Buddhist Karma Kagyu

[Andrewn]

There is no creator god in Buddhism, although there are Brahma gods. They are usually deluded beings, dominated by pride. Here is a talk by Ajahn Amaro about the different way of looking at good and evil in the Buddhist v's Abrahmic ways of looking.

Instead of a multitude of deluded gods, we Christians believe in one compassionate God who created mankind and the entire universe. We don't have to fear mara bec Christ conquered and gave us his salvation.

 

[ananda]

Instead of a multitude of deluded gods, we Christians believe in one compassionate God who created mankind and the entire universe. We don't have to fear mara bec Christ conquered and gave us his salvation.

Faith in those unseen Brahma gods are an unnecessary part of the Buddhist path. We don't want salvation (eternal life) - we desire nibbana (the cessation of suffering) instead.

 

[JackRT]

Faith in those unseen Brahma gods are an unnecessary part of the Buddhist path. We don't want salvation (eternal life) - we desire nibbana (the cessation of suffering) instead.

By "Brahma gods" do you refer to the gods of the Hindu faith?

 

[ananda]

By "Brahma gods" do you refer to the gods of the Hindu faith?

No, I refer to the Brahma devas of the Buddhist Path - the word "Brahma" is not used in the Buddhist context as a personal name (as in Hinduism), but to refer to the divine, in general.

 

[Andrewn]

I refer to the Brahma devas of the Buddhist Path - the word "Brahma" is not used in the Buddhist context as a personal name (as in Hinduism), but to refer to the divine, in general.

If you follow Tibetan Buddhism, you would believe in the demon Mara and the Fierce deities, no? What is their role in attaining nibbana?

 

[ananda]

If you follow Tibetan Buddhism, you would believe in the demon Mara and the Fierce deities, no? What is their role in attaining nibbana?

I follow Thai Forest Tradition (Theravada) Buddhism ... Mara is a title for a mid-level malicious deva/deity who has some degree of influence as a reigning deva over the sensual spheres in our tradition, and can also refer to anyone who tries to hinder others from full awakening.

 

[Andrewn]

I follow Thai Forest Tradition (Theravada) Buddhism ... Mara is a title for a mid-level malicious deva/deity who has some degree of influence as a reigning deva over the sensual spheres in our tradition, and can also refer to anyone who tries to hinder others from full awakening.

My understanding is that in Theravada they don't believe in any helpful deities or buddhisatvas. Is this correct?

You seem to be familiar with Christianity as you correctly define salvation as eternal life. Why do you choose extinction rather than eternal life?

 

[ananda]

My understanding is that in Theravada they don't believe in any helpful deities or buddhisatvas. Is this correct?

I would say that is incorrect (in regards to helpful deities). It's just that we don't place any great emphasis on the deities, as they have their own lives, heavenly interests, etc. and are said to rarely interact with this lower world. What is far more important are our own actions in life by which we work to change and improve ourselves towards greater skillfulness, rather than focusing on savior-type intercessory deities.

On the other hand, you would be correct about bodhisattvas. There are no celestial, savior bodhisattvas in Theravada as there are in Mahayana and Tibetan.

You seem to be familiar with Christianity as you correctly define salvation as eternal life. Why do you choose extinction rather than eternal life?

I would say I am quite familiar with Christianity - I grew up in it, and served as a teacher for both children and adults, also serving as an apologetics teacher for a number of years, before leaving the faith.

The Buddha, in the earliest Buddhist scriptures, is said to have stated repeatedly that annihilationism was a view that he was not teaching (e.g. MN 22, SN 44:10, etc.). Extinction isn't what we're looking for. We're seeking the cessation of suffering. Two wholly different spheres of emphasis.

I doubt anyone would follow Jesus if he promised an eternity of life if it was filled with an eternity of suffering. That's because we're not actually seeking eternal life ... we're seeing what we think that eternal life will really give us: eternal bliss/eternal relief from suffering. Even as a Christian, I realized I wasn't seeking God, Jesus, heaven, eternal life, etc. "God", "Jesus", heaven, eternal life, etc. were only the means I was seeking to attain that actual end.

