Do Buddhists Believe in God?

The Watercooler
62

Thank you for your response. Please let me say again that I regard Mahayana and Theravada as equally legitimate expressions of Buddhism.

As far as I know, the Pali suttas are equivalent to the Agamas of the Mahayana canon, so one could say that both Theravada and Mahayana have preserved the early Buddhist texts.

Some parts of the Agamas may even more accurately portray the historical Buddha’s teachings than the Pali suttas or at least come from an earlier date.

Since the Nikayas/Agamas are foundational to both Mahayana and Theravada Buddhism, I regard them as equally valid expressions of Buddhism.

63

Something I forgot to mention is the Mahayana Nirvana Sutra:

Eighthly, the Tathagata pervades all places, just like space. The nature of space cannot be seen; similarly, the Tathagata cannot really be seen, and yet he causes all to see him through his sovereignty. Such sovereignty is termed ‘the Great Self’. That Great Self is termed ‘Great Nirvana’. In this sense it is termed ‘Great Nirvana’.
http://www.nirvanasutra.net/nirvanasutrav.htm

Much of the central focus of the Nirvana Sutra falls on the existence of the salvific Buddha-dhatu (Buddha-nature(佛性), Buddha element, or Buddha principle), also called the Tathagatagarbha(如來藏) (“Buddha-matrix” or “Buddha embryo”), in every sentient being… The full seeing of the Buddha-nature ushers in Liberation from all suffering, and effects final deliverance into the realm of Great Nirvana (maha-nirvana). This “True Self” or “Great Self” of the nirvanic realm is said to be sovereign, to be attained on the morning of Buddhahhood, and to pervade all places like space. The Buddha-dhatu is always present, in all times and in all beings, but is obscured from worldly vision by the screening effect of kleshas ( tenacious negative mental afflictions) within each being (the most notable of which are greed 貪, hatred 嗔, delusion 癡, and pride 慢). Once these negative mental states have been eliminated, however, the Buddha-dhatu is said to shine forth unimpededly and the Buddha-sphere (Buddha-dhatu/ visaya) can then be consciously “entered into”, and therewith deathless Nirvana attained.
chinabuddhismencyclopedia.com

It’s also worth mentioning again that Mahayana Buddhism may have had more influence on Hinduism, rather than the other way around:

64

That’s the beauty of the world we are in today where we are able thanks to scholars rather than “religious” people, to access EBTs data from various traditions. This in particular will allow to progressively notice the possible corruptions to the Buddha teachings brought by one or the others traditions.

65

I honestly don’t see the various sects and schools of Buddhism as corruptions of the Buddha’s teachings. It’s just the Dharma, the same truth, being practiced and interpreted in different ways, like in the Buddha’s parable of the blind men and the elephant.

66

Yes, we can say that the Theravada and Mahayana traditions have both preserved the early texts. But be careful about sliding from speaking about texts to speaking about traditions. Theravada and Mahayana traditions are lineages of teaching and practice, embedded within specific cultural and geographical locations. Those traditions have preserved a wide variety of texts, some of which stem from the early period. But not everything in Theravada is early Buddhism, nor is everything in Mahayana.

It’s misleading to speak of a “Mahayana canon” except in the limited sense of “texts preserved in Mahayana monasteries”. The canons in Chinese and Tibetan include a vast range of material, some Mahayanist, some not. I have a copy of the Bible in my small pile of books here, but that doesn’t mean that I am a Christian. All we can say is that, in the libraries of Mahayana monasteries in China, texts of early Buddhism were preserved alongside texts of later traditions, including Mahayana. This tells us nothing about the philosophy and practices of Mahayana, except that, well, they were good at preserving books!

If we want to look at the actual relations between early Buddhism and later Mahayana texts and philosophies, we must start by identifying and studying carefully the early texts, and how these were adapted in the Abhidharma traditions.

Then we have a good start at being able to see how the Mahayanists, starting at least partly as a critique of Abhidharma and the contemporary Buddhist culture, formulated their new texts, primarily as written documents, taking advantage of new technologies and social conditions. The Mahayana sutras, at least in the beginning, and probably for a long time, made no pretence to establish a new school, but to offer a new reading on old ideas.

Then the key becomes the interpretations developed by the central figures in the emergence of mature Mahayana, especially Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu, and Asanga. Each of these was deeply versed in the teachings of the Agamas and the Abhidharma, and each in their own way developed sophisticated approaches that unified the various aspects.

Finally, we can look at how these Indian traditions were adapted and transformed in the new homelands of Buddhism in China and Tibet.

