Buddha kept silent about God

Sephiroth

by ariyamusafir   

Buddha Amitabha is one of the Buddha who had attained Buddhahood before Buddha Gotama, and Buddha Amitabha is not mentioned on just NORMAL story books.  

Bla Bla Bla ... same crap over and over and over again. FACT - Gautama Buddha IS the ONLY Buddha Mankind have ever known. His Teaching comes first, not some fairy tale character from some story book. :no:

Number 2. What I did in the past is to counter your slanderous remarks towards Pure Land and Buddha Amitabha, NOT promoting Pure Land which is a sub-school of the Mahayana tradition. What I did in the past, what I am doing now, and what I have argued with you (in heated arguments) in the past is on PURE Buddhism, not Pure Land as a sub-school but PURE meaning UNmixed, Unadulterated, UNaltered teachings of the Buddha Gotama, meaning, ORIGINAL 100%. So, to CONCLUDE my definition of PURE Buddhism = Original Buddhism and NOT just Pure Land sub-school or sub-tradition. Even when I emphasized on ORIGINAL teachings, I want no one to make slanderous remarks towards all other sub-tradition be it in Mahayana or Teravada or Vajrayana.

ONLY Pure Buddhism Man will ever know IS Thervada Buddhism - Original teaching of Gautama Buddha. Thank you.

In case you have forgotten, in the past, I have too many heated arguments with you on Pure/Original/Unmixed/Unaltered/NOT Modified teachings of the Buddha in the sense, that is what I want to follow and talk about it around here, but you, keep on insisting on there is no pure teachings, and you supported Mahayana (which I am not against at all, only emphasizing on orthodox/unmodified/unmixed) and then, it appears you are trying to force your ideas around everyone then.  

No one forcing anything to others. I'm stating FACTS, you are stating FICTION. That is the difference between us.
And I have NEVER supported Mahayana Buddhism. In my opinion, Thervada Buddhism IS Pure Buddhism and this will not change. :no:

Read FACTS (not FICTIONS) : http://www.mindbird.com/buddhism__an_introduction.htm

[Qoute]
Theravada is often thought of as the set of practices followed during the time of Gautama himself by his "Sangha" or order of monks and nuns. It is said to be little changed from that time and includes the idea that awakening (enlightenment) is primarily available only to people who leave ordinary life and work diligently for their own "salvation." Theravadins tend to be firmer in the belief that the Buddha was an ordinary man. The name Southern Buddhism has been used since these practices were primarily located in south Asia (India, Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand, and Cambodia).
[/Qoute]

It appears to me that you are trying to confuse others by taking my comments OUT of context. what I am trying to say is that, IF EVER and only IF EVER there is such god who created everything, then why does human still suffer, why does evil dooer still suffers, why does the world still contains many people who vent on commiting evil deeds???  

KARMA lah, IDIOT. How many times do people have to say? ff:

People who commit sins in the past lives WILL be reborn anew - with bodies which suits their sins in this life. They WILL have chance to redeem themselves (by doing good) or condemn themselves further (by doing bad). So in a way, Salvation or Damnation is in hands of Man, God is not to be blamed for Evil man does. The reason why so many "evil" people around today and why there is so many Religion exists today IS because many people have commited great sins in their past lives and they must redeem themselves accordingly by following this religion.

ONLY the chosen Few will ever know God .... and you ain't one of them, bub. ;)

It is not an insult to those of other faiths, it is a direct hit on those who tried to manipulate Buddhism to to their own or their religions benefits such as claiming Buddha as a prophet of their god and so on.

Buddha (I meant Siddharta Gautama here) is here for benefit of Mankind. And he will remain TILL True Buddhism is corrupted and his name is forgetten.

Now,it is not so called Buddha Amitabha which can only be found in story books. Buddha Gotama mentioned on Buddha Amitabha, same as Buddha Gotama also did mentioned on Buddha Padumuttara, Buddha Kassapa and Buddha to be Bodhisatta Metteya and other Buddha before Buddha Gotama. Go ask non-Pureland sub-tradition if they believe in Buddha Amitabha/Amitayus. Mahayanist who are non-Pure Land sub-tradition too believe in Buddha Amitabha. I respect and pay homage to all Buddha throughout the ten directions.

Hmph ... Pureland Buddhists turn their back on Gautama Buddha's teachings YET they make statements that they respect and pay homage to all Buddhas. HYPOCRITES. ;)

Gautama Buddha's teaching is that Man can find Salvation in this lifetime, Pureland concept state that Man have to daydream of going to some faraway place called Pure land. Gautama Buddha teachs AND EMPHASIED the Four Noble Truth and Eight Folded Path, I have no idea what is the basic concept for Pure Land Buddhism is or what they are emphasizing since many have taken sinful activities for living.

However, I directly hit on those people (who does not represent their religion in making those statements/concepts/idea) be it a muslim, a christian, a hindu, or anyone else (which I do not hit or insult or make attack remarks towards their religion BUT them as individuals who make slanderous remarks) which tries to CHEAT people by claiming and preaching to Buddhist and/or Non-Buddhist alike that Buddha Gotama is their prophet or an angel, avatar of their religion in which by fact, differs from the teachings of the Buddha himself! My definition of "YOUR" in my #18 post IS meant for all those who cheat using such menthod as you can see, that I made reference to those individuals who are of different faith!  

Go and practise Teaching of Gautama Buddha first, BEFORE you act as his lawyer. ;)
To me, you are same as Christians, Muslims and some Hindus who makes all sort of claims.

As I said, I don't care what sub-tradition, as long as it is the original, UNMIXED, UNALTERED teachings of the Buddha, I will go along with it.  