 

[Andrewn]

On the other hand, you would be correct about bodhisattvas. There are no celestial, savior bodhisattvas in Theravada as there are in Mahayana and Tibetan.

How is Theravada different from Chan/Zen, which seems to teach similar concepts despite its origin in Mahayana? Plz forgive my confusion, there are so many schools under the umbrella of Buddhism.

What is far more important are our own actions in life by which we work to change and improve ourselves towards greater skillfulness, rather than focusing on savior-type intercessory deities.

This sounds like a good introduction to Christianity. But you rejected the latter.

I would say I am quite familiar with Christianity - I grew up in it, and served as a teacher for both children and adults, also serving as an apologetics teacher for a number of years, before leaving the faith.

May I ask about how you came to reject Christianity?

The Buddha, in the earliest Buddhist scriptures, is said to have stated repeatedly that annihilationism was a view that he was not teaching (e.g. MN 22, SN 44:10, etc.). Extinction isn't what we're looking for. We're seeking the cessation of suffering. Two wholly different spheres of emphasis.

Yes, extinction isn't the primary goal but it seems like the means to cessation of suffering. In Buddhism it's said that the self dissolves in the eternal like a drop of water in the ocean. It's splitting hair to say that suicide is not the goal but the means to cessation of suffering, no?

I doubt anyone would follow Jesus if he promised an eternity of life if it was filled with an eternity of suffering. That's because we're not actually seeking eternal life ... we're seeing what we think that eternal life will really give us: eternal bliss/eternal relief from suffering.

This is true, but again it seems like splitting hairs. The eternal life implies eternal bliss, eternal joy, life with God. Eternal life starts here on earth. I guess Buddhists also believe nibbana starts in this life.

Even as a Christian, I realized I wasn't seeking God, Jesus, heaven, eternal life, etc. "God", "Jesus", heaven, eternal life, etc. were only the means I was seeking to attain that actual end.

This is unfortunate bec without the Love of Jesus and God, without connection / union with God, we remain in death and suffering.

 

[ananda]

How is Theravada different from Chan/Zen, which seems to teach similar concepts despite its origin in Mahayana? Plz forgive my confusion, there are so many schools under the umbrella of Buddhism.

In general, Chan/Zen teaches sudden enlightenment, that we simply need to realize we are already "Buddha" (a non-dual perspective), usually through the use of shocking, unexpected, or non-sensical events in an attempt to achieve that breakthrough realization. IMO it is a fusion of east Asian sensibilities & philosophies integrated with some early Buddhist practices.

Theravada, in general, teaches the need for reasonable, methodical practices towards full enlightenment.

This sounds like a good introduction to Christianity. But you rejected the latter.

I did.

May I ask about how you came to reject Christianity?

There were many reasons, but ultimately I came to question Christianity after being questioned about Christianity by seekers with questions and concerns I could not adequately answer as an apologetics teacher.

For me, some of my major concerns were: 1. I was not a witness of the alleged events claimed in the Bible, 2. I figured an omnipotent God would've provided something more infallible to verify his message than relying on fallible intermediaries, 3. the idea that an acting God must be the individual who suffers the most since action is based on the perception of suffering, and he cannot thus be the summum bonum or goal of existence.

Yes, extinction isn't the primary goal but it seems like the means to cessation of suffering. In Buddhism it's said that the self dissolves in the eternal like a drop of water in the ocean. It's splitting hair to say that suicide is not the goal but the means to cessation of suffering, no?

The drop metaphor is a Hindu perspective which seems to have been adopted by many later Buddhist traditions, where the atman dissolves into Brahman, but is not an early Buddhist perspective as far as I've read the early suttas. Suicide is not a means to cessation of suffering in early Buddhism.

