Is it possible that there is only one God...... for everyone?

[ananda]

you could, but is that the most reasonable conclusion? You could, but that wouldn't negate the fact that meaningful existence is driven by relationship, which does support the Christian notion of who/what God is.

Relationship is also a Buddhist understanding.

 

[Chriliman]

Relationship is also a Buddhist understanding.

How do Buddhist understand realationship? Does the understanding include an explation for how/why we exist?

 

[ananda]

How do Buddhist understand realationship?

Good relationships are fundamental in early Buddhism for self-development towards elimination of suffering & enlightenment.

Does the understanding include an explation for how/why we exist?

Is that a real concern, or is the more fundamental concern underlying that question really this: "why do we suffer?"

 

[Chriliman]

Good relationships are fundamental in early Buddhism for self-development towards elimination of suffering & enlightenment.

I agree good relationships are fundamental. How long does the elimination of suffering and the gift of enlightenment last?

Is that a real concern, or is the more fundamental concern underlying that question really this: "why do we suffer?"

I would think understanding how/why we exist would help answer why we suffer. Suffering isn't necessarily bad if it's for a good eternal cause where the suffering eventually ends and an eternal reward is reaped for all those who suffered and even died for the good eternal cause.

Why do you think we suffer and do you think suffering is always bad no matter what it's for?

 

[ananda]

I agree good relationships are fundamental. How long does the elimination of suffering and the gift of enlightenment last?

If suffering due to ignorance is eliminated through wisdom, then that elimination of suffering is permanent.

For example: the moment you directly & personally learned that touching fire leads to pain and suffering, wisdom (and enlightenment in regards to this issue) arose within you. You will no longer touch fire - you have eliminated that source of suffering.

I would think understanding how/why we exist would help answer why we suffer. Suffering isn't necessarily bad if it's for a good eternal cause where the suffering eventually ends and an eternal reward is reaped for all those who suffered and even died for the good eternal cause.

I can understand that perspective, but I have no reason to believe in a speculative eternal cause or an associated reward.

Why do you think we suffer and do you think suffering is always bad no matter what it's for?

It seems obvious to me that our suffering is caused by our delusional ignorance, because of our attachments, or because of our aversions. IMO literally every action we take in this world is meant to address some measure of suffering or discontentment in our lives. We're always running away from suffering.

 

[Chriliman]

If suffering due to ignorance is eliminated through wisdom, then that elimination of suffering is permanent.

For example: the moment you directly & personally learned that touching fire leads to pain and suffering, wisdom (and enlightenment in regards to this issue) arose within you. You will no longer touch fire - you have eliminated that source of suffering.

While I agree with the above, I don't think suffering due to ignorance is the only kind of suffering. Take for example the recent Houston flooding, there were many people, such as police men and firefighters, who willingly endured suffering in order to save others from the the pain and suffering that the flooding caused. They could have just as easily fled from the suffering, but they didn't, why? It's the Spirit of God within them that is willing to endure suffering and even death in order to save others from it. When God does it, the outcome is eternal life(life unending), free from suffering and death. It's a good outcome, but a price of suffering and even death is paid by Christ in order to achieve a reality free from all suffering and death, this is what we Christians place our hope and faith in.

It seems obvious to me that our suffering is caused by our delusional ignorance, because of our attachments, or because of our aversions. IMO literally every action we take in this world is meant to address some measure of suffering or discontentment in our lives. We're always running away from suffering.

Some go towards suffering for a good reason, like the heroes in the Huston flooding, who are driven by a Spirit of life that desires to save others from suffering and death, even if they themselves suffer and die as a result. I see God in that, I see what it means to truly live in that.

 

[ananda]

While I agree with the above, I don't think suffering due to ignorance is the only kind of suffering.

I didn't mean to imply that. Suffering comes from three main sources: ignorance, attachments, and aversions.

Take for example the recent Houston flooding, there were many people, such as police men and firefighters, who willingly endured suffering in order to save others from the the pain and suffering that the flooding caused. They could have just as easily fled from the suffering, but they didn't, why?

From a Buddhist perspective, they voluntarily embraced that suffering mainly because of attachments. They are attached to their jobs, its income, or even the need to help others ... or because they perceived that it would cause them more long-term suffering if they didn't embrace the shorter-term suffering.

Let me ask you this: who would you guess most peace officers & firefighters would likely help first - if they saw their 1) close family members, 2) friends, 3) acquaintances in a group of 4) unknown strangers in the middle of the flood ... and why?

It's the Spirit of God within them that is willing to endure suffering and even death in order to save others from it. When God does it, the outcome is eternal life(life unending), free from suffering and death. It's a good outcome, but a price of suffering and even death is paid by Christ in order to achieve a reality free from all suffering and death, this is what we Christians place our hope and faith in.

