Gods and Demons....

DinoBot

Just a general question. I have been reading about Buddhism a lot over the past while
and one thing I dont fully understand is the numerous reference to gods, demons and hungry ghosts.

I had thought Buddhism did not really believe in god ? So Im thinking I am misunderstanding these references.

As an example I came across this Buddha

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acala

"Despite his fearsome appearance, his role is to aid all beings by showing them the teachings of the Buddha, leading them into self-control"

Does this type of imageary appear in all sects/schools of Buddhism ?

Do Buddhist "pray" to different gods ? Do different Buddha's help/hinder us in any way?

Thanks,

D

Asiaprod

DinoBot wrote:

Just a general question. I have been reading about Buddhism a lot over the past while
and one thing I dont fully understand is the numerous reference to gods, demons and hungry ghosts.

Great question, here is an answer. It is difficult to grasp in places so please do ask questions.

The concept of a personal God does not fit into the Buddhist system of religion. Today there are many sects of Buddhism. Many differ in their concept of the divine and of Buddha. In general, Buddhists are pantheistic in their view of God. Many view God as an impersonal force which is made up of all living things and holds the universe together. There is no sovereign Person in the heavens holding all together in unity, there is only the ultimate impersonal unity of being.
Here is a great quote form a famous Buddhist, If God after making the world puts Himself outside it, He is no longer God. If He separates Himself from the world or wants to separate Himself, He is not God. The world is not the world when it is separated from God. God must be in the world and the world in God.
Since Buddhism in general does not believe in a personal God or divine being, it does not have worship, praying, or praising of a divine being. It offers no form of redemption, forgiveness, heavenly hope, or final judgment. Buddhism is more of a moral philosophy, an ethical way of life. It is in fact a non-theistic ethical discipline, a system of self training, stressing ethics and mind-culture to the exclusion of theology. Since Gautama's death, many sects have developed within Buddhism. Many of these sects differ in many fundamental ways and comparing them to one another is like comparing chalk to cheese. Many sects have developed their own unique concept of God. Some are pantheistic in their view of God. Others are atheistic. Still others have developed a polytheistic system of gods. Some have combined pantheism and polytheism. Several sects have elevated Gautama (or Buddha) to the level of a savior or divine being although he never claimed to be a deity. Other sects have combined some of the doctrines of God from other religions with Buddhism. Since Buddha never emphasized his concept of the divine, Buddhism is left with some of life's deepest questions unanswered, questions such as the origin of the universe and the purpose of man's existence.
For me, there is no God.

DinoBot

Thanks Asiaprod,

So is it true to say that Buddhism has changed and evolved as it
spread into the different countries and became influenced by
the social make-up of the country ?

Which school is closest to what the Buddha taught ?..... in your option:-)

You also said most buddhist would be pantheistic in their view of God. So what is the buddhist
view of free will ? And how, if at all, does the concept of free-will influence the buddhists
world view ?

Thanks,

D

Asiaprod

DinoBot wrote:

So is it true to say that Buddhism has changed and evolved as it
spread into the different countries and became influenced by
the social make-up of the country ?

Which school is closest to what the Buddha taught ?..... in your option:-)

You also said most buddhist would be pantheistic in their view of God. So what is the buddhist
view of free will ? And how, if at all, does the concept of free-will influence the buddhists
world view ?

Wow, you are coming up with great questions. really making me study, thanks:)

Yes indeed, Buddhism has changed and evolved as it spread. But then the Buddha did say that he expected us to expand on his teachings. He saw himself only as the forerunner. We would have to take up the torch ourselves and grow.

I think the closest big school will probably be the Tibetan Buddhists. I am sure there are some smaller local schools in India also but I don't really know them. Buddhism spread down through central India and westward through Nepal, Tibet and China. I think the greater number of schools spread from the Chinese variations--my school is from this path. Probably the most well known one of these is Zen Buddhism

Now the hard one, is there free will......yes, but its hidden.

According to Buddhism the various actions carried out by a being in the past and present produce a kind of intangible force that causes the being to experience a range of 10 worlds or life condition, moving from the bottom condition of Hell, through Hunger, Animality, Anger, Tranquility, Rapture, Learning, Realization to Bodhisattva, finally to Budhahood. These various existences constitute samsara, or the continuous round of life and death. There are also 3,000 life conditions, but thats another thread.

In Hinduism and Buddhism, such actions bear a common name - karma. Karma means an action, or combination of actions, by a single being or group of beings which produce effects. Those effects, which could be good, bad, or neutral, determine the future of the being who performed the action. Since this cycle is inescapable one naturally asks is there any room for free will under the law of karma. A more penetrating question is: "Might not free will be simply subjective opinion. So-called free will is also an effect of karma." For example, suppose a daughter goes against her parents wishes and decides to marry a younger man. The daughter might think that the decision was made by her free will, but under the law of karma that decision could very well be an effect of her past karmic relation with this young man and her parents. That she acts with a free will is only her subjective opinion. We can find many examples like this, all of which seem to indicate that there is no room for free will under the law of karma. Does this mean the fate of a person is predetermined by his or her past karma, that a person has no way to change it. The Buddha said this is not the case. Why and how, then, can one change one's fate.