This is true, but again it seems like splitting hairs. The eternal life implies eternal bliss, eternal joy, life with God. Eternal life starts here on earth. I guess Buddhists also believe nibbana starts in this life.

I do not see any Christian with any hint of eternal life here on earth. I do see Buddhists with a growing sense of peacefulness & bliss here on earth.

This is unfortunate bec without the Love of Jesus and God, without connection / union with God, we remain in death and suffering.

I understand that is the Christian claim, but that to me is unprovable. The practice of the Buddhist Path is provable, on the other hand.

Many people seek eternal life as a means for nibbana. Some others seek eternal death or annihilation as a means for nibbana. The key thing is, as I see it, we are all seeking nibbana.

 

[Andrewn]

The drop metaphor is a Hindu perspective which seems to have been adopted by many later Buddhist traditions, where the atman dissolves into Brahman, but is not an early Buddhist perspective as far as I've read the early suttas. Suicide is not a means to cessation of suffering in early Buddhism.

Then what's your understanding of parinirvana?

I do not see any Christian with any hint of eternal life here on earth. I do see Buddhists with a growing sense of peacefulness & bliss here on earth.

I understand that is the Christian claim, but that to me is unprovable. The practice of the Buddhist Path is provable, on the other hand.

You probably haven't been to the right churches where lives really change and people exhibit the fruit of the Spirit.

For me, some of my major concerns were: 1. I was not a witness of the alleged events claimed in the Bible, 2. I figured an omnipotent God would've provided something more infallible to verify his message than relying on fallible intermediaries, 3. the idea that an acting God must be the individual who suffers the most since action is based on the perception of suffering, and he cannot thus be the summum bonum or goal of existence.

As you already know, God created people to reflect His love, care, and compassion for the creation. People who follow him hear his voice. On earth, we cannot escape suffering but God gives us "a growing sense of peacefulness and bliss." God himself took flesh and suffered among us. Indeed, we preach Christ crucified—which is offensive to Jews and foolishness to Greeks.

Many people seek eternal life as a means for nibbana. Some others seek eternal death or annihilation as a means for nibbana. The key thing is, as I see it, we are all seeking nibbana.

Gautama Buddha criticized Brahmanism, and described the 4 noble truths and the 8-fold path. All these certainly have value. He started a great reformation of pagan religion and practices. I think it had significant influence in the pre-Christian West, as well.

Gautama apparently knew that his teaching wasn't the whole truth and expected the future Lord Maitreya to teach the pure dharma. My Christian bias is that Maitreya did come 2000 years ago.

 

[ananda]

Then what's your understanding of parinirvana?

Parinibbana is the cessation of all suffering without remainder.

You probably haven't been to the right churches where lives really change and people exhibit the fruit of the Spirit.

Perhaps. Does the "fruit of the Spirit" include the specific attainment of the primary Christian end-goal, namely, eternal life, something which I can observe? If not, then their presence seems incidental to me.

As you already know, God created people to reflect His love, care, and compassion for the creation. People who follow him hear his voice. On earth, we cannot escape suffering but God gives us "a growing sense of peacefulness and bliss." God himself took flesh and suffered among us. Indeed, we preach Christ crucified—which is offensive to Jews and foolishness to Greeks.

The parts I highlighted in bold are things I cannot prove. I can prove a growth in peacefulness and bliss for myself through the practice of the Buddhist Path, however.

Gautama Buddha criticized Brahmanism, and described the 4 noble truths and the 8-fold path. All these certainly have value. He started a great reformation of pagan religion and practices. I think it had significant influence in the pre-Christian West, as well. Gautama apparently knew that his teaching wasn't the whole truth and expected the future Lord Maitreya to teach the pure dharma. My Christian bias is that Maitreya did come 2000 years ago.

I don't believe that is taught in the early Buddhist scriptures. It may be part of Mahayana doctrine, however.

In Theravada, Lord Gotama is considered to be a fully enlightened Buddha. The future Lord Metteya will also be a fully enlightened Buddha who is to come after Gotama's dispensation and teachings have wholly disappeared.