Therveda Buddhism IS the Original, Unmixed and Unaltered teaching of the Buddha. Nothing else. :no:
Are you going to go with that? ff:

ariyamusafir

Bla Bla Bla ... same crap over and over and over again. FACT - Gautama Buddha IS the ONLY Buddha Mankind have ever known. His Teaching comes first, not some fairy tale character from some story book.

Buddha Gotama is one of the many Sammasam Buddha. Before him, there are other Sammasam Buddha, and after him, there too will be other Sammasam Buddha, such as Metteya. Buddha Amitabha is one of the many Buddha before Buddha Gotama, other then Buddha Padumuttara, Buddha Kassapa just to name a few.

ONLY Pure Buddhism Man will ever know IS Thervada Buddhism - Original teaching of Gautama Buddha. Thank you.

By the way, for your info, Vijaya, goes with Theravada, There are some forumers such as lyhmsia I believe goes with Mahayana. As for me, I tend to incline towards Theravada (due to my own PERSONAL beliefs and my own understanding). However, I want to stress that accusing that Mahayana does not follow original is not absolutely true. Mahayana follows all basic teachings of the Buddha such as the 4 Noble truths and The Noble Eight Fold Path. However, I have my beliefs same as many of the laymen and laywomen here. As I have said, I stress on original, unmixed, unaltered, pure teachings of the Buddha. Be it it is in Theravada, or Mahayana as what is important is the truth, and the original teachings of the Buddha.

Before the parinibbana of the Buddha, there were no splits into Theravada, Mahayana etc. The split only occured after the parinibbana of the Buddha.

KARMA lah, IDIOT. How many times do people have to say?

People who commit sins in the past lives WILL be reborn anew - with bodies which suits their sins in this life. They WILL have chance to redeem themselves (by doing good) or condemn themselves further (by doing bad). So in a way, Salvation or Damnation is in hands of Man, God is not to be blamed for Evil man does. The reason why so many "evil" people around today and why there is so many Religion exists today IS because many people have commited great sins in their past lives and they must redeem themselves accordingly by following this religion.

ONLY the chosen Few will ever know God .... and you ain't one of them, bub.

I KNOW is KAMMA LAH!!!!! You are not that smart as you potray yourself to be. READ! I Know is KAMMA. I am TELLING YOU, IF there is a GOD who is most powerful and CREATED the WORLD, who can do anything, then Human suffering can have their suffering removed without any effort, GOD can make this world a perfect place, or what the hack, why make this world when god rules supreme. THAT is IF and only IF such GOD exist, in which I believe is not true because I BELIEVE that there is NO such ONE ALMIGHTY GOD creator of EVERYTHING! There is NO such one ALMIGHTY GOD who creates everything and lives forever. GET it??? The mesage I am trying to pass through IS, There is NO one almighty god creator of everything in Buddhism. What we suffer or enjoy is due to our Kamma.

Hmph ... Pureland Buddhists turn their back on Gautama Buddha's teachings YET they make statements that they respect and pay homage to all Buddhas. HYPOCRITES.

Gautama Buddha's teaching is that Man can find Salvation in this lifetime, Pureland concept state that Man have to daydream of going to some faraway place called Pure land. Gautama Buddha teachs AND EMPHASIED the Four Noble Truth and Eight Folded Path, I have no idea what is the basic concept for Pure Land Buddhism is or what they are emphasizing since many have taken sinful activities for living.

I am NOT STRICT PURE LAND and I am NOT STRICT MAHAYANA. I am NOT strictly any traditions (though I tend to incline more on Theravada due to my own PERSONAL beliefs and understanding). I am not interested about which sect, tradition, school, or what so ever. I am interested only in unaltered, unmixed, purely original, but I want to stress is that your accusations that Pure Land followers turn their back on Buddha Gotama's teachings is NOT true! Pure Land too follows Buddha Gotama's teachings. Pure Land too are Buddhist. Pure Land did not turn their back on Buddha Gotama. You are making wild and slanderous accusations on something or somewhat which you have not even fully comprehend, nor have you fully understood or known, you know little regarding Pure Land, yet you tried to speak as though you know about Pure Land inside out. I do not know much about Pure Land, but I know a little at least, that is they too are Buddhist who did not turn their backs on Buddha Gotama. Buddha Amitabha is believed by all Theravada, and non-Theravada alike for your information!

Go and practise Teaching of Gautama Buddha first, BEFORE you act as his lawyer.
To me, you are same as Christians, Muslims and some Hindus who makes all sort of claims.

and what claims have I made? The fact is many people from other religion tried to twist facts about Buddhism to gain followers and these people some of them are hindus, muslims and even christians who some are in this forum before or currently!

Therveda Buddhism IS the Original, Unmixed and Unaltered teaching of the Buddha. Nothing else.
Are you going to go with that?

As I have said, as I have stressed! I do not care for whatsoever schools. What I care is the orignial, unmixed, unaltered, pure unadulterated teachings of the Buddha (though I tend to incline more on Theravada due to my own PERSONAL beliefs and my own understanding) as before the parinibbana of Buddha Gotama, there were NO SUCH SPLITS!

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 5-10-2006 11:53 AM ]

Sephiroth

by ariyamusafir   

Buddha Gotama is one of the many Sammasam Buddha. Before him, there are other Sammasam Buddha, and after him, there too will be other Sammasam Buddha, such as Metteya. Buddha Amitabha is one of the many Buddha before Buddha Gotama, other then Buddha Padumuttara, Buddha Kassapa just to name a few.

Gautama Buddha IS the ONLY Buddha which History and Facts can prove to exist. :hmm:

However, I have my beliefs same as many of the laymen and laywomen here. As I have said, I stress on original, unmixed, unaltered, pure teachings of the Buddha. Be it it is in Theravada, or Mahayana as what is important is the truth, and the original teachings of the Buddha.  

ONLY Pure, Unmixed and Unaltered teaching in Buddhism IS Thervada Buddhism. Thank you.

Before the parinibbana of the Buddha, there were no splits into Theravada, Mahayana etc. The split only occured after the parinibbana of the Buddha.

BECAUSE Gautama Buddha preach it to people who willing to make sacrifice of living their loved ones and home behind. ONLY this sort of people can reach Enlightnment easily, not the people who still attached to the World and call themselves Monks like those Monks in Mahayana. :no:

I KNOW is KAMMA LAH!!!!! You are not that smart as you potray yourself to be. READ! I Know is KAMMA. I am TELLING YOU, IF there is a GOD who is most powerful and CREATED the WORLD, who can do anything, then Human suffering can have their suffering removed without any effort, GOD can make this world a perfect place, or what the hack, why make this world when god rules supreme. THAT is IF and only IF such GOD exist, in which I believe is not true because I BELIEVE that there is NO such ONE ALMIGHTY GOD creator of EVERYTHING! There is NO such one ALMIGHTY GOD who creates everything and lives forever. GET it??? The mesage I am trying to pass through IS, There is NO one almighty god creator of everything in Buddhism. What we suffer or enjoy is due to our Kamma.

IF you know that you suffer because of your Karma, then why do seek God? You must pay for your own sins and God will not bother about you.

Your argument is like a prison goes to Jail because of his crime, and later, as he suffers in the prison, he claims there is no Justice because he is suffering in Jail. It is as stupid as it gets. :

I am NOT STRICT PURE LAND and I am NOT STRICT MAHAYANA. I am NOT strictly any traditions (though I tend to incline more on Theravada due to my own PERSONAL beliefs and understanding). I am not interested about which sect, tradition, school, or what so ever.  

Who gives a crap what you are? ;)

I am interested only in unaltered, unmixed, purely original, but I want to stress is that your accusations that Pure Land followers turn their back on Buddha Gotama's teachings is NOT true! Pure Land too follows Buddha Gotama's teachings. Pure Land too are Buddhist. Pure Land did not turn their back on Buddha Gotama. You are making wild and slanderous accusations on something or somewhat which you have not even fully comprehend, nor have you fully understood or known, you know little regarding Pure Land, yet you tried to speak as though you know about Pure Land inside out. I do not know much about Pure Land, but I know a little at least, that is they too are Buddhist who did not turn their backs on Buddha Gotama. Buddha Amitabha is believed by all Theravada, and non-Theravada alike for your information!

True Buddhism IS Gautama Buddha's teaching - 4 Noble Truth and 8 Noble Path.
True Buddhists ARE those who willing to make sacrifice of leaving their home and loved ones and live according to the Precepts. NO ONE ELSE. :no:

ALL others ARE Laymen - men who are no ready to make the Sacrifice. Such people are NOT Buddhist, but people who are trying to live according to Buddhist teaching. Their words are not the Law, True Buddhists' words ARE the Laws.

and what claims have I made? The fact is many people from other religion tried to twist facts about Buddhism to gain followers and these people some of them are hindus, muslims and even christians who some are in this forum before or currently!

You claim that Pureland Buddhism IS True Buddhism as well. That IS False. Gautama Buddha have never teach any Pureland teaching.
In my opinion, you are just as worse as Muslims and others.

As I have said, as I have stressed! I do not care for whatsoever schools. What I care is the orignial, unmixed, unaltered, pure unadulterated teachings of the Buddha (though I tend to incline more on Theravada due to my own PERSONAL beliefs and my own understanding) as before the parinibbana of Buddha Gotama, there were NO SUCH SPLITS!

Of course you don't care. THAT is why I never accepted (in my opinion) you as Buddhist. ;)

Fact - Original, Unmixed, Pure teaching of Buddhism IS Thervada. In till you make the sacrifice to leave your worldly possession and life, you are a Laymen - and have no authority to make any claims which is Buddhism and which is not. :no:

ariyamusafir

sad to say, as have explained, you still cannot understand what I am trying to say. Of course people suffer or enjoy due to their own actions, I am trying to say is if there is such one almighty god, then why there is nothing done. So, thus, there is NO one almighty god. get it???

As I have already mentioned, before the buddha's parinibbana, there is NO split into different traditions, different schools.

and look at how you twist my words, I say I do not care meaning, I am not interested in whatever schools or tradition it is AS LONG AS IT IS THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS! get it???? Try UNDERLINING the sentence following those which you have already underlined.

For your information, the Buddha have LAY deciples, and among those lay deciples, there is 1 Chief Male Lay deciples and 1 Chief Female Lay deciples. Go try ask a Theravadian monk and see if this statement of mine is true or not.

ariyamusafir

The reality or validity of belief in God is based on man's understanding capacity and the maturity of the mind.

The Development of the God-idea

To trace the origin and development of the God-idea, one must go back to the time when civilization was still in its infancy and modern science was still unknown. Primitive people, out of fear of and admiration towards natural phenomena, had believed in different spirits and gods. They used their belief in spirit and gods to form religions of their own. According to their respective circumstances and understanding capacity different people worshipped different gods and founded different faiths.

At the beginning of the God-idea, people worshipped many gods - gods of trees, streams, lightning, storm, winds, the sun and all other terrestrial phenomena. These gods were related to each and every act of nature. Then gradually man began to attribute to these gods, sex and form as well as the physical and mental characteristics of human beings. Human attributes were given to the gods: love, hate, jealousy, fear, pride, envy and other emotions found among human beings. From all these gods, there slowly grew a realization that the phenomena of the universe were not many but were One. This understanding gave rise to the monotheistic god of recent ages.

