Universality and Buddhism?

[zakkenroller]

I've often identified most with the concept of Spinoza's God. Namely, that God is the sum total of all beings and phenomena in the universe. In other words, that we are all part and parcel of the same phenomena or being

Leaving God out of it, is there support in the Suttas for the proposition that all beings are interrelated, all of us are universally connected, or part of the same universal phenomenon?

Often, while attempting a Metta or Mudita meditation, I can feel my thought consciousness stretching toward this kind of feeling.

[Alino]

Here an intresting talk of Thanissaro Bhikkhu about the questions of "universality", "we are all one" etc.

[anka]

the concept universality made me think this. dharma is universal. so, in other planets and galaxies, all improved civilizations should create traditions like buddhism. if we can travel out of the solar system, im sure we can see buddhism-like spiritual paths.

[zakkenroller]

Thank you for pointing out this lecture.

It's often difficult for me to watch lectures (Especially on a Saturday morning with the kids' hub bub.)

But I did find this long article by Thanissaro Bhikku on a similar theme. It looks like it's worth studying:

https://tricycle.org/magazine/we-are-not-one/

[mjaviem]

...
Leaving God out of it, is there support in the Suttas for the proposition that all beings are interrelated, all of us are universally connected, or part of the same universal phenomenon?...

There's no support for such a view as far as I know. The Buddha taught not self and quenching of the I am conceit. He taught there's no self to be found anywhere.

[Ceisiwr]

I've often identified most with the concept of Spinoza's God. Namely, that God is the sum total of all beings and phenomena in the universe. In other words, that we are all part and parcel of the same phenomena or being

Leaving God out of it, is there support in the Suttas for the proposition that all beings are interrelated, all of us are universally connected, or part of the same universal phenomenon?

Often, while attempting a Metta or Mudita meditation, I can feel my thought consciousness stretching toward this kind of feeling.

Spinoza was a Rationalist. His metaphysics depends heavily upon the theory of Substance. The Buddha wasn’t a Rationalist, and wouldn’t have accepted Substance. In that sense the two are in conflict. Some Mahayana traditions do teach that everything is interdependent, like Indra’s Net, via dependent origination. Personally I’m not convinced that D.O. was meant to be understood in such a manner.

[Bundokji]

If you are referring to the human realm, then it can be said that we are connected through kamma (kamma loka). In terms of interdependence, it seems to me that romanticizing universality is an outcome of the anxieties of feeling separated, so universality has no meaning without separation. That separation is the basis for a complementarian view of duties. For example, monastics and lay people complement each other. Same thing can be said about men and women, rulers and the ruled ....etc

[cappuccino]

that we are all part and parcel of the same phenomena or being

is there support in the Suttas for the proposition that all beings are interrelated, all of us are universally connected, or part of the same universal phenomenon?

you're sinking together


you're crashing together


then you enjoy the company


even hell…

[mikenz66]

In terms of interdependence, it seems to me that romanticizing universality is an outcome of the anxieties of feeling separated...

Interesting point. That there is interdependence is trivial - actions of beings (or natural events) obviously affect other beings. But making it into some mysterious principle seems to me to be over-reaching.


Mike

[SarathW]

I've often identified most with the concept of Spinoza's God. Namely, that God is the sum total of all beings and phenomena in the universe. In other words, that we are all part and parcel of the same phenomena or being

Leaving God out of it, is there support in the Suttas for the proposition that all beings are interrelated, all of us are universally connected, or part of the same universal phenomenon?

Often, while attempting a Metta or Mudita meditation, I can feel my thought consciousness stretching toward this kind of feeling.

Buddha taught the Dependent Origination. That is the interdependence nature of the mind. However, you can find this interdependence in the matter as well. In Buddhism, the universe is a collection of earth, water, wind, fire, space, and consciousness. They all are dependently originated. What is missing in your equation is the consciousness perhaps what you call God.
What Buddhism is all about not taking any of them as I, me, or myself or Anatta.

[dharmacorps]

For a full treatment of this issue, read Buddhist Romanticism by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Not only is there almost no support for this concept in the pali canon, but there is much that heads another direction entirely. The roots of the distortion of the dhamma begins with the Romantics in Europe.

[zakkenroller]

Thank you. I'm in the middle of this now. I've been trying to examine the soundness of my own assumptions about Buddhism recently and this essay is right on the nose.

[GreyHaven]

You mentioned specifically noting a feeling similar to universal consciousness in meditation. It's worth noting that this is potentially something well within the Abhidhammic progression of spheres - that is to say, the realm of infinite consciousness is quite real, it just isn't the be-all, end-all, it's another layer of *avijja*, albeit a beautiful one. People with the proper disposition can attain/access these spheres easier than others might, and so it may not be something you have intentionally strived for as such, either.

It is of some people's opinion that certain other contemplative traditions have their "peak" in an analogue of the sphere of infinite consciousness. It's there, but it isn't the unconditioned - more spheres lie beyond.