Gods in the Canon

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:37 am

Couldn't quite deside where to put this so sorry if it is in the wrong place!

I know there is mention of what the Buddha considdered a Brahman, and Monk, to be but is there any mention in the suttas of what he considered to be a god?

Thanks in advance
Manapa


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
clw_uk
Posts: 4655
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby clw_uk » Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:09 pm

Perhaps if you could clarify what you mean by God?

Do you mean the Abrahamic God or the Hindu versions? Do you mean an all powerful creator?


:anjali:
Unbowed, Unbent, Unbroken

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Mar 07, 2009 1:54 pm

as mentioned in the suttas


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

green
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:25 am

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby green » Sat Mar 07, 2009 2:58 pm


User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
Posts: 10649
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby David N. Snyder » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:10 pm

Image




User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:31 pm

One whose beyond or not-beyond or beyond-&-not-beyond can't be found; unshackled, carefree: he's what I call a brahman.

Hands restrained, feet restrained speech restrained, supremely restrained — delighting in what is inward, content, centered, alone: he's what they call a monk.

anything similar for a god/s?


He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:00 pm



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
Kare
Posts: 751
Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2009 10:58 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Kare » Sat Mar 07, 2009 4:29 pm

Mettāya,
Kåre

nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby nathan » Sun Mar 08, 2009 12:29 am

But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}

User avatar
adeh
Posts: 215
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 5:42 pm
Location: Mexico City

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby adeh » Sun Mar 08, 2009 1:05 am

The only Sutta that I can find that talks about the nature of the Devas is in the Ittivuttaka no. 83 [in the section of the threes, John Ireland translation] in which the Buddha speaks of the five prognostic signs that appear when a Deva is about to pass away. Adeh.

nathan
Posts: 692
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 3:11 am

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby nathan » Sun Mar 08, 2009 7:58 am

Awareness and understanding is clearly to be made known by the path and it's fruit:

The Arahant

"A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations — who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you.

"He directly knows water as water... fire as fire... wind as wind... beings as beings... gods as gods... Pajapati as Pajapati... Brahma as Brahma... the luminous gods as luminous gods... the gods of refulgent glory as gods of refulgent glory... the gods of abundant fruit as the gods of abundant fruit... the Great Being as the Great Being... the dimension of the infinitude of space as the dimension of the infinitude of space... the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness as the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness... the dimension of nothingness as the dimension of nothingness... the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception as the dimension of neither-perception-nor-non-perception... the seen as the seen... the heard as the heard... the sensed as the sensed... the cognized as the cognized... singleness as singleness... multiplicity as multiplicity... the All as the All...

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html

I think Ven. Bodhi's book with MN1 and the commentaries had a lot of background on all of this cosmology and philosophical thought that was excellent. It is an awesome sutta anyhow. My library perished in a small cataclysm here a while back but that was a great one for this subject. Still I have no idea if it is a theology or a theopathology or a theotaupsy or what? It doesn't matter to me if there is no convention of what it is called. It kind of seems to me that the Buddha is the supreme theologian so far as theologians go and that the path to arahatship would be the supreme education in this. I grew up with a lot of theologians and they would all wonder what to call it if not a theology. Not that I would be at all interested in taking up any of this with any of them. I think that could get tedious. Oh hey, how about theothropology! :smile:
metta & upekkha
But whoever walking, standing, sitting, or lying down overcomes thought, delighting in the stilling of thought: he's capable, a monk like this, of touching superlative self-awakening. § 110. {Iti 4.11; Iti 115}

User avatar
David N. Snyder
Site Admin
Posts: 10649
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby David N. Snyder » Mon Mar 09, 2009 7:37 pm

Image




User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby kc2dpt » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:11 am

- Peter


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Tue Mar 10, 2009 7:59 am



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.

User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby kc2dpt » Tue Mar 10, 2009 4:11 pm

- Peter


green
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2009 12:25 am

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby green » Wed Mar 11, 2009 2:18 am


User avatar
Cittasanto
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
Location: Ellan Vannin
Contact:

Re: Gods in the Canon

Postby Cittasanto » Wed Mar 11, 2009 6:27 am



He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.


Return to “General Theravāda discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Faelig and 43 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine