Basic buddhist concepts analysed in a Christian website

last SG · 2012-12-12T09:15:01+00:00

Re the flag and the wind, I believe the answer has got to do with the mind, but this is not the proper answer to give at all. It is again more like playing m...

Weychin SG

Let’s not forget we are not refering about somebody in past tense, eg. someone who who has long past on. Neither are we talking some ordinary being, but aliving God, omnipotent and omnipresent, creator of the world, king of kings!

Weychin SG

Believing and fearing in monsters or pontianaks due to ignorance and relying on hearsay. Cultivating wisdom, constant vigilance and an inquiring mind help dispels this ignorance. One simple way is let go of one's fear as a child and look under the bed or look up the roof, one who realise that monsters and pontianaks do not exist outside of one's mind. Similiarly looking for God one realises the omnipresence too resides in ones' mind! Thus if God is omnipresent in one's mind so too is God is omnipresent in everything one encounters! Perhaps you've read about the wizard of oz where everyone wears green tinted glasses and thus everthing appears green!

1. The strength of an argument lies not with the strength of one's convictions. It lies with the truth of the premises and whether the conclusion necessarily flows from the premises. If the premises are false and the conclusion does not follow, then the argument is unsound and no amount of conviction would make it a strong argument. It becomes mere gainsaying.

2. Parents tell kids that monsters are under the bed. The issue is, are there really monsters under the bed, regardless of what kids believe? You may believe that there is pontianak on the roof and based your fear on that belief. But that does not mean there is one on the roof.

3. You seem to believe that evolution (apes to man) is true, and thus that belief in a supernatural God is false, since it is a projection of man's need to survive. If that is so, then it also applies to all beliefs, including Buddhism. Are you willing to bite this bullet?

Weychin SG

The naked ape is not meant to imply evolution in this instance, but rather looking at ourselves without the immense strength of the great apes, teeth or talons of apex predators or thick fur. What we do have is a brain and mind very much highly adapted.
Religons is about empowerment and in theistic religons, entitlement. Buddhism is about empowerment, mastery over self over suffering, its cessation. I am sure you have some impression of the Four Noble Truths.
Buddhism transcends self,breaking the shackles of suffering caused by self.

2009novice SG

if i have a self, why i can't choose to be what i want???

Is there really a self? Why is the "self" different from baby to adulthood...? If self is permanent, why adults don't behave like babies...?

This God concept; i felt it's part of dependent arising... "created" when the universe is born. If there is really a intelligent designer, it must be a cruel one. Natural science tells us how the food chain is like, no one likes to be the prey. The living things are subjected to diseases... how vulnerable it is.

This intelligent designer concept seems to degrade the wisdom of our ancestors. Without them, we may not know how to grow rice now. I don't see how this designer teach humans to adapt to the harsh environment they lived before.

2009novice SG

Without one there cannot be many and without many it is not possible to refer to one. Therefore one and many arise dependently and such phenomena do not have the sign of inherent existence

-Nagarjuna

sinweiy SG

3. You seem to believe that evolution (apes to man) is true, and thus that belief in a supernatural God is false

no we don't believe that man came from apes (a lower life form), that's humiliating, on the contrary we came from devas(a higher life form).

BroInChrist SG

erm, rock realising that it's rock is quite different from wave realising that it is water. analogically, we human realised that we all are Buddha potential within ourselves, rather than we human realised that we are human.

it's already explained by HHDL in Buddhism view point. the notion is different. in our cosmology, there was a Brahma god who was the first being to be "created" or born in this universe of ours. he thought that he was the creator god, and also have the power to create form with freewill, but actually he is still an unenlightened being with a mind. He is still in Samsara. He's only in Paranirmitavasavartin heaven他化自在天. there are other heavens above him. so even that "creator god" also dwell in a "universe" or location or space.

1. Actually my point was that neither the rock or the wave can realise anything about itself as such things do not have the faculties to do any realising. It doesn't take much effort to realise that we are only human. But I don't quite see the point being made that all humans were Buddhas to begin with.

2. In your cosmoslogy there was a Brahma god who was created or born? Then it means such a being has a beginning and thus requires a greater cause. He is dependent on another entity or being higher than him. This differs from the Christian concept of God, that He is the eternal I AM, uncaused and there is none above Him or greater than Him.

BroInChrist SG

So is there a God that creates?

Yes. I believe there is a Creator God who made the universe and all that is in it.

BroInChrist SG

Let me use an analogy about self; imagine a lightbulb or the sun representing our consciousness which illuminates, our body in front of it representing phenomena, and a wall the reflection of the processes. All long as all the elements are in play, we see the shadow, each time the body moves, shape of the shadow changes. Now is this self, is it the real or illusory? It is real as we witness and interact with it's presence. It is illusory because it is simply a result of luminosity, phenomena and reflection of mind. It does not exist by itself. It only appears so.

