Buddhism and Hegel

[annem]

rossum If the Bible were written by an unchanging God, then it would read something like:

On the first day God said, "Let there be light," and on the second day God said, "Let there be light,"

Come, come, God doesn’t exist in time.

God bless, Annem

 

[rossum]

Come, come, God doesn’t exist in time.

Of course He does, since He acts inside time. At the time of Abraham the Red Sea was not parted. At the time of Moses the Red Sea was parted. At the time of Jesus the Red Sea was not parted. Did God do that or did some other entity?

Did Jesus exist in time? Is Jesus God? Jesus certainly existed inside time.

Your God acts inside time, and so He changes. Is He parting the Red Sea right now? Is He walking round Israel preaching right now? Your God changes.

rossum

 

[annem]

ROSSUM Did Jesus exist in time? Is Jesus God? Jesus certainly existed inside time. Your God acts inside time, and so He changes.

Hi. However, seriously, you’ve never heard this before? Yes, Moses existed in time. For a while, Jesus Christ, God himself, existed in our world and therefore experienced time.

But God himself does not exist in time. Period.

And here’s the really bad news…our minds are too puny to understand this. But it’s the truth nevertheless,

God bless Annem

 

[thinkandmull]

I think that rossum is saying that if God is Self-Existent, and one with His intellect, then his contingent actions would change His nature

 

[annem]

thinkandmull I think that rossum is saying that if God is Self-Existent, and one with His intellect, then his contingent actions would change His nature

God exists outside time. He is Yahweh “I AM” and as St. Paul says “God…before time began” (1 Cor).

God bless Annem

 

[thinkandmull]

He still did not have to try necessity create or become incarnate. So the knowledge of that contingent decision would change His nature if His nature is His essence. I think that is what rossum was trying to say

 

[thinkandmull]

My take is that the only way to deflect this argument is to say that contingent things and even God’s contingent acts and His knowledge of them are as if nothing to His necessity, so even the Incarnation doesn’t change His knowledge/essence

 

[rossum]

I think that rossum is saying that if God is Self-Existent, and one with His intellect, then his contingent actions would change His nature

Correct. Does God act consciously or unconsciously? If He acts consciously, then as His actions change (which they do) then His consciousness also changes.

If He acts unconsciously, then His consciousness does not change, but He is a very strange kind of God, who does not seem to match the standard Christian God.

rossum

 

[rossum]

Hi. However, seriously, you’ve never heard this before? Yes, Moses existed in time. For a while, Jesus Christ, God himself, existed in our world and therefore experienced time.

But God himself does not exist in time. Period.

Then Jesus is not God. Period. I do not think that is standard Christian theology.

Is Jesus God: yes or no?

Did Jesus exist in time: yes or no?

rossum

 

[annem]

rossum Did Jesus exist in time: yes or no?

God has no limits and does not exist in time. Yet God always knew the second person of the trinity would come to earth and die for us. God is not changed because he always knew and always was Christ…and yes, he can do this because because God is not bound by time. God is not a white haired old man, he is not merely greater than you or me or the total of humanity.

The problem that you have, rossum, is that you believe in Buddhism, which does not revel in logic, and regards intellectual debate as pointless. This is the opposite of Catholicism.

While for millennia after millennia Buddhism has had no explanation for who or what or how reincarnation works, the Catholic church argued our minds were given to us so we could use them to reason our way to God.

God bless you and flood you with light and miracles, Annem

 

[rossum]

God has no limits and does not exist in time.

If God has no limits then time does not limit Him and He can exist both inside and outside time. If God is constrained to exist outside time, then He does have limits. Your statement here is inconsistent.

God is not changed

Jesus changed. Again, is Jesus God or not?

You seem to want to apply a grab-bag of inconsistent properties to your God. Why do you expect me to accept such a logically incoherent deity?

You need to think through much more carefully exactly what properties your God does, and does not, have. An unchanging God cannot act. If your God acts then your God changes, from “I will act” to “I am acting” to “I have acted”.

The problem that you have, rossum, is that you believe in Buddhism, which does not revel in logic, and regards intellectual debate as pointless. This is the opposite of Catholicism.

