Theism, Atheism, Painting and God

[RichardH]

Thank you for these responses. Yes Kyonin... the Greek word is Theos. But I would suggest the opposite, that it is superficially looked into, and seldom looked into experientially, directly.

Also, regarding the assertion someone made that this is not the right place to discuss this... nonsense, The Buddha discussed such matters exhaustively, and had no aversion to the sacred. His use , for instance, of "Divine Abodes" (Brahma Viharas) to describe attributes universally regarded as Divine in other contemplative traditions, is typical. This Idea of The Highest value of the Heart, as Divine , is a powerful practice.

For years I was leading Sunday public practice for a Theravadin Sangha, and it was amazing how many people showed up with aversions to "religion".... They could hear Buddhist teachings on The Deathless, The Unconditioned , Absolute, True Self, all the while saying Buddhism was ok because it didn't have the "G" word. Odd that. Certainly the devotional side of Buddhist practice made people squirrely.

Anyway, it is ironic that this topic is being pushed by me, because I have always been wary of "positive" Zen terms like "True Self" and talk of No Birth and No Death, because they might encouraged attachment to subtle ideation and absolutism. I felt that talking about "cessation of Dukkha" was more skillful and closer to the original way of the Buddha. So something has changed big time for me. Something gave way. It's good.

Thanks again

Gassho
Daizan

[Jundo]

Sometimes I call All Reality as Stanley.

Gassho, J

[Byokan]

I'm guessing sometimes Stanley refers to All Reality as Jundo

Gassho
Lisa

[jeff_u]

Sometimes I call All Reality as Stanley.

I think there is a validity to everyone's perspectives--no matter how crazy or ill-informed they may seem from our point of view. From each of our relative positions in the world Stanley emerges. We are all expressions of the Stanley, the One-And-Only Stanley. As such, our thoughts, language, writings, creations, are also inseparable expressions of Stanley. Thus in a very real way we all express ourselves as Stanley. Even our so-called "false" positions and fantasies are part of this guy. That idea you have of a pink unicorn is Stanley-ish. Claiming yourself to be atheist, Christian, Buddhist, agnostic, or a reincarnation of Napoleon all equally ring of Stanley. Each of us as a point-of-view within Stanley sees the world Stanley-i-fied given our position, there is no way to be Not Be Stanley.

Gassho,
-Jeff

[Mp]

Oh Stanley! =)

Gassho
Shingen

[Myosha]

Hello,

As a recovering Catholic I believe we non-believers should practice al fresco; God willing.


Gassho,
Myosha

[RichardH]

Hello,

As a recovering Catholic I believe we non-believers should practice al fresco; God willing.


Gassho,
Myosha

As a recovering Anglican, Jewish, Theosophist, Advaitist, Atheist, Theist , magic mushroom taster, I couldn't agree more.

Gassho
Dazian

[Hans]

Hello,

"al fresco" is a great way of putting it

Gassho,

Hans Chudo Mongen

[Diarmuid1]

from Daitetsu:
I have to disagree here.
According to that logic, non-skiing would be sports, non-smoking an addiction, and abstinence a sex position.
According to that logic, if I said I believe in pink unicorns, that would make you automatically a believer as well (i.e. someone believing there are no pink unicorns).
People could claim all sorts of weird things and say that you are equally just believing (namely the opposite).
Atheism is a lack of belief though.
So it makes more sense to say that Atheism is a non-belief.

Is non-skiing the same as non-skiing-ism?
Is non-smoking the same as non-smoking-ism?

Although you say that you are using the same logic, I think you may be mistaken?

If I define myself as an apinkunicornist, you would be right to label me as a believer in the non-existence of pink unicorns. Atheism is the sure-fire belief that there is no god. Do you still think otherwise?

[delphizealot]

I'm personally inclined to disbelieve in fire-breathing purple monkeys, but perhaps then I'm liable to get burned. The funny thing about belief and disbelief is the process of formation that occurs in either case when the narrative of (dis)believing is examined. Various conceptions arise for what I believe or disbelieve and these conceptions come armed with the same barbs as all the myriad conditioned things. This process is natural and creative, though every act of creation comes preloaded with the seeds of its own dissolution/disillusion. If even God cannot survive Creation, how can I?

This is how it seems to me. There is refuge in the uncreated, encompassing the transient strokes of every picture ever painted. The tragedy (and the joy) of the artist is there there is actually nothing whatsoever to create.

[Daitetsu]

If I define myself as an apinkunicornist, you would be right to label me as a believer in the non-existence of pink unicorns.