In the process of development, the God-idea went through a variety of changing social and intellectual climates. It was regarded by different men in different ways. Some idealized god as the King of Heaven and Earth; they had a conception of god as a person. Others thought of god as an abstract principle. Some raised the ideal of Supreme deity to the highest heaven, while others brought it down to the lowest depths of the earth. Some pictured god in a paradise, while others made an idol and worshipped it. Some want so far as to say that there is no salvation without god?no matter how much good you do, you will not receive the fruits of your actions unless you act out of a faith in god. The Atheists said, 'No' and went on to affirm that god did not really exist at all. The Skeptics or Agnostics said, 'We do not or we cannot know.' The Positivists say that the God-idea was a meaningless problem since the idea of the term god 'was not clear'. Thus there grew a variety of ideas and beliefs and names for the God-idea: pantheism, idolatry, belief in a formless god, and belief in many gods and goddesses.

Even the monotheistic god of recent times has gone through a variety of changes as it passed through different nations and people. The Hindu god is quite different from gods of other faiths. Thus numerous religions came into existence: each one differed greatly from the other in the end, and each one says that 'God is One'.

The God-idea and Creation

As each religion came into existence and developed around the God-idea, religion developed its own particular explanation of creation. Thus the God-idea became associated with various myths. People used the God-idea as a vehicle for their explanation of the existence of man and the nature of the universe.

Today, intelligent men, who have carefully reviewed all the available facts, have come to the conclusion that, like the God-idea, the creation of myths must be regarded as an evolution of the human imagination which began with the misunderstanding of the phenomena of nature. These misunderstandings were rooted in the fear and ignorance of primitive man. Even today, man still retains his primitive interpretations of creation. In the light of recent, scientific thinking, the theological definition of god is vague and hence has no place in the contemporary creation theories or myths.

If man is created by an external source, then he must belong to that source and not to himself. According to Buddhism, man is responsible for everything he does. Thus Buddhists have no reason to believe that man came into existence in the human form through any external sources. They believe that man is here today because of his own action. He is neither punished nor rewarded by anyone but himself according to his own good and bad action. In the process of evolution, the human being came into existence. However, there are no Buddha-words to support the belief that the world was created by anybody. The scientific discovery of gradual development of the world-system conforms with the Buddha's Teachings.

Human Weakness and the Concept of God

Both the concept of God and its associated creation myths have been protected and defended by believers who need these ideas to justify their existence and usefulness to human society. All the believers claim to have received their respective scriptures as Revelation; in other words, they all profess to come directly from the one God. Each God-religion claims that it stands for Universal Peace and Universal Brotherhood and other such high ideals.

However great the ideals of the religious might be, the history of the world shows that the religions up to the present day have also helped in spreading superstitions. Some have stood against science and the advancement of knowledge, leading to ill-feelings, murders and wars. In this respect, the God-religions have failed in their attempt to enlighten mankind. For example, in certain countries when people pray for mercy, their hands are stained with the blood of the morbid sacrifices of innocent animals and sometimes, even fellow human beings. These poor and helpless creatures were slaughtered at the desecrated altars of imaginary and imperceptible gods. It has taken a long time for people to understand the futility of such cruel practices in the name of religion. The time has come for them to realize that the path of real purification is through love and understanding.

Dr. G. Dharmasiri in his book 'Buddhist critique of the Christian Concept of God' has mentioned, 'I see that though the notion of God contains sublime moral strands, it also has certain implications that are extremely dangerous to the humans as well as to the other beings on this planet.

'One major threat to humanity is the blindfold called 'authority' imposed on the humans by the concept of God. All theistic religions consider authority as ultimate and sacred. It was this danger that the Buddha was pointing at in the Kalama Sutta. At the moment, human individuality and freedom are seriously threatened by various forms of authorities. Various 'authorities' have been trying to make 'you' a follower. On top of all our 'traditional' authorities, a new form of authority has emerged in the name of 'science'. And lately, the mushrooming new religions and the menace of the Gurus (as typified by Jim Jones), have become live threats to the individual's human freedom and dignity. The Buddha's eternal plea is for you to become a Buddha, and He showed, in a clearly rational way, that each and every one of us has the perfect potentiality and capacity to attain that ideal.'

God-religions offer no salvation without God. Thus a man might conceivably have climbed to the highest pinnacle of virtue, and he might have led a righteous way of life, and he might even have climbed to the highest level of holiness, yet he is to be condemned to eternal hell just because he did not believe in the existence of God. On the other hand, a man might have sinned deeply and yet, having made a late repentance, he can be forgiven and therefore 'saved'. From the Buddhist point of view, there is no justification in this kind of doctrine.

Despite the apparent contradictions of the God-religions, it is not deemed advisable to preach a Godless doctrine since the belief in god has also done a tremendous service to mankind, especially in places where the god concept is desirable. This belief in god has helped mankind to control his animal nature. And much help has been granted to others in the name of god. At the same time, man feels insecure without the belief in god. He finds protection and inspiration when that belief is in his mind. The reality or validity of such a belief is based on man's understanding capacity and spiritual maturity.

However, religion should also concern our practical life. It is to be used as a guide to regulate our conduct in the world. Religion tells us what to do and what not to do. If we do not follow a religion sincerely, mere religious labels or belief in god do not serve us in our daily life.

On the other hand, if the followers of various religions are going to quarrel and to condemn other beliefs and practices - especially to prove or disprove the existence of God - and if they are going to harbor anger towards other religions because of their different religious views, then they are creating enormous disharmony amongst the various religious communities. Whatever religious difference we have, it is our duty to practise tolerance, patience and understanding. It is our duty to respect the other man's religious belief even if we cannot accommodate it; tolerance is necessary for the sake of harmonious and peaceful living.

