It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A simple explanation of why Buddhism is correct.

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:06 PM
link   
For our purposes, we will use the term "God" as it has come to be known in the western world:
The supreme being, omnipotent creator of the universe. I will be using quotes from the Christian bible, as I am more knowledgeable of the Christian God.

“Whether you believe in God or not does not matter much, whether you believe in Buddha or not does not matter so much; as a Buddhist, whether you believe in reincarnation or not does not matter so much. You must lead a good life.” ― Dalai Lama XIV

Buddhism is a belief system where through leading a good life (or many lives) and meditation, an enlightened state my be entered, in essence, becoming God. The only other "main" religion with a belief system like this is Hinduism, where over the course of many lives, you reach spiritual Nirvana. I would like to stress you CAN be a Christian Buddhist, a Jewish Buddhist, an Islamic Buddhist, an Atheistic Buddhist, or anything else.

The other of the main religions teach there is one God, in whichever form, and the only way to "heaven" is through having faith in the creator.

The aim here is to use a simple mathematical equation to prove Buddhism is correct:

It does not matter which God you believe in, or that you believe in God at all... You can reach the enlightened state and "become" God.

The western world sees God as an omnipotent being. Part of omnipotent is omnipresence.



Where can I go from your Spirit? Or where can I flee from your presence? If I ascend into heaven, you are there; if I make my bed in hell, behold, you are there; if I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me. If I say, "Surely the darkness will hide me and the light become night around me," even the darkness will not be dark to you; the night will shine like the day, for darkness is as light to you (Psalm 139:7-12).


Very simply, God exists beyond all boundaries of Time and Space. Using this, we can say that God is EVERYWHERE.

Now let's do some (simple) math:

x = smallest building block of the universe. There is nothing is smaller.

If God is everywhere, God is inside the smallest building block. If nothing is smaller, God comprises the whole. Therefore:

x = God

Everything is built from x. Theoretically, let's say it takes 100x to construct a man. Therefore:

100x = man
100x = God

man = God.

Take that however you will. Realizing you are God and becoming God are two different things, and I would assume one must practice in order to become God, so pray away!
edit on 11-8-2012 by mkmasn because: Sorry for posting in the wrong forum!




posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
So, 200 is 2God?



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by mkmasn
 


Minor point:

Buddhism is not a religion.

Major point:


Very simply, God exists beyond all boundaries of Time and Space. Using this, we can say that God is EVERYWHERE.


Correct, God is omnipresent. I'm not sure if that means that he IS everywhere, or he CAN be everywhere, but I don't think it really matters.


Therefore:

x = God

Everything is built from x.


Incorrect -- "God is everywhere" is different than "God is everything". We are not built "from God", we are built from matter. Pantheism is the belief that God is everything, and that is not a Christian belief, so, if this is the basis on which you are making your claim, then there cannot be a Christian Buddhist.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


We are not humans, wishing to have a spiritual experience. We are spiritual beings, having a human experience. We ARE built of the same material that is god.

It's true that Christians think we HAVE souls, but, in fact, we ARE souls, that have bodies. We are the "Holy Spirit."



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by mkmasn
 


Minor point:

Buddhism is not a religion.

Major point:


Very simply, God exists beyond all boundaries of Time and Space. Using this, we can say that God is EVERYWHERE.


Correct, God is omnipresent. I'm not sure if that means that he IS everywhere, or he CAN be everywhere, but I don't think it really matters.


Therefore:

x = God

Everything is built from x.


Incorrect -- "God is everywhere" is different than "God is everything". We are not built "from God", we are built from matter. Pantheism is the belief that God is everything, and that is not a Christian belief, so, if this is the basis on which you are making your claim, then there cannot be a Christian Buddhist.


MAIN point: Buddhism IS a Religion.www.buddhanet.net...