Some go towards suffering for a good reason, like the heroes in the Huston flooding, who are driven by a Spirit of life that desires to save others from suffering and death, even if they themselves suffer and die as a result. I see God in that, I see what it means to truly live in that.

It is good to have hope ... but I personally need more than faith and hope, I suppose.

 

[Chriliman]

I didn't mean to imply that. Suffering comes from three main sources: ignorance, attachments, and aversions.

I understand. Where I differ is the understanding that suffering is always bad and therefore should be avoided or removed entirely no matter what.

I think suffering for a good cause or outcome is a good thing.

From a Buddhist perspective, they voluntarily embraced that suffering mainly because of attachments. They are attached to their jobs, its income, or even the need to help others ... or because they perceived that it would cause them more long-term suffering if they didn't embrace the shorter-term suffering.

We're all attached to reality in some way and that isn't a bad thing.

Let me ask you this: who would you guess most peace officers & firefighters would likely help first - if they saw their 1) close family members, 2) friends, 3) acquaintances in a group of 4) unknown strangers in the middle of the flood ... and why?

I think the answer is obvious, but that doesn't negate the idea that willingly risking your life for others(no matter who it is) is an inherently good(Godly) trait, even though it makes no sense in terms of natural survival of the fittest and self preservation.

It is good to have hope ... but I personally need more than faith and hope, I suppose.

My faith and hope is a result of my acceptance of reality in the here and now. There are many injustices and evils that I have no control over, but I trust that God can and will put things to rights, permanently.

 

[ananda]

I understand. Where I differ is the understanding that suffering is always bad and therefore should be avoided or removed entirely no matter what. I think suffering for a good cause or outcome is a good thing. We're all attached to reality in some way and that isn't a bad thing.

I don't believe that Buddhism claims that suffering is bad. We simply recognize it for what it is - a tool, and that we must recognize how it drives us and how we strive to avoid it ... but that doesn't mean that it is "bad".

I think the answer is obvious, but that doesn't negate the idea that willingly risking your life for others(no matter who it is) is an inherently good(Godly) trait, even though it makes no sense in terms of natural survival of the fittest and self preservation.

IMO we help those closest to us first, because we are more attached to them, and because we see them as an integral part of our selves and world. To lose them would be a form of greater long-term suffering than the shorter-term suffering of attempting to save them.

My faith and hope is a result of my acceptance of reality in the here and now. There are many injustices and evils that I have no control over, but I trust that God can and will put things to rights, permanently.

I hope your faith serves you well!

 

[Chriliman]

I don't believe that Buddhism claims that suffering is bad. We simply recognize it for what it is - a tool, and that we must recognize how it drives us and how we strive to avoid it ... but that doesn't mean that it is "bad".

I'd add that it is wrong to avoid suffering if you know it can serve a greater good because the avoidance would inevitably cause more unending suffering.

IMO we help those closest to us first, because we are more attached to them, and because we see them as an integral part of our selves and world. To lose them would be a form of greater long-term suffering than the shorter-term suffering of attempting to save them.

Agreed.

I hope your faith serves you well!

You as well!

 

[ananda]

I'd add that it is wrong to avoid suffering if you know it can serve a greater good.

What's a "greater good", that you know of, than decreasing suffering for one's self & for others?

 

[Chriliman]

What's a "greater good", that you know of, than decreasing suffering for one's self & for others?

I'm saying if you know your own suffering will bring about the end of suffering for yourself and others, then it's wrong to not go through with the suffering.

 

[ananda]

I'm saying if you know your own suffering will bring about the end of suffering for yourself and others, then it's wrong to not go through with the suffering.

I can understand that sentiment, being driven to do so myself on countless occasions ... but I will nevertheless propose a unique Buddhist view:

​

Without omniscience, we cannot know truly or fully what will help or harm others. We cannot know the totality of their circumstances, and why or how they arrived at those circumstances in the first place. We cannot know whether our (imposed) "help" will actually make them better or worse off (e.g. they might not learn valuable life lessons and experience personal growth as a result of working out their own circumstances, believing that others will bail them out).

Instead, by 1. understanding our basic drive in life regarding dukkha (discontentment/suffering) 2. understanding how dukkha drives our every action, and 3. by understanding that others are afflicted similarly, we seek to watch after ourselves, by becoming more virtuously perfected in every way. By watching after ourselves, we progressively resolve not only our own dukkha, but also restrain our negative impact upon others and the resulting dukkha they would experience. We serve best as a shining example to others, teaching through example instead of force, allowing others to cultivate the personal development of the eye of wisdom by working things out for themselves.