However, it does not serve any purpose to introduce this concept of god to those who are not ready to appreciate it. To some people this belief is not important to lead a righteous life. There are many who lead a noble life without such belief while amongst believers there are many who violate the peace and happiness of innocent people.

Buddhists can also co-operate with those who hold this concept of god, if they use this concept for the peace, happiness and welfare of mankind but not with those who abuse this concept by threatening people in order to introduce this belief just for their own benefit and with ulterior motives.

For more than 2,500 years, all over the world, Buddhists have practised and introduced Buddhism very peacefully without the necessity of sustaining the concept of a creator of God. And they will continue to sustain this religion in the same manner without disturbing the followers of other religions.

Therefore, with due respect to other religionists, it must be mentioned that any attempt to introduce this concept into Buddhism is unnecessary. Let Buddhists maintain their belief since it is harmless to others and, let the basic Teachings of the Buddha remain.

From time immemorial, Buddhists have led a peaceful religious life without incorporating the particular concept of God. They should be capable of sustaining their particular religion without the necessity, at this juncture, of someone trying to force something down their throats against their will. Having full confidence in their Buddha Dhamma, Buddhists should be permitted to work and seek their own salvation without any undue interference from other sources. Others can uphold their beliefs and concepts, Buddhist will uphold theirs, without any rancor. We do not challenge others in regard to their religious persuasions, we expect reciprocal treatment in regard to our own beliefs and practices.

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 5-10-2006 04:44 PM ]

ariyamusafir

Belief in an eternal soul is a misconception of the human consciousness.

Soul-Theories

With regard to the soul theory, there are three kinds of teachers in the world:

The first teacher teaches the existence of an eternal ego-entity that outlasts death: He is the eternalist.
The second teacher teaches a temporary ego-entity which becomes annihilated at death: He is the materialist.
The third teacher teaches neither an eternal nor a temporary ego-entity: He is the Buddha.

The Buddha teaches that what we call ego, self, soul, personality, etc., are merely conventional terms that do not refer to any real, independent entity. According to Buddhism there is no reason to believe that there is an eternal soul that comes from heaven or that is created by itself and that will transmigrate or proceed straight away either to heaven or hell after death. Buddhists cannot accept that there is anything either in this world or any other world that is eternal or unchangeable. We only cling to ourselves and hope to find something immortal. We are like children who wish to clasp a rainbow. To children, a rainbow is something vivid and real; but the grown-ups know that it is merely an illusion caused by certain rays of light and drops of water. The light is only a series of waves or undulations that have no more reality than the rainbow itself.

Man has done well without discovering the soul. He shows no signs of fatigue or degeneration for not having encountered any soul. No man has produced anything to promote mankind by postulating a soul and its imaginary working. Searching for a soul in man is like searching for something in a dark empty room. But the poor man will never realize that what he is searching for is not in the room. It is very difficult to make such a person understand the futility of his search.

Those who believe in the existence of a soul are not in a position to explain what and where it is. The Buddha's advice is not to waste our time over this unnecessary speculation and devote our time to strive for our salvation. When we have attained perfection then we will be able to realize whether there is a soul or not. A wandering ascetic named Vacchagotta asked the Buddha whether there was an Atman (self) or not. The story is as follows:

Vacchagotta comes to the Buddha and asks:
'Venerable Gotama, is there an Atman ?
The Buddha is silent.
'Then Venerable Gotama, is there no Atman?
Again the Buddha is silent.
Vacchagotta gets up and goes away.

After the ascetic has left, Ananda asks the Buddha why He did not answer Vacchagotta's question. The Buddha explains His position:

'Ananda, when asked by Vacchagotta, the Wanderer: 'Is there a Self?, if I had answered: 'There is a Self'. Then, Ananda, that would be siding with those recluses and brahmanas who hold the eternalist theory (sassata-vada).'

'And Ananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there no Self?, if I had answered: 'There is no Self', then that would be siding with those recluses and brahmanas who hold the annihilationist theory (uccedavada)'.

'Again, Ananda, when asked by Vacchagotta: 'Is there a Self? If I had answered: 'There is a Self', would that be in accordance with my knowledge that all dhammas are without Self?

'Surely not, Sir.'

'And again, Ananda, when asked by the Wanderer: 'Is there no Self?', if I had answered: 'There is no Self', then that would have created a greater confusion in the already confused Vacchagotta. For he would have thought: Formerly indeed I had an Atman (Self), but now I haven't got one.' (Samyutta Nikaya).

The Buddha regarded soul-speculation as useless and illusory. He once said, 'Only through ignorance and delusion do men indulge in the dream that their souls are separate and self-existing entities. Their heart still clings to Self. They are anxious about heaven and they seek the pleasure of Self in heaven. Thus they cannot see the bliss of righteousness and the immortality of truth.' Selfish ideas appear in man's mind due to his conception of Self and craving for existence.

Anatta: The Teaching of No-Soul

The Buddha countered all soul-theory and soul-speculation with His Anatta doctrine. Anatta is translated under various labels: No-soul, No-self, egolessness, and soullessness.

To understand the Anatta doctrine, one must understand that the eternal soul theory _ 'I have a soul' _ and the material theory _ 'I have no soul' _are both obstacles to self-realization or salvation. They arise from the misconception 'I AM'. Hence, to understand the Anatta doctrine, one must not cling to any opinion or views on soul-theory; rather, one must try to see things objectively as they are and without any mental projections. One must learn to see the so-called 'I' or Sour or Self for what it really is : merely a combination of changing forces. This requires some analytical explanation.

