GOD is Spirit according to the Bible. What is spirit, you might say? I can only speak based on my own relationship with God and I tell you that I have no wish to define God for you or anybody because as far as I am concern, GOD is beyond's any man's comprehension and you only communicate and have a relationship / be aware of God in your own life.Originally posted by longchen:Is God a thing?
If God is a thing, then who is the creator of this Being call God?
So can God be a thing? If God can be an object, then it is not the ultimate. Because if it is an object/thing/Being, then who is the creator of this object/thing/Being?
Originally posted by concerned_man:From Internet search, there are other group who have the same definition of God, where God has no physical form.
Each inidividual interpret God differently. Regardless of this variation, it is real for them in their mind and heart.
well tat's wat buddha trying to enlighten us and bring us to focus on the 'main' concern.Tat's ending sufferingOriginally posted by longchen:
When we try to intepret God, we are trying to imagine/conceptualise the ungraspable. .. and God becomes a concept/idea and in our mind it becomes 'objectified'. It is like a dog trying to bite its own tail.
From my understanding, there is no creator-creation division. It is an optical/perceptual illusion...a matrix. Observer(me) and the being observed (other) is a hypnotic thought... creating the appearance of 'me and other'..
Originally posted by longchen:
When we try to intepret God, we are trying to imagine/conceptualise the ungraspable. .. and God becomes a concept/idea and in our mind it becomes 'objectified'. It is like a dog trying to bite its own tail.
From my understanding, there is no creator-creation division. It is an optical/perceptual illusion...a matrix. Observer(me) and the being observed (other) is a hypnotic thought... creating the appearance of 'me and other'..
yes the mind is the creatorOriginally posted by concerned_man:Interesting. In fact Buddha did say that all creations are the works of our mind.
"Yi Jie Fa Chong Xin Xiang Shen, Wei Xin Suo Xian, Wei Shi Suo Bian" The chinese text is available in the Amitabha and Pure Land thread.
What if I say that the person called God is uncreated and has no beginning?Originally posted by longchen:Is God a thing?
If God is a thing, then who is the creator of this Being call God?
So can God be a thing? If God can be an object, then it is not the ultimate. Because if it is an object/thing/Being, then who is the creator of this object/thing/Being?
Originally posted by casino_king:u sure Buddha's from Hindu?.. i read there's abt 62 religions then in India.
Like I said, Buddha was from Hindu tradition amd if you think that God (as creator is Brahma, the statue that Hindus worship, you are sadly mistaken and Buddha was right to reject the creator god Brahma.)
tah mr.casino better listen to sinweiy & read tis http://www.geocities.com/sinweiy/enlight/budrelig.pdf don 'anyhow' 'anyhow'Originally posted by sinweiy:u sure Buddha's from Hindu?.. i read there's abt 62 religions then in India.
all already have a God concept. there's no point for Buddha to add another.
ref:
http://www.geocities.com/sinweiy/enlight/budrelig.pdf
/\
If you meant thing as a physical form, then i think God is not a thing. Not even spirit, cuz even spirit may pose a physical form like a cloud or smoke.Originally posted by longchen:Is God a thing?
If God is a thing, then who is the creator of this Being call God?
So can God be a thing? If God can be an object, then it is not the ultimate. Because if it is an object/thing/Being, then who is the creator of this object/thing/Being?
Agreed..Originally posted by longchen:
When we try to intepret God, we are trying to imagine/conceptualise the ungraspable. .. and God becomes a concept/idea and in our mind it becomes 'objectified'. It is like a dog trying to bite its own tail.
From my understanding, there is no creator-creation division. It is an optical/perceptual illusion...a matrix. Observer(me) and the being observed (other) is a hypnotic thought... creating the appearance of 'me and other'..
Emmm... am not so sure about describing it as a person. The function of existence is impersonal and without self.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:What if I say that the person called God is uncreated and has no beginning?
I seeOriginally posted by longchen:Emmm... am not so sure about describing it as a person. The function of existence is impersonal and without self.
Uncreated and no beginning, yes. No beginning because Nowness has no past and no future. Past and future are our memory...manifested realm. But, i think, we may not be able to categorise them as manifested or uncreated. Because the categorisation/labeling itself is a thought manifestation.
Originally posted by nightzip:If you meant thing as a physical form, then i think God is not a thing. Not even spirit, cuz even spirit may pose a physical form like a cloud or smoke.
God is everywhere and nowhere, cannot be touched or see, but yet could be felt from the inner self.![]()
Originally posted by neutral_onliner:I believe that you have intepreted MIND in error. The MIND that Buddha speaks of is not the human mind.
yes the mind is the [b]creator
Mind is the forerunner of all actions.
All deeds are led by mind, created by mind.
If one speaks or acts with a pure mind,
happiness follows, as surely as one's shadow
-Buddha.[/b]
u don 'anyhow anyhow' lehOriginally posted by casino_king:I believe that you have intepreted MIND in error. The MIND that Buddha speaks of is not the human mind.
It is like what John, Jesus' disciple wrote:
John 1 WEB
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
Does it mean that man's words was with God from the beginning and man's words was God?
No, similarly, when Buddha said MIND, he did not mean man's mind.
Man's actions, yes proceeded from man's mind.
So if you project it up; the universe too was created by a MIND.
John used WORD instead of MIND because in Jewish traditions, it was stated:
What we see now came into existence with the words: "LET THERE BE LIGHT."
Begind the words: "LET THERE BE LIGHT" is the MIND.
In the beginning was the MIND, and the MIND was with God and the MIND was God.
Yes Longchen,Originally posted by longchen:Observer(me) and the being observed (other) is a hypnotic thought... creating the appearance of 'me and other'..
This is an interesting topic and since it is allowed to discuss more about God in a Buddhism forum, I would like to talk a little more about the experience of 'AMness" in all things.Originally posted by longchen:Emmm... am not so sure about describing it as a person. The function of existence is impersonal and without self.
Uncreated and no beginning, yes. No beginning because Nowness has no past and no future. Past and future are our memory...manifested realm. But, i think, we may not be able to categorise them as manifested or uncreated. Because the categorisation/labeling itself is a thought manifestation.
I see.. thanks for sharingOriginally posted by Thusness:This is an interesting topic and since it is allowed to discuss more about God in a Buddhism forum, I would like to talk a little more about the experience of 'AMness" in all things.
Like a river flowing into the ocean, the self dissolves into nothingness. When a practitioner becomes thoroughly clear about the illusionary nature of the individuality, subject-object division does not take place. A person experiencing “AMness” will find “AMness in everything”. What is it like?
Being free individuality -- coming and going, life and death, all phenomenon merely pop in and out from the background of the AMness. The AMness is not experienced as an ‘entity’ residing anywhere, neither within nor without; rather it is experienced as the ground reality for all phenomenon to take place. Even the moment of subsiding (death), the yogi is thoroughly authenticated with that reality; experiencing the ‘Real’ as clear as it can be. We cannot lose that AMness; rather all things can only dissolve and re-emerges from it. The AMness has not moved, there is no coming and going. This "AMness" is “God”.
With this kind of attitute, how you expect to progress?Originally posted by neutral_onliner:u don 'anyhow anyhow' leh![]()