Alex bliss

Why doesn't buddhism call the emptiness as god??

41 posts in this topic

Because he likes to talk about god :)


How to get to infinity? Divide by zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Buddhism, 'Sunyata' is the basis of all reality. It is what underlies all forms and is the 'substance' that the world is made of.

The concept of 'God' is more associated with Hinduism. The Hindus believed in many Gods, they thought of Brahma as the supreme reality,  they believed in a soul or a self, while Buddha had nothing to say about them and thought of as irrelevant. Hinduism has all sorts of complex beliefs, rituals, creeds, rites, mantras, stories, legends, philosophy, etc etc.

The reason is that Hinduism is also a way of life, not just for 'monks' like the Buddhists, but for everyone. It served a standard religion function, that's why it has all sorts of moral codes, heaven and hell, belief in Gods etc like Christianity, however Buddhism was more of a religion for the recluse, you are not a good Buddhist if you are actively indulging in worldly pleasures, and Buddhism is way more focused  on direct enlightenment and direct spiritual experience then Hinduism. The founder of Buddhism is the 'Buddha' a guy who had made the vow to be enlightened at all costs whether doesn't matter if he dies or not . Buddhism is influenced by that.
But the ideas in Buddhism already have their basis in Hinduism.

Before Buddhism, Hindus had concepts like 'Om', Samadhi, Turiya. The things written in Buddhism is already written in the Upanishads.

Both religions are correct, it's just that Buddhism has a different way to interpret reality that may have a universal ring to it, while Hinduism puts labels on all sort of things and may look like it has a cultural influence. But what I think is they are trying to say the same thing. It's like saying, whether reality is a positive (hindus) or a negative(buddhism), is there a soul or a no soul, whether the substance of the world is 'Brahma' or 'Sunyata'. It's just a matter of perception.

 

Edited by Ibn Sina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember that all the people that are so quick to tell you about God have never seen God.

We are quick to give are opinion as if its known truth when the reality is that at best it's just a guess .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might be wrong but it's cause they believe God is the Buddha-mind.  I think emptiness is the nature of mind, nature of God like Leo also says God is a giant mind. So what is the substance of a mind it's empty but it exists.


"Your the left eye and i am the right would it not be madness to fight, WE COME ONE." - Faithless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ibn Sina said:

In Buddhism, 'Sunyata' is the basis of all reality. It is what underlies all forms and is the 'substance' that the world is made of.

The concept of 'God' is more associated with Hinduism. The Hindus believed in many Gods, they thought of Brahma as the supreme reality,  they believed in a soul or a self, while Buddha had nothing to say about them and thought of as irrelevant. Hinduism has all sorts of complex beliefs, rituals, creeds, rites, mantras, stories, legends, philosophy, etc etc.

The reason is that Hinduism is also a way of life, not just for 'monks' like the Buddhists, but for everyone. It served a standard religion function, that's why it has all sorts of moral codes, heaven and hell, belief in Gods etc like Christianity, however Buddhism was more of a religion for the recluse, you are not a good Buddhist if you are actively indulging in worldly pleasures, and Buddhism is way more focused  on direct enlightenment and direct spiritual experience then Hinduism. The founder of Buddhism is the 'Buddha' a guy who had made the vow to be enlightened at all costs whether doesn't matter if he dies or not . Buddhism is influenced by that.
But the ideas in Buddhism already have their basis in Hinduism.

Before Buddhism, Hindus had concepts like 'Om', Samadhi, Turiya. The things written in Buddhism is already written in the Upanishads.

Both religions are correct, it's just that Buddhism has a different way to interpret reality that may have a universal ring to it, while Hinduism puts labels on all sort of things and may look like it has a cultural influence. But what I think is they are trying to say the same thing. It's like saying, whether reality is a positive (hindus) or a negative(buddhism), is there a soul or a no soul, whether the substance of the world is 'Brahma' or 'Sunyata'. It's just a matter of perception.

 

Actively engaging in worldly pleasure is fine to be a good Buddhist, buy the middle way and all that


love or silence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's almost like this forum doesn't deserve a good well informed post based on data, research and knowledge. A well educated post can easily be torn down  by an ignorant user just by spitting some one liner bullshit and the value of the gem just reduces. I don't think I am going to spend much time here writing down my posts. It's fruitless. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Ibn Sina said:

It's almost like this forum doesn't deserve a good well informed post based on data, research and knowledge. A well educated post can easily be torn down  by an ignorant user just by spitting some one liner bullshit and the value of the gem just reduces. I don't think I am going to spend much time here writing down my posts. It's fruitless. 