The Buddha taught that what we conceive as something eternal within us, is merely a combination of physical and mental aggregates or forces (pancakkhandha), made up of body or matter (rupakkhandha), sensation (vedanakkhandha), perception (sannakkhandha), mental formations (samkharakkhandha) and consciousness (vinnanakkhandha). These forces are working together in a flux of momentary change; they are never the same for two consecutive moments. They are the component forces of the psycho-physical life. When the Buddha analyzed the psycho-physical life, He found only these five aggregates or forces. He did not find any eternal soul. However, many people still have the misconception that the soul is the consciousness. The Buddha declared in unequivocal terms that consciousness depends on matter, sensation, perception and mental formations and that is cannot exist independently of them.

The Buddha said, 'The body, O monks, is not the Self. Sensation is not the Self. Perception is not the Self. The mental constructions are not the Self. And neither is consciousness the Self. Perceiving this, O monks, the disciple sets no value on the body, or on sensation, or on perception, or on mental constructions, or on consciousness. Setting no value of them, he becomes free of passions and he is liberated. The knowledge of liberation arises there within him. And then he knows that he has done what has to be done, that he has lived the holy life, that he is no longer becoming this or that, that his rebirth is destroyed.' (Anatta-Lakkhana Sutta).

The Anatta doctrine of the Buddha is over 2500 years old. Today the thought current of the modern scientific world is flowing towards the Buddha's Teaching of Anatta or No-Soul. In the eyes of the modern scientists, man is merely a bundle of ever-changing sensations. Modern physicists say that the apparently solid universe is not, in reality, composed of solid substance at all, but actually a flux of energy. The modern physicist sees the whole universe as a process of transformation of various forces of which man is a mere part. The Buddha was the first to realize this.

A prominent author, W.S. Wily, once said, 'The existence of the immortal in man is becoming increasingly discredited under the influence of the dominant schools of modern thought.' The belief in the immortality of the soul is a dogma that is contradicted by the most solid, empirical truth.

The mere belief in an immortal soul, or the conviction that something in us survives death, does not make us immortal unless we know what it is that survives and that we are capable of identifying ourselves with it. Most human beings choose death instead of immortality by identifying themselves with that which is perishable and impermanent by clinging stubbornly to the body or the momentary elements of the present personality, which they mistake for the soul or the essential form of life.

About those researches of modern scientists who are now more inclined to assert that the so-called 'Soul' is no more than a bundle of sensations, emotions, sentiments, all relating to the physical experiences, Prof. James says that the term 'Soul' is a mere figure of speech to which no reality corresponds.

It is the same Anatta doctrine of the Buddha that was introduced in the Mahayana school of Buddhism as Sunyata or voidness. Although this concept was elaborated by a great Mahayana scholar, Nagarjuna, by giving various interpretations, there is no extraordinary concept in Sunyata far different from the Buddha's original doctrine of Anatta.

The belief in soul or Self and the Creator God, is so strongly rooted in the minds of many people that they cannot imagine why the Buddha did not accept these two issues which are indispensable to many religions. In fact some people got a shock or became nervous and tried to show their emotion when they heard that the Buddha rejected these two concepts. That is the main reason why to many unbiased scholars and psychologists Buddhism stands unique when compared to all the other religions. At the same time, some other scholars who appreciate the various other aspects of Buddhism thought that Buddhism would be enriched by deliberately re-interpreting the Buddha word 'Atta' in order to introduce the concept of Soul and Self into Buddhism. The Buddha was aware of this unsatisfactoriness of man and the conceptual upheaval regarding this belief.

All conditioned things are impermanent,
All conditioned things are Dukka - Suffering,
All conditioned or unconditioned things (dhamma)
are soulless or selfless. (Dhammapada 277, 278, 279)

There is a parable in our Buddhist texts with regard to the belief in an eternal soul. A man, who mistook a moving rope for a snake, became terrified by that fear in his mind. Upon discovery that it was only a piece of rope, his fear subsided and his mind became peaceful. The belief in an eternal soul is equated to the rope - man's imagination.

some highlights from me: Anatta meaning No-Soul. However, this is not to be confused with the No-Soul theory hold by those who hold the annihilationist theory. Must read the above by Venerable Dhammananda for a better explaination.

[ Last edited by  ariyamusafir at 5-10-2006 04:49 PM ]

Sephiroth

by ariyamusafir   

sad to say, as have explained, you still cannot understand what I am trying to say. Of course people suffer or enjoy due to their own actions, I am trying to say is if there is such one almighty god, then why there is nothing done. So, thus, there is NO one almighty god. get it???

Like an hamster running around on a training wheel, your pathetic mind runs around in that head of yours. ;)

Explain to me WHY, IF God exists, He should help you?
You know you are suffering from your Karma. You know the karma is from YOUR own actions in the past. And you know that you are required to redeem yourself in the present or future existence. So you know all that needs to know, so why should God (with assumption He exists) should help you? :stp:

Like I said before, your logic is like :-
The Bus is not coming this way, therefore, the Bus doesn't exists.
OR
The Bus doesn't stop to take me, therefore the Bus doesn't exists. ;)

As I have already mentioned, before the buddha's parinibbana, there is NO split into different traditions, different schools.

Then logically speaking, ALL split into different schools and traditions after Buddha's Passing IS FALSE. :hmm:

and look at how you twist my words, I say I do not care meaning, I am not interested in whatever schools or tradition it is AS LONG AS IT IS THE ORIGINAL TEACHINGS! get it???? Try UNDERLINING the sentence following those which you have already underlined.

And Original Teaching IS Thervada Buddhism. :ah:

For your information, the Buddha have LAY deciples, and among those lay deciples, there is 1 Chief Male Lay deciples and 1 Chief Female Lay deciples. Go try ask a Theravadian monk and see if this statement of mine is true or not.  

I don't need to do anything ... you make the claim, you provide the proof.