Obviously this is a complex and difficult task. History is hard. But we don’t make it easier by throwing out the established facts.

9 Likes
67

Thank you, Bhikkhu, for your response. When I read the Mahayana sutras, I tend not to read them literally whenever they seem to contradict what was already taught in the Agamas.

Thankfully, Mahayana Buddhism isn’t based on reading texts in a literalistic fashion. First and foremost, Mahayana sutras are read for their spiritual value, not as literalistic historical accounts:

It’s worth noting that the Agamas are foundational to Mahayana Buddhism, especially since the Mahayana sutras seem to have originally been written for people who were already familiar with either the Agamas or the concepts contained therein.

Personally, I believe these men were enlightened teachers, and perhaps there are Theravadins who feel the same.

Nagarjuna’s distinction between relative truth and ultimate truth is one reason why I don’t worry so much about the historicity of the Mahayana sutras. Mahayana sutras might be a finger pointing to the moon of enlightenment, rather than the absolute truth itself.

2 Likes
68

Any Mahayana Buddhist who insists that the Mahayana sutras must be literal historical accounts in order to have spiritual value is likely misinformed on the doctrinal foundations of Mahayana Buddhism.

The Lotus Sutra has an entire chapter on upaya or skillful means, a chapter which includes the well-loved parable of the burning house:

The Shurangama Sutra has an entire chapter explaining the two-truths doctrine, that one shouldn’t mistake the finger pointing to the moon of enlightenment as the moon itself:

The purpose of the Mahayana sutras is to make explicit concepts which were at least implicit in the Nikayas/Agamas, not to provide word-for-word accounts of historical events.

69

This would not be possible according to how the Buddha explains what Nibbana is, don’t you think?

With metta

1 Like
70

This is from The Avatamsaka Sutra:

The Dharmakaya, though manifesting itself in the triple world, is free from impurities and desires. It unfolds itself here, there and everywhere responding to the call of karma. It is not an individual reality, it is not a false existence, but is universal and pure. It comes from nowhere, it goes to nowhere; it does not assert itself, nor is it subject to annihilation. It is forever serene and eternal. It is the One, devoid of all determinations. This body of Dharma has no boundary, no quarters, but is embodied in all bodies. Its freedom or spontaneity is incomprehensible, its spiritual presence in things corporeal is incomprehensible. All forms of corporeality are involved therein, it is able to create all things. Assuming any concrete material body as required by the nature and condition of karma, it illuminates all creations. Though it is the treasure of intelligence, it is void of particularity. There is no place in the universe where this Body does not prevail. The universe becomes but this Body forever remains. It is free from all opposites and contraries, yet it is working in all things to lead them to Nirvana.
Muryoko: Journal of Shin Buddhism

According to The Avatamsaka Sutra, the Dharma-body ultimately leads all beings to Nirvana.

Amida is not a literal flesh and blood Buddha, in the sense of the historical Shakyamuni Buddha. Amida, a name meaning infinite light and eternal life, is symbolic of Dharma-body.

71

…and is not mentioned at all as something that helps in the path, according to Early Buddhist Texts (EBTs). It sounds like a later invention.

With metta

72

This might be an example of a Mahayana sutra making explicit a concept which was already at least implicit in the Pali suttas.

73

Your link above states that dharmakāya refers to the teachings of the Buddha in the earliest Buddhist teachings, in the first paragraph.

Then it goes on to say that after the deification of the Buddha by later authorities, dharmakāya became the trikaya.

Are you saying that you are able to believe in a ‘Universal Buddha’ which was a creation of later scholars without having any issues about it?

With metta

74

Yes, if the concept gradually developed from the original seed which the historical Buddha planted, along with the contributions of enlightened teachers who came after the Buddha’s passing.

75

Speaking of the The Avatamsaka Sutra, it also speaks of the Dharma-body as a universal consciousness:

The Dharmakaya, though manifesting itself in the triple world, is free from impurities and desires. It unfolds itself here, there and everywhere responding to the call of karma. It is not an individual reality, it is not a false existence, but is universal and pure. It comes from nowhere, it goes to nowhere; it does not assert itself, nor is it subject to annihilation. It is forever serene and eternal. It is the One, devoid of all determinations. This body of Dharma has no boundary, no quarters, but is embodied in all bodies.
Muryoko: Journal of Shin Buddhism

Perhaps the most well-known sutra example of the Dharmakaya is the Eternal Buddha of the Lotus Sutra:

In chapter fifteen we are told how a vast multitude of bodhisattvas spring up from the earth in a miraculous manner in order that they may undertake the task of transmitting and protecting the teachings of the Buddha. When the Buddha is asked who these bodhisattvas are, he replies that they are persons whom he has taught and guided to enlightenment. His questioner quite naturally asks how Shakyamuni could possibly have taught and converted such immeasurable multitudes in the course of only forty years of preaching.

