at the center of all religions have done.
Also, is God apart from Consciousness? Does anything exist outside of consciousness? Does anything arise or manifest outside of consciousness? Do we have any evidence of that?
to be continued...
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
Thank you all for your invaluable info. Meantime, i'll carry on with meditation. I love meditation as it helps me to achieve inner peace. Hopefully, I am able to better manage my anger and patience through meditation. Do you guys have anything to share with me on deeper meditation?
May
Try to keep the 10 commandments very well and practice from the heart. Look out for the 7 deadly sins in your heart and cultivate the 7 virtues from the heart. This could help improve your meditation. -
My opinion on this is better dun confuse urselves when u believe in both.
If u feel u r confused then post here let ppl know and stop the practise.
-
Originally posted by zero thought:
Try to keep the 10 commandments very well and practice from the heart. Look out for the 7 deadly sins in your heart and cultivate the 7 virtues from the heart. This could help improve your meditation.
How u know TS is a Catholic? If she's a muslim or Jews? -
Originally posted by Pure Emptiness:
How u know TS is a Catholic? If she's a muslim or Jews?
It doesn't matter. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now: Mayleesl: Many monotheistic religions exist today (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, some strains of Hinduism, etc) - each have their own story, idea, depiction of what God is.
Which one is true? Which one do you believe? How can they be so contradictory in their depiction?
Or perhaps we should look beyond man made texts and look into direct experience? What 'God' is... this is what the mystics at the center of all religions have done.
Also, is God apart from Consciousness? Does anything exist outside of consciousness? Does anything arise or manifest outside of consciousness? Do we have any evidence of that?
to be continued...
(continuation)
From contemplative inquiry into the nature of reality (through questions like 'Who am I?') we begin to discover that the fundamental essence of what we truly are and the entire universe is a ground of consciousness. This is a non-conceptual insight... but think about it - if there is no evidence of an object apart from consciousness, then the entire universe as we know it - mountains, rivers, you, me, etc...all arise from and within consciousness. This can all be realized from our own experience... unlike beliefs of a personal god based on some ancient texts that often contradict each other and can never be verified. They remain as some mere vague concepts and are not helpful at all...
Even if we do meet up with the so called 'god', that meeting with the person called 'god' would depend and arise within our consciousness. That person you meet will also be alive by the power of Consciousness. And the meeting will be sustained by the power of consciousness. Our consciousness is thus the true source of the entire animate and inanimate world. What is the only true all-power, all-presence, all-knowing 'creating' agent of the entire universe? Consciousness. Without which, nothing can manifest at all...
Consciousness is thus discovered to be the subject of the universe... for where is perceptions apart from the perceiving awareness. This is the level where I mean 'your view of God will be transformed from a personal God to an impersonal Ground of Being'.
However, this is not the final realization... there is further insights into the nature of awareness and the universe that dissolves the view of 'duality' and 'inherency'.
There will come a time when it is realized that the 'perceiving mind' is precisely just perceptions, sensations, sights, thoughts, etc... the insight arises that 'manifestation is the source!' because awareness precisely is the perception itself - the observer is the observed. Further investigation removes the notion of an ultimate agent behind experience... there is no perceiving agent or awareness that 'causes' perception - it is not that there is no consciousness but consciousness is simply and only the arising and subsiding sensations according to conditions. There is no hearer behind hearing, experiencer behind experiencing - there is simply this process of experiencing without an agent... the experiencing is precisely simply the flow of experience. These experiences are self-luminous and arise dependent on supporting conditions.
Our views change as we progress in our contemplative practice. In the spirit of true contemplatives in all religions, don't stick to one belief but continue investigating and practicing and the truth shall be revealed.
-
Originally posted by mayleesl:
Nothing to share from me. You may like to keep a "dogmatic and radical" frame of mind on everything that you can see, hear, feel and knowing are Buddha
, while enjoying the meditation practice.