 

[Andrewn]

Does the "fruit of the Spirit" include the specific attainment of the primary Christian end-goal, namely, eternal life, something which I can observe? If not, then their presence seems incidental to me.

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peacefulness, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,23 meekness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

This fruit should be obvious in the life of true Christians. I have respect for the buddhist philosophy but doubt that one can attain it through self reliance on the practice of the Buddhist path. We haven't seen emphasis on human rights, social work, care for the poor, and hospital and school building resulting from Buddhist faith. We certainly saw this fruit among Christians.

The future Lord Metteya will also be a fully enlightened Buddha who is to come after Gotama's dispensation and teachings have wholly disappeared.

You don't think that Gautama was speaking of Christ, and I can't be sure either.

I guess if we can rely on ourselves to reach eternal life then we don't need Christ. This is especially true if we don't believe that God loves us and is interested in revealing the eternal life he had prepared for us.

But, even among Buddhists, many in the Mahayana tradition did reject the idea of self-reliance and started looking for buddhisatvas to help them along the path. They have the right idea but they look in the wrong place.

 

[ananda]

Gal 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peacefulness, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness,23 meekness, and self-control. Against such things there is no law.

This fruit should be obvious in the life of true Christians. I have respect for the buddhist path but doubt that one can attain it through self reliance on the practice of the Buddhist path. We haven't seen emphasis on human rights, social work, care for the poor, and hospital and school building resulting from Buddhist faith. We certainly saw this fruit among Christians.

I disagree, I see similar "fruits" among Buddhists as well. Our philosophy tends to emphasize the importance of 1. personal example, and 2. direct 1-to-1 help as superior to the help offered through corporate organizations ... that might be a reason why it is not as apparent.

In any case, such "fruit" does not validate the Christian path, IMO. For me, the only thing that might validate part of the Christian path would be obvious, observable evidence that faith brings eternal life (the end goal), just like the Buddhist path is validated for me by proof that it brings a progressive increase in bliss & decrease in suffering (our end goal).

You don't think that Gautama was speaking of Christ, and I can't be sure either.

I guess if we can rely on ourselves to reach eternal life then we don't need Christ. This is especially true if we don't believe that God loves us and is interested in revealing the eternal life he had prepared for us.

But, even among Buddhists, many in the Mahayana tradition did reject the idea of self-reliance and started looking for buddhisatvas to help them along the path. They have the right idea but they look in the wrong place.

The unending bliss of nibbana has a more direct draw for me than the idea of eternal life. After all, "life" is characterized by action, and action is intentionally done as a result of perceived suffering. Therefore, life will always be fueled by suffering, and eternal life is, in essence, eternal suffering.

IMO Mahayana arose as a result of a (erroneous, IMO) perceived need to reframe the early Buddhist teachings so they would appeal more to the laity. For me, they are in essence a separate religion.

 

[Andrewn]

For me, the only thing that might validate part of the Christian path would be obvious, observable evidence that faith brings eternal life (the end goal), just like the Buddhist path is validated for me by proof that it brings a progressive increase in bliss & decrease in suffering (our end goal).

As I wrote before, "On earth, we cannot escape suffering but God gives us a growing sense of peacefulness and bliss." As you probably know, Christ commanded us not to escape suffering but to carry our cross and follow him. And we were told that we would receive glory as we suffer obediently.

1Pe 4:14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory,who is the Spirit of God, rests on you.

The unending bliss of nibbana has a more direct draw for me than the idea of eternal life. After all, "life" is characterized by action, and action is intentionally done as a result of perceived suffering. Therefore, life will always be fueled by suffering, and eternal life is, in essence, eternal suffering.

As you already know, extinction or annihilation is not a choice one can make. In the Bible there are only 2 choices:

Joh 5:28 “Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation.