And don't bother me with what Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda said or that guy and this guy said. I'm not interested. Thank you. :no:

ariyamusafir

As I have said, if god created everything, thus he would have made everyone good. Also, if he had made you, then your thoughts, your everything is controlled by this so called god. Hence, why is this NOT, because there is no such thing. Can you proof that one almighty god really exist? You can't!

The Buddha's teaching the Buddha did NOT invite you to come and BELIEVE! The Buddha teach people to come and SEE for themself.

Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda is a Theravadian Monk. Get it??? I need not present the proof here as I have already known, and I was NOT asking you to prove it, only for your own verification.

Also, the split was not on the main teachings that is the 4 noble truth and the noble eight fold path. The split was due to disagreement on some issues.

Sephiroth

by ariyamusafir   

As I have said, if god created everything, thus he would have made everyone good. Also, if he had made you, then your thoughts, your everything is controlled by this so called god. Hence, why is this NOT, because there is no such thing. Can you proof that one almighty god really exist? You can't!

Hmph ... You talk about Karma, you know CRAP about Karma. ;)

Karma is Action/Consequences System - IF God created a puppet which He could control, THEN THERE COULD NOT BE ANY NEED FOR KARMA, HEAVEN OR HELL - IS there?

Karma exists BECAUSE God have given you a free will to choose - choose on what thoughts you wish to put in that empty head of yours, choose on what to do, what to say, what to believe and such.

The VERY fact that Karma Exist IS proof God Exist. The very fact that we HAVE a choice to do good or evil accordance to Karma IS to me a proof God exist. You can say whatever you want. ;)

The Buddha's teaching the Buddha did NOT invite you to come and BELIEVE! The Buddha teach people to come and SEE for themself.

So why are you BELIEVING in a fairy tale about Pure land? :cak:
You judge others with your "high and almighty" standards, but when someone judge you according to the same standard, you FAIL miseably. ;)

Dr. K. Sri Dhammananda is a Theravadian Monk. Get it??? I need not present the proof here as I have already known, and I was NOT asking you to prove it, only for your own verification.

Gautama Buddha IS my ONLY ONE I would accept. Thank you.

Also, the split was not on the main teachings that is the 4 noble truth and the noble eight fold path. The split was due to disagreement on some issues.  

I don't care what they disagree about. What I know is Gautama Buddha's teachings is been corrupted.

tickmeoff

sephiroth believe in God??

Sephiroth

by tickmeoff   

sephiroth believe in God??  

That is not the topic here. :no:

Originally posted by Sephiroth at 17-10-2006 07:59 AM
by tickmeoff   

sephiroth believe in God??  

That is not the topic here. :no:

Hi  sephiroth,

I agree with u , Mahayana teaching r a modified version of Theravada but basically they r the same just that they had modified it.

I didn't mean that we shud not believe in Mahayana , if the Mahayana teaching is same as the Theravada then it is ok to believe.

from a talk of a Venerables : One shouldn't believe that Vows alone can bring someone to Pure land.

Sephiroth

by tommy-6   

I agree with u , Mahayana teaching r a modified version of Theravada but basically they r the same just that they had modified it.

I didn't mean that we shud not believe in Mahayana , if the Mahayana teaching is same as the Theravada then it is ok to believe.

Mahayana was created for Laymen - sort of preparatory for them if they want to take up the Vows of Monkhood and walk the Buddha's Path. I'm not placing any blame on Mahayana. BUT what happening today is against the very principle of creation of Mahayana Principles and goes against Thervada Principles as well.

People who follows Mahayana Principles have started to question the very principles of Thervada as true methods of Buddhism and achieving Enlightnment. Many who follows Mahayana Principles STILL indulge in Worldly Conducts and do little to follow examples of Gautama Buddha who is the founder of Buddhism.

And many of this people reshape what the World knows of Buddhism according to Mahayana Principles - especially in China. Atheism already sweep into Buddhism as well, like in Sri Lanka. Where Gautama Buddha silent about God's existence and teach His disciples about Living a proper Life, I have seen MANY SO-CALLED BUDDHIST MONKS and SENIOR DISCIPLES claiming God doesn't exists - which only brings anger to others who do believe in God. They act in such ignorant manner as IF they are wiser than Gautama Buddha.

from a talk of a Venerables : One shouldn't believe that Vows alone can bring someone to Pure land.   

Why don't you do and ask whether Pureland exists or not first? ;)

Pureland exists or not , its not a main concern .........

If we doing the right things and follow the Buddha Teaching , ones shouldn't be concern whether pure land exist or not.

Sephiroth

by tommy-6   

Pureland exists or not , its not a main concern .........

If we doing the right things and follow the Buddha Teaching , ones shouldn't be concern whether pure land exist or not.   

Don't lie, at least not to me. :no:

Pure land concept IS a major concern to Mahayana Followers. Their belief teaches them to expect them to be reborn in some land of Buddha where they could practise Buddhism properly. That is the basic of their approach. And a MAJOR DIFFERENCE between Thervada followers and Mahayana Followers.

Thervada Buddhists do not care about being reborn somewhere. To them, NOW is the Time to be free and Enlightned. Gautama Buddha teaches Buddhist to LIVE NOW and BE FREE, NOT DIE and BE BORN SOMEWHERE TOMORROW.

dun be silly my fren , r u trying to say a venerable well known monk lying to u?

How long u been in the world of Buddhism? 10 years 20 years or 30 years or maybe 50 years?
How long u had study Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism?

Try to read & listen more and more Dhamma .

Understand the teaching..........

U just saying that "Gautama Buddha teaches Buddhist to LIVE NOW and BE FREE, NOT DIE and BE BORN SOMEWHERE TOMORROW" then y u r so concern bout the existance?

