Question : (Unedited)
Buddhism does not accept the idea of a creator God, but did the original Buddha expressly state that, or, is it implied by the logic of his teachings?
My comment:
My comment:
Hi Mc,
This is a follow-up comment to my previous answer which you can ignore for I have included it in here. My earlier answer was done on the spur of the moment without in-depth thinking. As I said I need to check the text. So here is the full answer.
If you mean creator God to be the Christian concept of God, then your question will have no answer because this creator God was not "known" during the Buddha's time; in fact this God was not "created" yet, bearing in mind that Christianity came into being during the time of Jesus. Even if you mean a Judaic God, it was also not known in India during the Buddha's time.
Actually when one asks a Buddhist of his opinion about the Creator God, it will be a nondescript terminology because this Creator God idea was never a contention in Buddhist teachings. So to believe or not is never a problem to the Buddhist. It is just like asking a Christian whether the scriptures reject the concept of Nibbana. As far as he is concerned this concept is irrelevant and a non-entity. He will tell us that what is not written in the Bible is not truth. There is not a need to reject specifically, as such.
Likewise, if we study the Buddha's teachings we will come to realize that if we agree with the Buddha, then the creator God is irrelevent and a non-entity. The Buddha did not need to specifically refute, because as far as he was concerned the creator God idea was not in his teachings. As a matter of interest, there was indeed mentioned by the Buddha of a different Creator God which in Brahmanism (the original form of present Hinduism) is called Brahma, the Creator God. In the first sutta of the Digha Nikaya, called the Brahmajala Sutta, it is said along these lines:
"DN I (Sutta 1) Brahmajala (The Perfect Net)
The world system will pass away. Then after a long time, this world system begins to re-evolve. Palace of Brahma appears but empty. Then some being falls from the World of Radiance and comes to live in the Palace. Being lonely he wishes that other beings might come to join him. Just then other beings also fall into this Palace. This Brahma thinks that he has created the others, and the others also think likewise, and Brahma being regarded as the Creator."
So in this context, the Buddha did expressly state that the concept of Brahma as the creator god was false. In the Judaic context we may conclude that it is implied.
This is a follow-up comment to my previous answer which you can ignore for I have included it in here. My earlier answer was done on the spur of the moment without in-depth thinking. As I said I need to check the text. So here is the full answer.
If you mean creator God to be the Christian concept of God, then your question will have no answer because this creator God was not "known" during the Buddha's time; in fact this God was not "created" yet, bearing in mind that Christianity came into being during the time of Jesus. Even if you mean a Judaic God, it was also not known in India during the Buddha's time.
Actually when one asks a Buddhist of his opinion about the Creator God, it will be a nondescript terminology because this Creator God idea was never a contention in Buddhist teachings. So to believe or not is never a problem to the Buddhist. It is just like asking a Christian whether the scriptures reject the concept of Nibbana. As far as he is concerned this concept is irrelevant and a non-entity. He will tell us that what is not written in the Bible is not truth. There is not a need to reject specifically, as such.
Likewise, if we study the Buddha's teachings we will come to realize that if we agree with the Buddha, then the creator God is irrelevent and a non-entity. The Buddha did not need to specifically refute, because as far as he was concerned the creator God idea was not in his teachings. As a matter of interest, there was indeed mentioned by the Buddha of a different Creator God which in Brahmanism (the original form of present Hinduism) is called Brahma, the Creator God. In the first sutta of the Digha Nikaya, called the Brahmajala Sutta, it is said along these lines:
"DN I (Sutta 1) Brahmajala (The Perfect Net)
The world system will pass away. Then after a long time, this world system begins to re-evolve. Palace of Brahma appears but empty. Then some being falls from the World of Radiance and comes to live in the Palace. Being lonely he wishes that other beings might come to join him. Just then other beings also fall into this Palace. This Brahma thinks that he has created the others, and the others also think likewise, and Brahma being regarded as the Creator."
So in this context, the Buddha did expressly state that the concept of Brahma as the creator god was false. In the Judaic context we may conclude that it is implied.
4 comments:
I am neither ‘for’ nor ‘against’ any religion. I consider myself a Buddhist and I am open to the views of other religions, especially on the topic of God.
For Christian and Islam, believe in God / Allah is the foundation for their beliefs. That is to say, if there is no God / Allah, there will be no Christian and Islam. So, if I express my view that ‘God doesn’t exist’ and ‘whether there exist a God / Allah is not important’ then they will refer me to the Bible and Koran to prove to me that God is actual fact, exist.
It is fine for me that Christian & Islam believes in God / Allah and their belief in those written in Bible & Koran. I am not even disputing whether is there any truth in what written in the holy books.
So, my point is that, it is our universal rights to have faith in whatever beliefs or religions. It is also our rights to preach to each other on what we believe to others in good faith, and not with the intention of ‘converting’ he / she into whatever that we believe at. Whether he / she chooses to convert is his / hers rights.
I have high regards to those works of Christian missionaries that helping out the unfortunates. In fact, such noble works should be encouraged and emulate by others, as these are for the good of mankind. For me, such actions are in fact, good for the respective Karma that what Buddhist believe.
From : someone you know
Anonymous,
"I have high regards to those works of Christian missionaries that helping out the unfortunates."
Many, especially the evangelical types have hidden agenda. Even World Vision has hidden agenda.
I was told Tzu Chi even built a mosque for the muslims in the affected tsunami area, without any hidden agenda.
Definitely Justin. I have utmost respect of this Tzu Chi.
http://www.tzuchi.org/
They are the very first to response to tsunami victims in Aceh and Sri Lanka. You can watch the documentary in DA AI TV. Tzu Chi help without condition attached, but with sincere hearts.
The Master Zheng Yen, should be nominated for Noble prize, as recommended by Dhamika.
http://www.newdaai.tv/chinese/schedules/schedules.php
"How could a God who has no corporal body and who is universally alone say, "Let us make Man in our image, after our likeness?" Isn't this nonsense.
The book the Twelve Planet written by Zecharia Sitchin in interesting..research on the sumerian text is onteresting to read.
Are we created by through stem cells???
Post a Comment