• "When watching after yourself, you watch after others. When watching after others, you watch after yourself." - Sedaka Sutta SN 47.19
• "[One] endowed with five qualities practices both for his own benefit and for that of others ... [he is] consummate in virtue and encourages others to be consummate in virtue .. concentration ... discernment ... release ... knowledge & vision of release" - Hita Suta AN 5.20 (cf AN 4.99)

 

[Chriliman]

I can understand that sentiment, being driven to do so myself on countless occasions ... but I will nevertheless propose a unique Buddhist view:

​

Without omniscience, we cannot know truly or fully what will help or harm others. We cannot know the totality of their circumstances, and why or how they arrived at those circumstances in the first place. We cannot know whether our (imposed) "help" will actually make them better or worse off (e.g. they might not learn valuable life lessons and experience personal growth as a result of working out their own circumstances, believing that others will bail them out).

I agree, being omniscient like God would be great and without God we can't know everything(that isn't to say God couldn't give us his knowledge of everything over time) However, this fact does not excuse me from at least trying to do what I know is good, like subjecting myself to suffering in order to alleviate or stop entirely, someone else' suffering along with my own.

Instead, by 1. understanding our basic drive in life regarding dukkha (discontentment/suffering) 2. understanding how dukkha drives our every action, and 3. by understanding that others are afflicted similarly, we seek to watch after ourselves, by becoming more virtuously perfected in every way. By watching after ourselves, we progressively resolve not only our own dukkha, but also restrain our negative impact upon others and the resulting dukkha they would experience. We serve best as a shining example to others, teaching through example instead of force, allowing others to cultivate the personal development of the eye of wisdom by working things out for themselves.

• "When watching after yourself, you watch after others. When watching after others, you watch after yourself." - Sedaka Sutta SN 47.19
• "[One] endowed with five qualities practices both for his own benefit and for that of others ... [he is] consummate in virtue and encourages others to be consummate in virtue .. concentration ... discernment ... release ... knowledge & vision of release" - Hita Suta AN 5.20 (cf AN 4.99)

This seems like good wisdom and if the end goal is to stop suffering and death and achieve some sort of life filled with pure unending experience of good, fulfilling relationship with others, then it's right inline with what I believe God's will is.

 

[ananda]

I agree, being omniscient like God would be great and without God we can't know everything(that isn't to say God couldn't give us his knowledge of everything over time) However, this fact does not excuse me from at least trying to do what I know is good, like subjecting myself to suffering in order to alleviate or stop entirely, someone else' suffering along with my own.

This seems like good wisdom and if the end goal is to stop suffering and death and achieve some sort of life filled with pure unending experience of good, fulfilling relationship with others, then it's right inline with what I believe God's will is.

It seems we agree with much ... except for the presence or absence of any deity involved with it all!

 

[Chriliman]

It seems we agree with much ... except for the presence or absence of any deity involved with it all!

It does seem so, but if suffering and death are stoped, as we both agree would be good, then it would require a good immortal being like God to be involved. Otherwise we could just conclude that suffering and death will end when all beings forever cease to live, although death would be the victor in that case. So without God, death wins?

 

[SkyWriting]

Sorry I think I wasn't clear, I think all religions are man made, maybe there is a mysterious force out there but its interpretation is solely man made, hence why there are innumerable religions in the world. Ergo I think that if there is a god, it'll not be the god of any organised religion, just an unimaginable concept.

One that most groups of people, no matter how isolated, think exists?
The evidence is not in your favor.

 

[SkyWriting]

What do you think of this evidence?

This video was entertaining, the only kind I watch.

1. God does not get angry, but men do think it is so.
- God does not experience time so any "time" references are human based.
Question framed incorrectly.

2. Does God tempt people? A purely subjective evaluation.
Suppose I was tempted....only I would really know.
And if I thought I was was, would that be under control of others?
Both answers are the correct one.

3. Works verses faith.
Faith is correct, good works is a sometimes observable symptom of Faith
and may serve as an indicator of faith. Only God knows the motivations of people.

4. Can man see Gods' face? Not without ending up physically dead.
Spiritually, it's a good thing.

Assuming that the "best/worst" contradictions are first, no need to continue this review.

 

[ananda]

It does seem so, but if suffering and death are stoped, as we both agree would be good, then it would require a good immortal being like God to be involved. Otherwise we could just conclude that suffering and death will end when all beings forever cease to live, although death would be the victor in that case. So without God, death wins?

Wouldn't you agree that our concern about death is really a deeper question about suffering? That is, we suffer when we think of dying? (Or, suicidal people are suffering when thinking about living!)

 

[Chriliman]

Wouldn't you agree that our concern about death is really a deeper question about suffering? That is, we suffer when we think of dying? (Or, suicidal people are suffering when thinking about living!)

No doubt that death causes suffering for those who are living, but if there is no immortal God then death will eventually swollow up all life and suffering will end, but so will life. Would you consider that a good thing if sufferings ends in that way? Is this an enlightened way to think?