You lack knowledge of Buddhism. Try reading some Nagarjuna if you want intellectual debate. What I am giving you here are some of Nargajuna’s initial arguments on the nature of change, action and time.

Nagarjuna’s philosophy represents something of a watershed not only in the history of Indian philosophy but in the history of philosophy as a whole, as it calls into questions certain philosophical assumptions so easily resorted to in our attempt to understand the world. Among these assumptions are the existence of stable substances, the linear and one-directional movement of causation, the atomic individuality of persons, the belief in a fixed identity or selfhood, and the strict separations between good and bad conduct and the blessed and fettered life. All such assumptions are called into fundamental question by Nagarjuna’s unique perspective which is grounded in the insight of emptiness (sunyata), a concept which does not mean “non-existence” or “nihility” (abhava), but rather the lack of autonomous existence (nihsvabhava). Denial of autonomy according to Nagarjuna does not leave us with a sense of metaphysical or existential privation, a loss of some hoped-for independence and freedom, but instead offers us a sense of liberation through demonstrating the interconnectedness of all things, including human beings and the manner in which human life unfolds in the natural and social worlds.

– IEP: Nagarjuna

While for millennia after millennia Buddhism has had no explanation for who or what or how reincarnation works

Merely because you have not read the relevant Buddhist texts, does not mean that those texts do not exist. Start by studying the five skandhas with reference to which of the five transition to the next life and which do not.

rossum

 

[Thomas_White]

There is Being and there is Nothingness, and they are the same. This is so in Hegel’s dialectics and in Buddhism. I would have to get back to explain this and provide a reference. But both Being and Nothing are ‘no-thing’, the absence of things, of any-thing, and each flows into the other as the resolution and end of a dialectic.

In Buddism, this dialectic continues, often perceived as suffering, until it is resolved. This requires any number of lifetimes, and these are not necessarily human ones. Nirvana entails the overcoming of all dualities of thought.

True and false are concepts and a duality. This is not so different in any spirituality I have studied, though it can be sort of esoteric and hard to discern.

 

[annem]

rossum IYou need to think through much more carefully exactly what properties your God does, and does not, have. An unchanging God cannot act. If your God acts then your God changes, from “I will act” to “I am acting” to “I have acted”.

Not if he existed in time, but God does not exist in time. Nor can time limit God, since he is eternally present. And he can act and do as he wants and yet, of course, always knows what he will do. God is utterly removed from cause and effect. He is not just a greater version of a man.

This is really not that difficult. What is incredible is to imagine the God of who knows how many kinds of universes, of who knows what unfathomable depths, loves you and me.

You lack knowledge of Buddhism. Try reading some Nagarjuna if you want intellectual debate. W

Although I haven’t read anything about the Buddhist sect that encourages intellectualism, here is Thich Hanh in “Being Place”: “In Buddhism, knowledge is regarded as an obstacle to understanding, like a block of ice that obstructs water from flowing”. Here is another quote from yet another book I have by Hanh: “Buddhists…do not engage in excessive intellectual or analytical scrutiny”.

the lack of autonomous existence… offers us a sense of liberation through demonstrating the interconnectedness .

This is your idea of intellectual debate, yet one more morbid Buddhist statement on the joys of dying and finally being interconnected with worms!!! Yikes, rossum. Whoever the person was who penned those jolly lines, get them some antidepressants.

no explanation for reincarnation …Merely because you have not read the relevant Buddhist texts,

But apparently you have. So perhaps you can offer us all a convincing explanation for who or what decides who gets to be a worm and who gets to be a monk.

 

[rossum]

Nor can time limit God, since he is eternally present.

Then He is eternally and unchangingly parting the Red Sea for Moses. How do you explain the fact that Red Sea is not currently parted? An unchanging God will never be able to stop parting the Red Sea because to stop doing something is to change. Show me your unchanging God parting the Red Sea today.

And he can act and do as he wants

No He cannot, not if He does not change:

“Dear Lord, please cure my cancer.”

