Buddhism and the
God-idea
by Venerable Nyanaponika
Thera
Quite contradictory views have been
expressed in Western literature on the attitude of Buddhism toward
the concept of God and gods. From a study of the discourses of the
Buddha preserved in the Pali canon, it will be seen that the idea
of a personal deity, a creator god conceived to be eternal
and omnipotent, is incompatible with the Buddha's teachings. On the
other hand, conceptions of an impersonal godhead of any
description, such as world-soul, etc., are excluded by the Buddha's
teachings on Anatta, non-self or
unsubstantiality.
In Buddhist literature, the belief in a
creator god (issara-nimmana-vada) is frequently mentioned
and rejected, along with other causes wrongly adduced to explain
the origin of the world; as, for instance, world-soul, time,
nature, etc. God-belief, however, is placed in the same category as
those morally destructive wrong views which deny the kammic results
of action, assume a fortuitous origin of man and nature, or teach
absolute determinism. These views are said to be altogether
pernicious, having definite bad results due to their effect on
ethical conduct.
Theism, however, is regarded as a kind of
kamma-teaching in so far as it upholds the moral efficacy of
actions. Hence a theist who leads a moral life may, like anyone
else doing so, expect a favorable rebirth. He may possibly even be
reborn in a heavenly world that resembles his own conception of it,
though it will not be of eternal duration as he may have expected.
If, however, fanaticism induces him to persecute those who do not
share his beliefs, this will have grave consequences for his future
destiny. For fanatical attitudes, intolerance, and violence against
others create unwholesome kamma leading to moral degeneration and
to an unhappy rebirth.
Although belief in God does not exclude a
favorable rebirth, it is a variety of eternalism, a false
affirmation of permanence rooted in the craving for existence, and
as such an obstacle to final deliverance.
Among the fetters (samyojana) that
bind to existence, theism is particularly subject to those of
personality-belief, attachment to rites and rituals, and desire for
fine-material existence or for a "heaven of the sense sphere," as
the case may be.
As an attempt at explaining the universe,
its origin, and man's situation in his world, the God-idea was
found entirely unconvincing by the Buddhist thinkers of old.
Through the centuries, Buddhist philosophers have formulated
detailed arguments refuting the doctrine of a creator god. It
should be of interest to compare these with the ways in which
Western philosophers have refuted the theological proofs of the
existence of God.
But for an earnest believer, the God-idea
is more than a mere device for explaining external facts like the
origin of the world. For him it is an object of faith that can
bestow a strong feeling of certainty, not only as to God's
existence "somewhere out there," but as to God's consoling presence
and closeness to himself. This feeling of certainty requires close
scrutiny. Such scrutiny will reveal that in most cases the God-idea
is only the devotee's projection of his ideal — generally a noble
one — and of his fervent wish and deeply felt need to believe.
These projections are largely conditioned by external influences,
such as childhood impressions, education, tradition and social
environment. Charged with a strong emotional emphasis, brought to
life by man's powerful capacity for image-formation, visualization
and the creation of myth, they then come to be identified with the
images and concepts of whatever religion the devotee follows. In
the case of many of the most sincere believers, a searching
analysis would show that their "God-experience" has no more
specific content than this.
Yet the range and significance of
God-belief and God-experience are not fully exhausted by the
preceding remarks. The lives and writings of the mystics of all
great religions bear witness to religious experiences of great
intensity, in which considerable changes are effected in the
quality of consciousness. Profound absorption in prayer or
meditation can bring about a deepening and widening, a brightening
and intensifying of consciousness, accompanied by a transporting
feeling of rapture and bliss. The contrast between these states and
normal conscious awareness is so great that the mystic believes his
experience to be manifestations of the divine; and given the
contrast, this assumption is quite understandable. Mystical
experiences are also characterized by a marked reduction or
temporary exclusion of the multiplicity of sense-perceptions and
restless thoughts, and this relative unification of mind is then
interpreted as a union or communion with the One God. All these
deeply moving impressions and the first spontaneous interpretations
the mystic subsequently identifies with his particular theology. It
is interesting to note, however, that the attempts of most great
Western mystics to relate their mystical experiences to the
official dogmas of their respective churches often resulted in
teachings which were often looked upon askance by the orthodox, if
not considered downright heretical.
The psychological facts underlying those
religious experiences are accepted by the Buddhist and well-known
to him; but he carefully distinguishes the experiences themselves
from the theological interpretations imposed upon them. After
rising from deep meditative absorption (jhana), the
Buddhist meditator is advised to view the physical and mental
factors constituting his experience in the light of the three
characteristics of all conditioned existence: impermanency,
liability to suffering, and absence of an abiding ego or eternal
substance. This is done primarily in order to utilize the
meditative purity and strength of consciousness for the highest
purpose: liberating insight. But this procedure also has a very
important side-effect which concerns us here: the meditator will
not be overwhelmed by any uncontrolled emotions and thoughts evoked
by his singular experience, and will thus be able to avoid
interpretations of that experience not warranted by the
facts.
Hence a Buddhist meditator, while
benefiting by the refinement of consciousness he has achieved, will
be able to see these meditative experiences for what they are; and
he will further know that they are without any abiding substance
that could be attributed to a deity manifesting itself to the mind.