What is Buddhism? Buddhism is a religion to about 300 million people around the world. The word comes from 'budhi', 'to awaken'. It has its origins about 2,500 years ago when Siddhartha Gotama, known as the Buddha, was himself awakened (enlightened) at the age of 35. • Is Buddhism a Religion? To many, Buddhism goes beyond religion and is more of a philosophy or 'way of life'. It is a philosophy because philosophy 'means love of wisdom' and the Buddhist path can be summed up as: (1) to lead a moral life, (2) to be mindful and aware of thoughts and actions, and (3) to develop wisdom and understanding.

It clearly states that to many, it goes beyond religion. It is indeed a religion, none the less. ANY religion is a "way to live" A certain set of morals one follows in his or her life.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by ErroneousDylan
So, 200 is 2God?


2πRG-d= circumference of G-d?



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:42 PM
link   
reply to post by ErroneousDylan
 


If there is one God, as the main three would have us believe, any amount of building blocks used to create something will always equate to one God.


reply to post by adjensen
 


Dictionary.com
om·ni·pres·ent   [om-nuh-prez-uhnt] Show IPA
adjective
present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent God.

That means he is everywhere, to include inside things. Which means, since Christians believe God is omnipresent, it IS a Christian belief.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesmokingman
MAIN point: Buddhism IS a Religion.


Well, the Dalai Lama humbly disagrees with you. Basic Buddhism a philosophy, not a religion


The Dalai Lama, who is in Washington, DC for a ten day event, has written: “I have come to the conclusion that whether or not a person is a religious believer does not matter much. Far more important is that they be a good human being.”. . . “That is why I sometimes say that religion is something we can perhaps do without.”



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by mkmasn
Dictionary.com
om·ni·pres·ent   [om-nuh-prez-uhnt] Show IPA
adjective
present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent God.


Let's compare that statement to pantheism, which is your claim:


Pantheism is a metaphysical and religious position. Broadly defined it is the view that (1) “God is everything and everything is God … the world is either identical with God or in some way a self-expression of his nature”
(Source)

Same thing? Clearly not.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Omnipresence is a Christian belief but just because God exists in an atom does NOT mean he is the atom. Air exists in a box but a box does not = air. It is UNchristian to believe that we are made up of God but that God exists in us is a Christian belief.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjensen

Originally posted by mkmasn
Dictionary.com
om·ni·pres·ent   [om-nuh-prez-uhnt] Show IPA
adjective
present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent God.


Let's compare that statement to pantheism, which is your claim:


Pantheism is a metaphysical and religious position. Broadly defined it is the view that (1) “God is everything and everything is God … the world is either identical with God or in some way a self-expression of his nature”
(Source)

Same thing? Clearly not.


If God is everywhere, He must be in the smallest building block of creation, do you agree? Otherwise he wouldn't be everywhere... Then he wouldn't be omnipresent, as the bible claims he is.

Since nothing is smaller than the smallest building block of creation, God must comprise the whole of the smallest building block of creation, do you agree? This may be an infinitesimally small piece of matter, which God is in, and since nothing is smaller, the only thing it COULD be comprised of IS God.

Therefore, using simple logic, it becomes clear God is equal to the smallest building block of the universe/creation/etc.

If the smallest building block comprises all things, logically, God comprises all things. The world is NOT identical to God. There's your difference. I didn't say anything about an expression of his nature. I simply said you are comprised of God and can become "God" just as the Buddhist teachings say.
edit on 11-8-2012 by mkmasn because: Finished the thought



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Buddhism is a religion with about 8000 sects, that predated Christianity by about 500 years. It was a religion then and it still is now. It is recognized as a religion and you are blatantly taking the Dalai Lama out of context and deflecting the subject, being the "correctness of Buddhism."

That being said, the Dalai Lama also said that Buddhism is fluid and changes with science, learns from science. But anything based on spiritualism and the development of spiritualism as it pertains to the journey of the soul, humanity, the planet and ultimately god, is a religion.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   
reply to post by mkmasn
 


I really love the Dhammapada. It's my favorite among the Eastern Buddhist texts.