To help us to understand that one's fate is not entirely predetermined by one's past karma, we have to revisit Karma again. Cause and effect (Karma), just like birth and death, lose its significance at the enlightened level because at the level of basic nature there is no one to receive the effect of karma, whether it is good or bad. Therefore, at the extreme, when one is enlightened, the law of karma is not applicable. All that the enlightened one does, says, or thinks is through free will, a manifestation of basic nature, and not the effect of past karma. All of the Buddha's teachings aim at this one goal: that is, to identify oneself with one's basic nature. All his methods are designed to enable one to gradually come into harmony with that basic nature.

This basic nature possesses all kinds of good human qualities, such as loving-kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity. All these good qualities could cause good karma, which produces good effects. Therefore, during the process of cultivating harmony with basic nature, these good qualities will be revealed bit by bit, like an occasional ray of sunshine penetrating through a heavy cloud. These revelations are the true products of a person's free will. Because such free will creates good karma, and because good karma produces good effects which in turn are good karma for the next effect, and so on, a person has the potential to become enlightened, to recognize basic nature, and to become a Buddha. At this level, one will not only be rid of samsara, but will also gain the perfect wisdom and compassion necessary to teach other sentient beings to follow the same path. (Take note MeditationMom that we do agree on a lot of stuff)

Karma is a vast subject that takes years to really understand. I am just beginning to grasp some of the finer points. I could talk for hours without exhausting all the available materials on the subject. The two points I would like to leave you with are:

Good or bad karma will inevitably produce its respective effect. Our daily doings, speech, and thoughts will affect our future. A wise person knows, therefore, how to live properly.

Remember that the law of karma stops operating and you become rid of samsara only by identifying yourself with your basic nature. How you may gradually identify yourself with basic nature, and realize that it is yourself, is the essence of Buddha's teaching.

This is why I study and practice it.

DinoBot

Asiaprod wrote:

This basic nature possesses all kinds of good human qualities, such as loving-kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity. All these good qualities could cause good karma, which produces good effects.

Therefore, during the process of cultivating harmony with basic nature, these good qualities will be revealed bit by bit, like an occasional ray of sunshine penetrating through a heavy cloud. These revelations are the true products of a person's free will.

So if I understand correctly, when one is enlightened, the law of karma is not applicable. So only when you reach a level where you fully understand your true self will you really have free will.

Asiaprod wrote:

The law of karma stops operating and you become rid of samsara only by identifying yourself with your basic nature.

So what/who or how does the process begin ? Is it built in for everyone to eventually start to question their exsitance ? and from that begin on the path to understanding their true nature ?

Asiaprod

DinoBot wrote:

So if I understand correctly, when one is enlightened, the law of karma is not applicable. So only when you reach a level where you fully understand your true self will you really have free will.

Correct, that is how I see it. We always act under the influence of Karma. We can not escape this natural process. Being a natural process also explains why in general Buddhists do not believe in God(s). The so-called good effect or bad effect of Karma is not a judgement nor is it given as a reward or punishment by a super authority such as God. The good or bad effect produced by good or bad karma is purely and simply a natural phenomenon governed by natural laws that act automatically, with complete justice. If God has anything to do with it, then God must also act according to this natural law. This cause produces this effect. That cause produces that effect. God would not change this natural path because of his like or dislike of a particular person. The good and bad referred to here are not defined by any code or law created by human being unless such a code or law follows the natural path. For example, when democracy was first established in the United States, women did not have the right to vote. At that time, women who complied with that status were considered good and those who fought against it were considered bad. The judgement was incorrect, however. The natural path is that human beings are all equal, and thus the system which gives women equal voting rights with men is truly the just one. Therefore, those who opposed the unequal voting system were actually the good ones.

So what/who or how does the process begin ? Is it built in for everyone to eventually start to question their exsitance ? and from that begin on the path to understanding their true nature ?

I would believe that we are all destined to begin this process. For some it comes quickly, for others it will take many lifetimes. Anytime we question any of our actions, that is a sign of the process at work, no matter what religion or belief system we follow.

DinoBot

Hi ,

I have been reading the tibetan book of the dead and in the opening commetry it speaks alot about the different gods/buddhas you will meet. Some with four faces and thosands of arms.

How should this be read ?

I get the feeling such imagary does not cause a problem for people from that culture.

I mean is it like a westerner saying "its raining cats and dogs" Nobody from this part of world would think it actually rained down animals.

Is it similiar, in that the image is only used to represent a stage or is it saying you will in fact meet these gods ?

Asiaprod wrote:

For me, there is no God.

So do you even hold the view that god is an impersonal force which is made up of all living things ? If so, is god not self aware ?

D