In chapter sixteen Shakyamuni reveals the answer to this riddle. The Buddha, he says, is an eternal being, ever present in the world, ever concerned for the salvation of all beings. He attained buddhahood an incalculably distant time in the past, and has never ceased to abide in the world since then. He seems at times to pass away into nirvana, and at other times to make a new appearance in the world. But he does this only so that living beings will not take his presence for granted and be slack in their quest for enlightenment. His seeming disappearance is no more than an expedient means that he employs to encourage them in their efforts, one of many such expedients that he adopts in order to fit his teachings to the different natures and capacities of individual beings and insure that those teachings will have relevance for all. From this we see that in the Lotus Sutra the Buddha, who had earlier been viewed as a historical personality, is now conceived as a being who transcends all boundaries of time and space, an ever-abiding principle of truth and compassion that exists everywhere and within all beings.
The Essential Lotus: Selections from the Lotus Sutra - Google Books

76

Well he said as long as people practice the Noble Eightfold Path the world will not be free from Arahanths.

There’s no mention of long term time ‘bombs’.

If by chance there was a dharmakāya there would be no possibility of there being any future Buddhas because they would be useless in the might of such a force who would enlighten beings much more effectively IMO.

With metta

77

According to Mahayana Buddhism, Buddhas appear in the world as embodiments of the one Dharmakaya, in order to compassionately lead other beings to enlightenment.

78

Does this mean you want to postpone enlightenment now, undergo much more suffering and become a sammasambuddha in the future? Or do you believe you are one now?

With metta

79

It’s a common misconception that the Bodhisattva ideal entails postponing enlightenment until all other beings are enlightened, which would be a logical absurdity if suffering beings are innumerable. It’s more common for Mahayana Buddhists to vow to attain enlightenment as quickly as possible, in order to then lead all other beings to enlightenment.

According to the Jodo Shinshu sect of Pure Land Buddhism, to which I belong, we seek to attain Buddhahood immediately upon rebirth into the Pure Land, in order to then immediately return to this world out of compassion for all beings:

At the end of life, we will be born in the Pure Land and attain Buddhahood, returning at once to this delusional world to guide people to awakening.
Teachings | Jodo Shinshu Hongwanji-ha (Nishihongwanji)

According to Shinran Shonin, the founder of Jodo Shinshu Buddhism, the Pure Land is the realm of Nirvana.

80

If you want to lead others to Enlightenment you should learn the Early Buddhist Texts which is what the Gotama Buddha taught to lead his disciples to Nibbana.

With metta

81

If and when I become a Buddha, then I will be able to perfectly lead other beings to enlightenment.

While seeking Buddhahood is not a requirement in Theravada Buddhism, it is nonetheless an option one can pursue in Theravada:

Buddhahood is not reserved only for chosen people or for supernatural beings. Anyone can become a Buddha. No founder of any other religion ever said that his followers can have the opportunity or potentiality to attain the same position as the founder.

However, attaining Buddhahood is the most difficult task a person can pursue in this world. One must work hard by sacrificing one’s (attachment to) worldly pleasures. One has to develop and purify one’s mind from all evil thoughts in order to obtain this Enlightenment.

It will take innumerable births for a person to purify himself and to develop his mind in order to become a Buddha. Long periods of great effort are necessary in order to complete the high qualification of this self-training.

The course of this self-training which culminates in Buddhahood, includes self-discipline, self-restraint, superhuman effort, firm determination, and willingness to undergo any kind of suffering for the sake of other living beings who are suffering in this world.

This clearly shows that the Buddha did not obtain this supreme Enlightenment by simply praying, worshipping, or making offerings to some supernatural beings. He attained Buddhahood by the purification of His mind and heart.

He gained Supreme Enlightenment without the influence of any external, supernatural forces but by the development of His own insight. Thus only a man who has firm determination and courage to overcome all hindrance, weaknesses and selfish desires can attain Buddhahood.

Prince Siddhartha did not attain Buddhahood overnight simply by sitting under the Bodhi tree. No supernatural being appeared and revealed anything by whispering into His ear while He was in deep meditation under the Bodhi tree. Behind His Supreme Enlightenment there was a long history of previous births.

Many of the Jataka stories tell us how He worked hard by sacrificing His life in many previous births to attain His Supreme Buddhahood.
What Buddhists Believe - Attainment of Buddhahood