If you compare this with a simple truth, Buddha realized the answer all along. This cannot imply that God's law was fulfilled in Buddha, just that Buddha knew the truth. I agree with the fact that Buddha had it right, but he made a massive error in one fact. Suffering must happen.

God only allows the will to receive and the will to give. Suffering is required to give. Buddha made one simple mistake in this. The ultimate answer of life the universe and everything is not to avoid or end suffering. It is to embrace it.

Taking reward causes suffering. Take your neighbors car and he must buy another. Give your neighbor a car and you now suffer the thing given. To give a gift, it must be lost by the one giving it. Or does it? If I work at a job, the reward for suffering the work then extends to my family. I have given a gift that returns.

Buddha said: "Change your child's diaper and when you are old, he will change yours." Well, he didn't say that exactly, but he did say this:

Chapter 1 - Choices

We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with an impure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable.
"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Live with such thoughts and you live in hate.
"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Abandon such thoughts, and live in love.
In this world
Hate never yet dispelled hate.
Only love dispels hate.
This is the law,
Ancient and inexhaustible.

The truth Buddha realized is this. Hate is taking by our own will. It's the culmination of a selfish aspiration to take what is not yours from another person. Love dispels hate and can only give. God requires our will to give and receive. A gift that is given is suffered by someone else. A reward that is taken is also suffered by someone. Smoke and you get cancer. You and your family suffers. Suffer a job and reward follows. Either way, we suffer. Buddha decided that he could end suffering. The problem is, suffering is required. You can only give if you suffer. Love requires it.

Jesus fulfilled this by dying for us on a cross. Buddha, had he lived another 500 years, would have recognized His error in Christ. Why? The marvelous truth of love he knew was pointing to Christ all along.



edit on 11-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by adjensen
 


Buddhism is a religion with about 8000 sects, that predated Christianity by about 500 years. It was a religion then and it still is now. It is recognized as a religion and you are blatantly taking the Dalai Lama out of context and deflecting the subject, being the "correctness of Buddhism."

That being said, the Dalai Lama also said that Buddhism is fluid and changes with science, learns from science. But anything based on spiritualism and the development of spiritualism as it pertains to the journey of the soul, humanity, the planet and ultimately god, is a religion.


Exactly.

That quote means that no matter what your beliefs, you can believe in and follow the enlightened path which is Buddhism.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mkmasn
 


Our universe is a digital simulation. The spirit world is analog. The universe is finite on the macrocosm, and on the micro it is limited by Planck's length. It's made up of indivisible units.

Btw.. Buddha was an atheist.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Why the complaint about Buddhism not being a religion, but rather a philosophy? What's wrong with philosophy?



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by mkmasn
 


Our universe is a digital simulation. The spirit world is analog. The universe is finite on the macrocosm, and on the micro it is limited by Planck's length. It's made up of indivisible units.

Btw.. Buddha was an atheist.


Wow. Analog and digital. That's a nice way of seeing Word in time. I just started to say that it is impossible to be anti-christ apart from the initial event of his life and death. Oooopse. Christ was the first image that was opposed by Satan before man (Rendered image). I had to think that one through first.

I am not sure on Buddha. He didn't stand against love, but embraced it. What he missed was a simple mistake we all make. Love requires suffering to be true. Loving the lovely is easy. Loving the unlovely is not so easy. Judgment is between the two. If I judge a beautiful girl as worthy of me, I also judge other as not worthy. I make myself the benchmark. Do I see myself against the true benchmark of beauty and love? Probably not. I am biased. Buddha had no benchmark, yet he was astoundingly close. I give him the benefit of the doubt. Read the Dhammapada and try to find verses to contradict it. Dharma is law and community responsibility to honor. Define the Eastern words and you find a parallel to the source it was take from.