Therefore, the Buddhist's conclusion must be that the highest
mystic states do not provide evidence for the existence of a
personal God or an impersonal godhead.
Buddhism has sometimes been called an
atheistic teaching, either in an approving sense by freethinkers
and rationalists, or in a derogatory sense by people of theistic
persuasion. Only in one way can Buddhism be described as atheistic,
namely, in so far as it denies the existence of an eternal,
omnipotent God or godhead who is the creator and ordainer of the
world. The word "atheism," however, like the word "godless,"
frequently carries a number of disparaging overtones or
implications, which in no way apply to the Buddha's
teaching.
Those who use the word "atheism" often
associate it with a materialistic doctrine that knows nothing
higher than this world of the senses and the slight happiness it
can bestow. Buddhism is nothing of that sort. In this respect it
agrees with the teachings of other religions, that true lasting
happiness cannot be found in this world; nor, the Buddha adds, can
it be found on any higher plane of existence, conceived as a
heavenly or divine world, since all planes of existence are
impermanent and thus incapable of giving lasting bliss. The
spiritual values advocated by Buddhism are directed, not towards a
new life in some higher world, but towards a state utterly
transcending the world, namely, Nibbana. In making this statement,
however, we must point out that Buddhist spiritual values do not
draw an absolute separation between the beyond and the here and
now. They have firm roots in the world itself for they aim at the
highest realization in this present existence. Along with such
spiritual aspirations, Buddhism encourages earnest endeavor to make
this world a better place to live in.
The materialistic philosophy of
annihilationism (ucchedavada) is emphatically rejected by
the Buddha as a false doctrine. The doctrine of kamma is sufficient
to prove that Buddhism does not teach annihilation after death. It
accepts survival, not of an eternal soul, but of a mental process
subject to renewed becoming; thus it teaches rebirth without
transmigration. Again, the Buddha's teaching is not a nihilism that
gives suffering humanity no better hope than a final cold
nothingness. On the contrary, it is a teaching of salvation
(niyyanika-dhamma) or deliverance (vimutti) which
attributes to man the faculty to realize by his own efforts the
highest goal, Nibbana, the ultimate cessation of suffering and the
final eradication of greed, hatred and delusion. Nibbana is far
from being the blank zero of annihilation; yet it also cannot be
identified with any form of God-idea, as it is neither the origin
nor the immanent ground or essence of the world.
Buddhism is not an enemy of religion as
atheism is believed to be. Buddhism, indeed, is the enemy of none.
A Buddhist will recognize and appreciate whatever ethical,
spiritual and cultural values have been created by God-belief in
its long and checkered history. We cannot, however, close our eyes
to the fact that the God-concept has served too often as a cloak
for man's will to power, and the reckless and cruel use of that
power, thus adding considerably to the ample measure of misery in
this world supposed to be an all-loving God's creation. For
centuries free thought, free research and the expression of
dissident views were obstructed and stifled in the name of service
to God. And alas, these and other negative consequences are not yet
entirely things of the past.
The word "atheism" also carries the
innuendo of an attitude countenancing moral laxity, or a belief
that man-made ethics, having no divine sanction, rest on shaky
foundations. For Buddhism, however, the basic moral law is inherent
in life itself. It is a special case of the law of cause and
effect, needing neither a divine law-giver nor depending upon the
fluctuating human conceptions of socially conditioned minor
moralities and conventions. For an increasing section of humanity,
the belief in God is breaking down rapidly, as well as the
accustomed motivations for moral conduct. This shows the risk of
basing moral postulates on divine commandments, when their alleged
source rapidly loses credence and authority. There is a need for an
autonomous foundation for ethics, one that has deeper roots than a
social contract and is capable of protecting the security of the
individual and of human institutions. Buddhism offers such a
foundation for ethics.
Buddhism does not deny that there are in
the universe planes of existence and levels of consciousness which
in some ways may be superior to our terrestrial world and to
average human consciousness. To deny this would indeed be
provincial in this age of space travel. Bertrand Russell rightly
says: "It is improbable that the universe contains nothing better
than ourselves."
Yet, according to Buddhist teachings, such
higher planes of existence, like our familiar world, are subject to
the law of impermanence and change. The inhabitants of such worlds
may well be, in different degrees, more powerful than human beings,
happier and longer-lived. Whether we call those superior beings
gods, deities, devas or angels is of little importance, since it is
improbable that they call themselves by any of those names. They
are inhabitants of this universe, fellow-wanderers in this round of
existence; and though more powerful, they need not be wiser than
man. Further, it need not be denied that such worlds and such
beings may have their lord and ruler. In all probability they do.
But like any human ruler, a divine ruler too might be inclined to
misjudge his own status and power, until a greater one comes along
and points out to him his error, as our texts report of the
Buddha.
These, however, are largely matters beyond
the range and concern of average human experience. They have been
mentioned here chiefly for the purpose of defining the Buddhist
position, and not to serve as a topic of speculation and argument.
Such involvement can only divert attention and effort from what
ought to be our principal object: the overcoming of greed, hatred
and delusion where they are found in the here and
now.
An ancient verse ascribed to the Buddha in
the Questions of King Milinda says:
Not far from here do you need to
look!
Highest existence — what can it avail?
Here in this present aggregate,
In your own body overcome the world!