No, I wouldn't, that would be quite absurd.
If I say there is a pink unicorn, then I have the burden of proof. Nobody has to justify their non-belief in a pink unicorn.
Likewise when somebody claims there is God then the burden of proof is with them. Calling the other party who simply does not believe in unverified claims a believer, is illogical.

Atheism is the sure-fire belief that there is no god. Do you still think otherwise?

You obviously define Atheism differently than most Atheists do.
Most Atheists don't say "There is no God, period." (there are some, of course, but they are a minority), but more like "I have no reason to believe in a God."
Here an interesting Wikipedia link which might help you understand it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

Quote:
the position "I do not believe that X is true" is different from the explicit denial "I believe that X is false".

Most Atheists tend to the first statement. Your reasoning would be correct if it were the latter.

Anyway, we've had all this already in the other thread, it is a bit cumbersome to repeat everything again...

Cheers,

Daitetsu

[Ansan]

Before I sit in Zazen, I usually read from a book on Buddhism, chosen from Jundo's suggested reading list. Today, I was hit by a thunderbolt as I continued reading Brad Warner's book "Sit Down & Shut Up" and began the chapter on God. In it, he says "...every decent Zen teacher I have ever encountered does believe in God." p 186. I finished the chapter and had more questions than answers.

Throughout my long life, I have wallowed through the usual experiences of believing in a Supreme Being. I was born as a Catholic and trained in its dogmas throughout my schooling. I was acclimated to my isolated religiosity but in my years at a University, my discovery of other religions made me realize and appreciate the validity of all other belief systems in some forms. Even those with multiple deities. Eventually, I lost faith in a god but it stimulated my gravitation toward myths and folk tales. This led then to the realm of fantasy and creativity of thought. I discovered Joseph Campbell, Clarissa Pinkola Estes and other Jungian scholars. Even though my belief in a god had diminished and disappeared throughout the years, I refused the word "atheist" because it connotes militancy. When asked for a religious preference, I usually answered "non-theist." I could have said "none" but that accounts for nothing because there is "something" that I need to clarify.

The word "decent" in Brad's comment is the one that stunned me, because it insinuates those who do not believe in God are indecent. I guess my first thought was "does Zen 'require' a belief in God?" As I sat in turmoil, I realized that in all my readings on Zen (and I admit I am not very educated in that regard) that I had never encountered that prerequisite. I turned to TreeLeaf and found this thread. It addresses my concerns and opens many avenues of thought and even answers. Thank you for such intelligence and introspection.

Is there an available previous thread as indicated by some of the comments? Is anybody familiar with the Jataka Tales?

Gassho,
Ansan

SatToday

[Jundo]

Before I sit in Zazen, I usually read from a book on Buddhism, chosen from Jundo's suggested reading list. Today, I was hit by a thunderbolt as I continued reading Brad Warner's book "Sit Down & Shut Up" and began the chapter on God. In it, he says "...every decent Zen teacher I have ever encountered does believe in God." p 186. I finished the chapter and had more questions than answers.

Yes, well, in a later book Bro. Brad goes on to define (can one define?) "God" so broadly, that it would be hard for anyone not to believe in God in some way ... even many solid athiests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5aXg-BOCIvo

I like this one just because of the space bunny ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ml8Z-M2CtPI

Sometimes Brad says stuff without it really being so deep and well expressed, and without much real familiarity with Buddhist/Zen history.

Gassho, J

SatToday

[Ansan]

Yes, well, in a later book Bro. Brad goes on to define (can one define?) "God" so broadly, that it would be hard for anyone not to believe in God in some way ... even many solid athiests.

Sometimes Brad says stuff without it really being so deep and well expressed, and without much real familiarity with Buddhist/Zen history.

Gassho, J

SatToday

Thank you, Jundo. I watched the videos (Has Brad met Marvin the Martian??) and then went on to read the next chapter "It! The Thing from Beyond the Realm of Mind". It is similar to his discussion on the video. Why is "It" called "God" a word that has a gender and carries a lot of baggage, such as prolific smoting. The word "It" seems more encompassing and non-definable. Brad quotes Ungo Doyo (Yunju Dauying?) from Shobogenzo: "If you want to attain to the matter which is it, you must be a person who is it. Already being a person who is it, why worry about the matter which it is?" I have much to learn. My one and only contention is Brad's usage of the phrase "every decent Zen teacher...does believe in God." I am not a Zen teacher but am I indecent if I don't believe, not saying that I don't or even do, and may not even know? The word "indecent" implies impropriety and I can't accept that. But then again, I am not a Zen teacher. So there. I am not going to worry about it. Not withstanding that picky comment, I am enjoying and learning a great deal from Brad and am grateful for his teachings.

Gassho
Ansan

SatToday