It's hard to fault it. There are blemishes, but it's so good on many levels.




edit on 11-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by mkmasn
If God is everywhere, He must be in the smallest building block of creation, do you agree? Otherwise he wouldn't be everywhere... Then he wouldn't be omnipresent, as the bible claims he is.

Since nothing is smaller than the smallest building block of creation, God must comprise the whole of the smallest building block of creation, do you agree?


No, that is illogical. An equivalent of your statement is "I am in this room, ergo, I am this room." Even philosophically, that makes no sense.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by adjensen
 


Well I dont think the Dahli lama is the one that decides that. It is his opinion, nothing more. The Buddhism religion has been around 2500 years. Long before he inhabited the earth. So you and he can disagree all you like, it doesnt really matter anyway.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by EnochWasRight
reply to post by mkmasn
 


I really love the Dhammapada. It's my favorite among the Eastern Buddhist texts.

If you compare this with a simple truth, Buddha realized the answer all along. This cannot imply that God's law was fulfilled in Buddha, just that Buddha knew the truth. I agree with the fact that Buddha had it right, but he made a massive error in one fact. Suffering must happen.

God only allows the will to receive and the will to give. Suffering is required to give. Buddha made one simple mistake in this. The ultimate answer of life the universe and everything is not to avoid or end suffering. It is to embrace it.

Taking reward causes suffering. Take your neighbors car and he must buy another. Give your neighbor a car and you now suffer the thing given. To give a gift, it must be lost by the one giving it. Or does it? If I work at a job, the reward for suffering the work then extends to my family. I have given a gift that returns.

Buddha said: "Change your child's diaper and when you are old, he will change yours." Well, he didn't say that exactly, but he did say this:

Chapter 1 - Choices

We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with an impure mind
And trouble will follow you
As the wheel follows the ox that draws the cart.
We are what we think.
All that we are arises with our thoughts.
With our thoughts we make the world.
Speak or act with a pure mind
And happiness will follow you
As your shadow, unshakable.
"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Live with such thoughts and you live in hate.
"Look how he abused me and hurt me,
How he threw me down and robbed me."
Abandon such thoughts, and live in love.
In this world
Hate never yet dispelled hate.
Only love dispels hate.
This is the law,
Ancient and inexhaustible.

The truth Buddha realized is this. Hate is taking by our own will. It's the culmination of a selfish aspiration to take what is not yours from another person. Love dispels hate and can only give. God requires our will to give and receive. A gift that is given is suffered by someone else. A reward that is taken is also suffered by someone. Smoke and you get cancer. You and your family suffers. Suffer a job and reward follows. Either way, we suffer. Buddha decided that he could end suffering. The problem is, suffering is required. You can only give if you suffer. Love requires it.

Jesus fulfilled this by dying for us on a cross. Buddha, had he lived another 500 years, would have recognized His error in Christ.





edit on 11-8-2012 by EnochWasRight because: (no reason given)


I am not Christian, but I have read the bible, almost every page, from cover to cover (Except the chapters on the blood lines. So boring). Personally, I don't think Jesus ever existed. My reasoning is this:

Jesus needed to die on the cross to become the last sacrificial lamb to God in order to save our sins. The reason was because in order for God to be just, he could not be merciful. He could not forgive everyone for their sins, some had been greater sinners than others. But He did not specify in His commandments the severity and circumstance of those sins against God (i.e. stealing to feed yourself as opposed to stealing out of greed).

In order to forgive everyone and grant them new guidelines within the frame of those commandments, He sent His son to die on the cross. He had shown His mercy towards the sinners and remained just at the same time.

The problem I have with this is He CAN be both just and merciful. That would be the whole omnipotent thing. All powerful. There was never any need to send Jesus to die on the cross. That's why I don't believe it happened.

If God does exist, as we're assuming in this discussion, God is both Good and Evil, Love and Hate, Peace and Suffering. He is everything. Not only did He create all those things, He is in the very fiber of that which makes those things real. Since God is all powerful, those things can each be independent of each other and one may not be needed for the other to exist.




top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join