 

 

Mine is a two liner. ;)

Edited by Joker_Theory

"Your the left eye and i am the right would it not be madness to fight, WE COME ONE." - Faithless

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ibn Sina said:

It's almost like this forum doesn't deserve a good well informed post based on data, research and knowledge. A well educated post can easily be torn down  by an ignorant user just by spitting some one liner bullshit and the value of the gem just reduces. I don't think I am going to spend much time here writing down my posts. It's fruitless. 

 

 

You are so self centered and your ego is so big that whenever somebody dismiss or disagree your post that you consider a valuable "gem" you get angry lol. Lot of work to do!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Moreira lool yeah.   @Ibn Sina bro spirituality means being generous without expectations..when you give something just so that you get back ..that's selfish motive !! Peace 😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because God would then become a 'thing', something that can be worshipped.

Try to worship emptiness/nothingness, you will always fail.

You are free, so be free. That's the whole point of religion.

Edited by Truth Addict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Alex bliss because god is still something. 


"God is good, God is everything - the end. You go on with your illusion that something is not okay, and you lose, and you lose, and you lose.” — Byron Katie

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Moreira said:

your ego is so big

My ego is as big as the empire state building. 

However, if you logically, with good knowledge and research show that I am wrong, then I  accept it. I am not 'irrationally' egotistical when it comes to learning.

But I get frustrated when someone just throws one liner crap and  it gets equated with all the hard work and deep research that I have  gone through. 
Any pot head or crack head can come to this forum and give their  opinions, and now I am equal to them, however  I have done far more work then them. What I write  can be of value to the readers of this forum.

It's like, Einstein  wrote down entire theory of   of general relativity on a wall seen by everybody, and a methaddict  comes along and sprays 'It is wrong'and walks away.

It is frustrating.
 

Edited by Ibn Sina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ibn Sina I appreciated your thoughtful, well written and researched response above. I know what you mean, but keep in mind that not everyone who reads and appreciates the time you put in will necessarily give you any signal that they did so.


How to get to infinity? Divide by zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@outlandish Yes, you are right. But It's  not that I want everyone to thank me and show that they appreciate my effort, it's that I don't react properly to someone trying to show me wrong and create 'doubt' in what I said. And the reason is, I get into a dilemma, should  I spend my time refuting his arguements? Or  should I leave it like that? But what he wrote makes my post 'look' like it is wrong, so should I reply him to make it not look wrong? But wouldn't that be just a waste of time?

Leo's vids have very high standards. But I have to say, his forum has low standard.  There is very few high quality material in here, most of them is just people giving their opinions however they feel like , passing their time, trying to feel better  by arguing etc.

Edited by Ibn Sina

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Ibn Sina I'd say just avoid the trap of feeling like the last word is the final word. Just because someone put up some lower quality post after you spoke your mind doesn't mean anyone is listening to the last one. I think you can have confidence in what you said, and let go of feeling like you need to prove yourself, because really, do you even care what some random individual on the internet thinks?

Most of the time I find it's not really worth engaging in debates, but there's a sweet spot where it can be worthwhile. Just depends doesn't it...? I remember reading once (maybe in a Steven Pinker book) how obviously, debates/arguments rarely change the opponent's mind. But what they do do, when they're done right, is change the spectators' mind. Makes sense.


How to get to infinity? Divide by zero.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, outlandish said:

@Ibn Sina I'd say just avoid the trap of feeling like the last word is the final word. Just because someone put up some lower quality post after you spoke your mind doesn't mean anyone is listening to the last one. I think you can have confidence in what you said, and let go of feeling like you need to prove yourself, because really, do you even care what some random individual on the internet thinks?

Most of the time I find it's not really worth engaging in debates, but there's a sweet spot where it can be worthwhile. Just depends doesn't it...? I remember reading once (maybe in a Steven Pinker book) how obviously, debates/arguments rarely change the opponent's mind. But what they do do, when they're done right, is change the spectators' mind. Makes sense.

Thanx for the advice :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now