“I’m sorry Dave, I can’t do that. I didn’t cure your cancer yesterday, so if I cured it today that would be a change, and I am unchanging.”

An action involves change, like parting a sea or curing a cancer. If God does not change then God cannot act. Change is difference over time; if God is not within time then God cannot make any difference within time.

rossum

 

[You]

There is Being and there is Nothingness, and they are the same. This is so in Hegel’s dialectics and in Buddhism. I would have to get back to explain this and provide a reference. But both Being and Nothing are ‘no-thing’, the absence of things, of any-thing, and each flows into the other as the resolution and end of a dialectic.

In Buddism, this dialectic continues, often perceived as suffering, until it is resolved. This requires any number of lifetimes, and these are not necessarily human ones. Nirvana entails the overcoming of all dualities of thought.

True and false are concepts and a duality. This is not so different in any spirituality I have studied, though it can be sort of esoteric and hard to discern.

Is Buddhism about reincarnation?
What is the purpose of reincarnation if it is?

 

[rossum]

Is Buddhism about reincarnation?

Buddhism is about avoiding reincarnation. Every time you are born, you will die, with the added possibility of seeing your parents die (again), disease and old age as well.

[The Buddha said:] “What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – or the water in the four great oceans?”

“As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – not the water in the four great oceans.”

"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.

"This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – not the water in the four great oceans.

– Assu sutta, Samyutta Nikaya 15.3

What is the purpose of reincarnation if it is?

Reincarnation has no purpose. It is an effect which arises from previous causes. If you attained nirvana in your previous life then you are not reborn. If you failed to attain nirvana in your previous life then you come back for another go round.

rossum

 

[You]

Buddhism is about avoiding reincarnation. Every time you are born, you will die, with the added possibility of seeing your parents die (again), disease and old age as well.

[The Buddha said:] “What do you think, monks: Which is greater, the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – or the water in the four great oceans?”

“As we understand the Dhamma taught to us by the Blessed One, this is the greater: the tears we have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – not the water in the four great oceans.”

"Excellent, monks. Excellent. It is excellent that you thus understand the Dhamma taught by me.

"This is the greater: the tears you have shed while transmigrating and wandering this long, long time – crying and weeping from being joined with what is displeasing, being separated from what is pleasing – not the water in the four great oceans.

– Assu sutta, Samyutta Nikaya 15.3

Reincarnation has no purpose. It is an effect which arises from previous causes. If you attained nirvana in your previous life then you are not reborn. If you failed to attain nirvana in your previous life then you come back for another go round.

rossum

Is anything preserved in you from your previous incarnation?

 

[rossum]

Is anything preserved in you from your previous incarnation?

Buddhism analyses a human into five parts (skandhas): form, feelings, perceptions, formation and consciousness. Only a part of the formations skandha passes from one life to the next. Among other things it carries your accumulated karma to date.

Note that none of the five is a soul and none of the five is unchanging.

rossum

 

[You]

Buddhism analyses a human into five parts (skandhas): form, feelings, perceptions, formation and consciousness. Only a part of the formations skandha passes from one life to the next. Among other things it carries your accumulated karma to date.

Note that none of the five is a soul and none of the five is unchanging.

rossum

What is karma?
Are you conscious of its presence from a past incarnation?
Can you draw knowledge from a past incarnation to assist you?

 

[thinkandmull]

God has no limits and does not exist in time. Yet God always knew the second person of the trinity would come to earth and die for us. God is not changed because he always knew and always was Christ…and yes, he can do this because because God is not bound by time. God is not a white haired old man, he is not merely greater than you or me or the total of humanity.

The problem that you have, rossum, is that you believe in Buddhism, which does not revel in logic, and regards intellectual debate as pointless. This is the opposite of Catholicism.

While for millennia after millennia Buddhism has had no explanation for who or what or how reincarnation works, the Catholic church argued our minds were given to us so we could use them to reason our way to God.

God bless you and flood you with light and miracles, Annem

God in eternity knows His contingent decision to become Incarnate, but it is as if nothing, just nothing, to Him so the extra knowledge does not change His intellect which is Him