Sephiroth

by tommy-6   

dun be silly my fren , r u trying to say a venerable well known monk lying to u?

So, you think Gautama Buddha, who never teached about Pure land, is lying to His disciples? Maybe He was not as enlightned as you may think, eh? ff:

I don't care about some monks and such, all I care is the TRUE BUDDHISM. Mahayana in MY opinion, is not that. :no:

U just saying that "Gautama Buddha teaches Buddhist to LIVE NOW and BE FREE, NOT DIE and BE BORN SOMEWHERE TOMORROW" then y u r so concern bout the existance?  

I should be asking you that. Why are you so concern about Pure Land which no one could proof its existence? :cak:

I don't care about some monks and such, all I care is the TRUE BUDDHISM. Mahayana in MY opinion, is not that(Sephiroth)

I think u got a problem.............U should not said that MAHAYANA is not true. This will offend MAHAYANA followers.
If in this world there are more ppl like u , what will Buddhism be?

as wat I always say to u , read dhamma then u will understand ,
Its really wasting my time replying to ur such nonsense msg.

GOTO : http://www.buddhanet.net/

and read from there...and if free goto temples(Theravada)  and look for the abbot and ask him this question.


"Don't Care about monk" (Sephiroth)  ===  such words,  u also can say out....... The words r coming out from few Theravada Mons
and
do u think u r better than them?  U make me laugh............. Even the Venerables  Dr. K Sri Dammananda also never say this.

U r so funny , my fren.........
Ur last sentence really make me laugh and even few frens of mine here also saying u r so naive.......

I should be asking you that. Why are you so concern about Pure Land which no one could proof its existence?

Above its ur last sentences (remember) ?  

Below its ur previous sentence (remember)  :

Why don't you do and ask whether Pureland exists or not first? (Sephiroth)
and

another : (remember)

Don't lie, at least not to me. (Sephiroth)

Pure land concept IS a major concern to Mahayana Followers. Their belief teaches them to expect them to be reborn in some land of Buddha where they could practise Buddhism properly. That is the basic of their approach. And a MAJOR DIFFERENCE between Thervada followers and Mahayana Followers. (Sephiroth)

Thervada Buddhists do not care about being reborn somewhere. To them, NOW is the Time to be free and Enlightned. Gautama Buddha teaches Buddhist to LIVE NOW and BE FREE, NOT DIE and BE BORN SOMEWHERE TOMORROW. (Sephiroth)

So do u remember wat u said previously?
Who r more concern?
try to put right palm on your chest and ask. Am I sincere and truthful? If you are then you are fine.

[ Last edited by  tommy-6 at 23-10-2006 11:07 AM ]

Sephiroth

by tommy-6   

I think u got a problem.............U should not said that MAHAYANA is not true. This will offend MAHAYANA followers.
If in this world there are more ppl like u , what will Buddhism be?  

Buddhism will revert back to its original state - back to Thervada where Monks are honored and Laymen do not make comments on what Buddhism should or shouldn't be. :no:

as wat I always say to u , read dhamma then u will understand ,
Its really wasting my time replying to ur such nonsense msg.

The REAL Buddhism is Four Noble Truth and Eight Folded Path. That is ALL a Buddhism should understand and follow.

"Don't Care about monk" (Sephiroth)  ===  such words,  u also can say out....... The words r coming out from few Theravada Mons
and do u think u r better than them?  U make me laugh............. Even the Venerables  Dr. K Sri Dammananda also never say this.

If some Monk thinks he is better than Gautama Buddha, then WHY should I think myself better than some "Doctor"? :cak:

U r so funny , my fren.........
Ur last sentence really make me laugh and even few frens of mine here also saying u r so naive.......

I should be asking you that. Why are you so concern about Pure Land which no one could proof its existence?

Above its ur last sentences (remember) ?  

Below its ur previous sentence (remember)  :

Why don't you do and ask whether Pureland exists or not first? (Sephiroth)
and

another : (remember)

Don't lie, at least not to me. (Sephiroth)

Pure land concept IS a major concern to Mahayana Followers. Their belief teaches them to expect them to be reborn in some land of Buddha where they could practise Buddhism properly. That is the basic of their approach. And a MAJOR DIFFERENCE between Thervada followers and Mahayana Followers. (Sephiroth)

Thervada Buddhists do not care about being reborn somewhere. To them, NOW is the Time to be free and Enlightned. Gautama Buddha teaches Buddhist to LIVE NOW and BE FREE, NOT DIE and BE BORN SOMEWHERE TOMORROW. (Sephiroth)

Please DO LAUGH. That will be another difference between you and me - between someone who knows Buddhism and someone allegedly following something called Buddhism.

A person who follows Buddhism WILL wonder what I have said and think properly. A person who allegedly follows Buddhism will only laugh at it. So please do laugh. It will be useful to hide your ignorance. ;)

So do u remember wat u said previously?
Who r more concern?
try to put right palm on your chest and ask. Am I sincere and truthful? If you are then you are fine.

I'm sincere toward TRUE BUDDHISM. ;)

Please remember : No MONK think that he is better than Lord Buddha.

Its only u that think that u r better than Theravada & Mahayana Monks.

AGAIN the last sentences really make us laugh again ...........

If u r really sincere , then u will not saying that MAHAYANA is not true.

have u ever understand why they got different school? Do u know???????

read the Dhamma on the webpage I recommend then u will understand rather than u r now guessing and follow ur own without listen to any Monks talk or Dhamma..............

I hope u can understand and try to listen to wat ppl said and go out to look for the answer by reading more books and had more monks & friends to discuss about Dhamma.

If u follow wat we say on the above , u will be a better person....

[ Last edited by  tommy-6 at 23-10-2006 11:28 AM ]