Was the Buddha as ignorant as an atheist on God, arguing from the existence of evil ?

Question

How then did he become a god himself among some Buddhists ?

Here's how Buddha would argue:

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why does he order such misfortune
And not create concord?

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why prevail deceit, lies and ignorance
And he such inequity and injustice create?

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Then an evil master is he, (O Aritta)
Knowing what's right did let wrong prevail!

What do you think is wrong with his attitude ? Was he "enlightned" or did he simply embrace a fatalistic vision ?

Please look at the question clearly. Question is : how did some Buddhists regard him as a god, was Buddha really knowledgeable about God or was he simply in fatalistic despair / depression ?

Answer 1

Gautama or Buddha(the enlightened one), was a social reformer he never meant to establish a religion, and the Buddhist religion did not start until he died, if his teaching were followed he would not be worshiped like he is.

Answer 2

First: Buddha is NOT a god and is NOT considered a god by Buddhist. He is a revered teacher. (Similar to Moses of Judeo-Christian beliefs and Muhammad of Muslim belief)

Seconds: Buddha would not argue about a god because, god or no god, it is irrelevant to the reality of Buddha's teachings and to the processes of enlightenment.

Suffering is the natural state of things in the world of Samsara. (the cycle of birth, death and rebirth) Buddha teaches that before we can escape Samsara, we must liberate ourselves from improper thinking and return to our original nature.

{Side Note: The two concepts that either baffle or upsets most practitioners of western religions such as Judaism, Islam and Christianity are the Buddhist beliefs that:

a) All beings are inherently good and posses a infinite capacity for good as opposed to possessing "original sin" or being unworthy simply by nature of our being human.

b) The other point, not unrelated, is that Buddhism teaches that we are responsible entirely for our selves. When something bad occurs, it is our own fault. If we are to become enlightened, it is up to us to find a teacher, once we have a teacher, he can only point the way to enlightenment, he can not enlighten us, only we can enlighten ourselves. This is in direct contrast to Judeo-Christian/Muslim notions that god/Jesus(Allah) must grant permission for us to be saved or redeemed. }

That said, Buddha did not think god created evil or good. Good is the balance of reality and bad is unbalanced fiction. God does not enter the picture. Years later, and even today, there are many people that practice Buddhism and other theistic realigns together. Gelukpa Buddhism (and other Tibetan schools of Buddhism) have merged traditional Indian Buddhism with native religions incorporating deities and other beings into their faith. (No Buddhist I know has ever said that these Buddhists were mistaken or wrong, even though their beliefs are significantly different.) I also know several Christians who believe entirely in the christen god and in Jesus, but still practice the self cultivation of Zen Buddhism. These Christians I knew did not do this by ready books, they studied with Zen masters and these masters KNEW and accepted these Christians faith in a god. The Christians have not been asked to convert or to change their ideas. If they do, that is okay, but it is NOT a requirement or even a goal of the Zen teacher. The only goal is to help these people remove suffering from their life and perhaps reach an enlightened state of being. End of Goal!

In closing, Buddha teaches peace, tranquility, understanding and compassion as well as "a" way (as opposed to the only way) to reach enlightenment and put an end to suffering. The Lord Buddha did not make derogatory remarks about god or gods and he did not spend time contemplating how a god or gods caused or prevented harm. What he taught was the four noble truths:

I) There is suffering in the world
II) Desire and Craving is the cause of suffering.
III) The cessation of suffering is the cessation of desire and cravings.
IV) The way leading to the cessation of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path
...1) Right Viewpoint
...2) Right Values
...3) Right Speech
...4) Right Actions
...5) Right Livelihood
...6) Right Effort
...7) Right Mindfulness
...8) Right Meditation

This is the core of all Buddhist teachings. The cause of suffering is not, has never and will never be listed by Buddhists as neglect by a creator or a god of any type. This is NOT the Buddhist way.

I hope this helps your understanding of Buddhism.

Answer 3

Arguing for or hostile to the life of God is basic, surely i believe an atheist might want to attempt first to educate God because purely by seeing the guidelines of yet another will they understand what motivates them and understand their argument. Fanaticism in Atheist beliefs can get up as actual as in a faith. to really understand one ought to work out each and every aspect of the coin and settle for that both have which ability and earnings if no longer the solutions. Having evaluated the life of God, seeing the failings and listened to the thoughts of human beings which have a faith, i'd be able to argue any way I chosen, purely because my ideas and thoughts lead me in a unmarried route might want to by no ability close my ideas to the different. it isn't hypocritical, that regularly is the label utilized by smaller minded human beings to justify no longer finding out their beliefs which on the right of the day is the midsection of the crime in fanaticism. Seeing each and every aspect of the argument it will be basic to say sure i might want to argue the for aspect, i'd be extra recommended and extra useful armed at attacking my personal perspectives seeing the failings there, yet would I actually have the interest needed to sway the evaluations of the guy the argument became designed to cajole. There will be my downfall.

Answer 4

First of all Buddha never said that He is a GOD (where do you research? saying He is a GOD?)
And I never heard or read that argument coming from Buddha. But thanks for making me think that, there maybe outsiders trying to ruin the Buddha's teachings.
Buddha always states never believe in anything that is written in the holy books, or those inherited tradition because this can be man-made and man is still subject to errors. Search the truth yourself that's the concept of Ehipassiko, come and prove it.
May peace be with you =)

Answer 5

Apparently you see a God who is an individual. What if god is everything, and not a single thing. Then to call this entity a god would be to try to define a concept to it's ;owest possible level. man creating god in an image he desires it to be. Those who are enlightened simply have become aware that all that is, and all that isnt, is that which is all. the individual is simply an aspect of this all, kinda like god has multiple personality disorder and each of us is one of them.

Answer 6

1: Siddhartha Gautama is gone, severed from the samsara. He is in no way, shape, or form a god.

2; Buddha was agnostic, he believed that blind faith and blind denial both created attachment to ideas, creating suffering...

Answer 7

Buddha isn't considered a deity.

Buddhism is an atheistic religion in that it includes all the other traditional aspects of religion but is without belief in a god / deity.

Answer 8

Buddha would view a belief in God as an attachment, a source of suffering.
Enlightenment comes from ridding oneself of desires and attachments, thus eliminating suffering.

One could, then consider Budhha an atheist...

Buddha would encourage you to use your own thoughts and feelings to see if what he was telling you was true, as well.

What is the source of this arguement? I would like to see its context.

Answer 9

Ok, this takes the cake. Buddhists are the most peaceful, non-pushy people on earth. And , no, I am not a Buddhist. Why do feel the need to put them down and to insult them. Believe whatever you want, and allow others the same priviledge.

Answer 10

Your question is like that of a child asking his father if he is ignorant because he said that clouds are water when it is obvious to the child that a water doesn't float out of a glass and into the air.

Just because you don't understand does not make him ignorant. The same is true concerning Atheists, just because you don't understand doesn't mean they are wrong in their assertions.