The question is, why do you equate the self with the shadow or see both as analogous? I think the analogy of the shadow is flawed. The shadow is cast because there are REAL objects like the sun and the object on which the light calls upon. The shadow is real because we can observe it, but it has no physical properties, it is just the absence of light because light travels in sraight lines. It disappears and move in accordance with the light source and the object. It is temporal but certainly not illusory. To call it illusory is to apply the wrong vocabulary. The laws of nature are set in place by a Creator God to give us the phenomena we observe in our daily lives. Just because things work in tandem or interact with each other does not negate their reality or render them illusory.

BroInChrist SG

Being a fully functional human being comes with a consciousness, self as witnessed on the same person is different in outlook and perception while young, teenage and adult and old age are different. Self can be liken to a operating system with inherent upgrading software. Just a operating system cannot exist outside a computer, a computer that does not have an operating system is just an expensive paperweight.

Question then is, who built the software and hardware? I think an intelligent cause best accounts for it, don't you agree?

BroInChrist SG

regardling the light and human analogy, i have another point of view.

humans are the problem ourselves. whever a light shines, we stand in front and block it, thus the reasult is a shadow of drakness.

while i see moredenr people worshipping 'gods' are really selfish (a centre onlyy around their own group and covent) and 'professional beggarism', there is nothing more to make me even wanna pick up the heavy book and read.

I think you are reacting to a caricature of the Christian faith.

BroInChrist SG

What better proof than it were to come out from the horse's mouth! But that's not to be forthcoming, but from either third party or some texts rewritten over the centuries!

It would be pretty much the same with Buddhism and many religions which have their own sacred texts.

BroInChrist SG

Which begs the question, on what basis do you think that God is just like monsters or pontianak under the bed or on the roof which just exist as a figment of one's imagination? It's just like people saying that belief in God is just like belief in Santa Claus. But this is merely an assertion, or a mere dismissal by associating one with the other. No rational person believes that Santa Claus is a real person who flies on a reindeer-pulled carriage and deposits gifts down chimneys on Christmas day, but there are many such rational people who believe in God while not believing in Santa Claus. You need to interact with the reasons for faith, instead of dismissing it caverlierly.

Steveyboy SG

This is what I have gathered from my learning of being a convert from Christianity to Buddhism. Isn't this a novelty?

In Christianity, they believe in God, the creator of all things including the devil and us.

In Buddhism, we believe that the Buddha taught us the way out of suffering and cyclic rebirths. The Buddha never claimed to be like God but just an ordinary man who had perfected his wisdom and compassion, hence he was able to show us the way out through his teachings and examples. In Buddhism, we do not believe in an almight creator force, it is actually the results of our actions that shapes our world.

My question to the Christians would be, if God is the creator, why did he create so much inequality? Why did he create the devil? Why is the devil stronger than God today? Why create some people to suffer and since the God theory originated from the middle east, why is there so much strife there when so many people in the middleeast is praying to God. Shouldn't God be kind and put an end to the suffering?

What about people who are born in countries who would never hear the word of God? Where do they go? Hell? Purgatory?

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to put Christianity down but for me, Buddhism answers more questions than Christianity.

BroInChrist SG

Yes, we do have a brain and a mind that works. But I do not believe that it is because our brains have adapted, which is an evolutionary explanation. I believe we are created in God's image, completely different from the animal world. Our closest relatives are not the apes in the zoo or in the wild, but fellow humans. We are all related by descent from Adam and Eve that God created as fully mature and functioning human beings, not from some apelike brutish creature.

What do you mean when you say that theistic religions like Christianity is about empowerment or entitlement? Yes, I do have some understanding of the 4 Noble Truths and the 8 Fold Paths taught in Buddhism. It attempts to address the issue of suffering and death. In my view, the meaning of anything is tied up with its origins. Where does death comes from? In fact, where does life comes from? Where does suffering comes from? All these things are addressed in the Bible.

BroInChrist SG

if i have a self, why i can't choose to be what i want???

Is there really a self? Why is the "self" different from baby to adulthood...? If self is permanent, why adults don't behave like babies...?

1. You have confused self with something else. Why would you think that to have a self means you have the powers to be what you want? You are a human being, you can be all you want as a human being to the best of your own capabilities, but you can't be a bird just because you have a self. Self basically means there is a YOU or ME to talk about. It does not mean or require omnipotence.

2. You grow from a baby to an adult. You are still you, only that you have grown in stature, in maturity, thinking etc. Why? Because that's how God made us! The person is growing, so why would you say this means there is no self?