IMO Mahayana arose as a result of a (erroneous, IMO) perceived need to reframe the early Buddhist teachings so they would appeal more to the laity. For me, they are in essence a separate religion.

This is true bec Buddhist philosophy is only for monks. The masses in Southeast Asia and in Tibet practice animistic religion:

Animism and Buddhism

 

[ananda]

As I wrote before, "On earth, we cannot escape suffering but God gives us a growing sense of peacefulness and bliss." As you probably know, Christ commanded us not to escape suffering but to carry our cross and follow him. And we were told that we would receive glory as we suffer obediently.

1Pe 4:14 If you are insulted for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory,who is the Spirit of God, rests on you.

As you already know, extinction or annihilation is not a choice one can make. In the Bible there are only 2 choices:

Joh 5:28 “Do not be amazed at this, because a time is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and will come out—the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation.

Do you know this to be true, or just believe it to be true?

This is true bec Buddhist philosophy is only for monks. The masses in Southeast Asia and in Tibet practice animistic religion:

Animism and Buddhism

I agree there is much animism that is often mixed with parts of Buddhism (that is not a big concern of mine, as I don't personally recognize it as authentic Buddhism). However, the early suttas shows that the Lord Buddha spoke much and often about lay life, not just monastic life.

 

[Andrewn]

Do you know this to be true, or just believe it to be true?

I know for sure that Christ is Lord and King of the entire world and that His word is truth.

How do you know that you'll never suffer in this life or the life to come? You previously wrote, "I can prove a growth in peacefulness and bliss for myself through the practice of the Buddhist Path, however." But this is not the same as claiming to be immune from affliction and suffering.

 

[ananda]

I know for sure that Christ is Lord and King of the entire world and that His word is truth.

How do you know this for sure? Are you a personal witness to his position as lord and king of the world?

How do you know that you'll never suffer in this life or the life to come? You previously wrote, "I can prove a growth in peacefulness and bliss for myself through the practice of the Buddhist Path, however." But this is not the same as claiming to be immune from affliction and suffering.

All I know for sure is that my progress in the practice of the Buddhist Path leads me to greater states of peacefulness & bliss. By that, I can reasonably extrapolate that it likely leads to the unending peace of nibbana.

It's like saying there are steps A to Z in the Path. Faith in the efficacy of step A leads to the practice of step A, which reinforces a stronger faith in step B. The practice of step B leads to a stronger faith in step C. Etc.

 

[Andrewn]

How do you know this for sure? Are you a personal witness to his position as lord and king of the world?

God gives us an inner witness as he promised:

Joh 14:18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I am coming to you.

Joh 14:26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I told you.

Gal 4:6 And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts to shout, “Abba, Father!”

Rom 8:16 The Spirit himself joins our spirit in testifying that we are God’s children.

All I know for sure is that my progress in the practice of the Buddhist Path leads me to greater states of peacefulness & bliss. By that, I can reasonably extrapolate that it likely leads to the unending peace of nibbana. It's like saying there are steps A to Z in the Path. Faith in the efficacy of step A leads to the practice of step A, which reinforces a stronger faith in step B. The practice of step B leads to a stronger faith in step C. Etc.

In one sense it's good that Buddhist philosophy can produce this transformation. In another sense, I think it's an incomplete truth. But you cannot believe this without God revealing it to you. So, all you can do is pray that he does.

 

[ananda]

God gives us an inner witness as he promised:

Joh 14:18 “I will not leave you as orphans; I am coming to you.

Joh 14:26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and remind you of everything I told you.

Gal 4:6 And because you are sons, God sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts to shout, “Abba, Father!”

Rom 8:16 The Spirit himself joins our spirit in testifying that we are God’s children.

I suppose I never received that inner witness, then.

In one sense it's good that Buddhist philosophy can produce this transformation. In another sense, I think it's an incomplete truth. But you cannot believe this without God revealing it to you. So, all you can do is pray that he does.

I didn't need to believe through revelation and prayer, because I experienced it for myself.