3. You said the universe is born, which means it has a beginning. Then what caused the universe to begin?

4. The issue of an intelligent designer is not to be confused with the issue of the character of the designer. The Bible explains why the world we live in is not pretty but rather filled with suffering and death. I am sure you know what the Bible teaches on this. In the beginning God created a perfect world without sin and death. Man sinned against God and brought death into the world. So when we look at the misery around us, we are looking at a sin-cursed fallen world. It wasn't like that in the beginning.

5. Only an intelligent designer can explain the intelligence of humans. God created man and told him to fill the earth, and to tend the Garden and the ground. Adam was the first man to classify and give names to the animals, and he was to have dominion over what God has made on the earth, not to abuse it but as steward.

BroInChrist SG

Without one there cannot be many and without many it is not possible to refer to one. Therefore one and many arise dependently and such phenomena do not have the sign of inherent existence

-Nagarjuna

The Bible teaches the existence of the ONE who is also THREE, the triune Godhead. And this being exists independently of anything else.

BroInChrist SG

no we don't believe that man came from apes (a lower life form), that's humiliating, on the contrary we came from devas(a higher life form).

Just to clarify, are you saying that Buddhism rejects the evolution story, that man came about over millions of years of evolution from pondscum to apelike creatures and then to man? This would be interesting to know because I have yet to come across a Buddhist who opposes the belief in evolution. But now you seem to say that Buddhism is against that. Can you please clarify?

BroInChrist SG

This is what I have gathered from my learning of being a convert from Christianity to Buddhism. Isn't this a novelty?

In Christianity, they believe in God, the creator of all things including the devil and us.

What about people who are born in countries who would never hear the word of God? Where do they go? Hell? Purgatory?

Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to put Christianity down but for me, Buddhism answers more questions than Christianity.

1. In what sense is conversion to Buddhism from Christianity a novelty? Even if it is a novelty, what is the significance of that?

2. Yes, Buddhism teaches how to get out of suffering. But it never addresses the question of origins. It sidesteps it entirely and dismisses it as irrelevant. There is IMO a lack of the big picture and a complete view of things.

3. Indeed the Buddha is an ordinary man who claimed to have an answer to the problem of suffering and death, and who also succumbed to death eventually. Christianity teaches that God came down as man, suffered and died on the cross, and rose from the dead to show that death has been overcome. But Buddhism does not explain why or where man come from, but the Bible teaches that God created us.

4. You claimed to have been a convert from Christianity, but have you read Genesis? What does it say at the end of Day Six of creation week? God's says it was "very good". What do you think He meant by that? If you have never considered this deeply, perhaps now is a good time to refresh yourself on this.

5. You think God is unable to stop evil? Then the God you reject is not the God of the Bible. God has already told us the future, evil will be no more and the curse will be no more. Have you read Revelation? You can't claim to have read that and then say that Satan is stronger than God.

6. What about people who never heard of God? Well, the Bible teaches about this too in the book of Romans. Have you read it?

7. Lastly, what particular issues do you think that the Bible does not answer but only Buddhism can? To be sure, the Bible does not claim to answer everything, and I don't think the Buddha answered everything too. So perhaps you may wish to clarify?

sinweiy SG

Yes, we reject. we have Aggañña Sutta as prove. it's the Genesis in Buddhism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agga%C3%B1%C3%B1a_Sutta

Some of the creatures of light (the Abbhasaras) who had curiosity and a greedy nature began to dive and taste the savory Earth's substance. At that moment, the creature found out that it tasted so delicious. Thus, greed started to seep in and it ate the substance voraciously, greedily, thus calling also its comrades (who were flying above and on earth) to join in the feast. Not long afterwards, the creatures began to eat so greedily and due to the huge amount of the mud substance, they could feed on it for a very long time.

As they ate and ate, their luminous body began to be coated by the mud substance, formed a coarser body, then suddenly, the sun and moon were seen, so were the stars, and also Night and Day began on Earth. The logical explanation of this was that the creatures were the self-luminating, so blinding and luminating that they didn't notice the Sun. The Earth was covered in their light. So, when the materialization took place, the light faded inside their newly conceived 'body' of mud and thus the night and day became apparent to them. Then, as the night and day became apparent, season and years also appeared.

Their body was still coarse and roughly shaped. Thus, after a very long time, the mud-like substance began to exhaust. Then, mushroom-like plants began to grow so fast that it replaced the mud-like ocean. The creatures began to devour them as well, and they found it also so delicious as sweet honey and milk. Their body hardened more and details began to turn finer.

haha, remind me of Adam and Eve.

« Previous Page Next Page »