Debunking a Creator

[Simple_Jack]

If i was to have a go at debunking your statement, I'd simply say.

 

*Its wrong*.

 

Now you try and debunk my statement.

 

Regardless of what you say, I'll always have a counter-statement.

 

and the thread will go on forever since you cant really prove anything with just words posted on a thread.

 

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

 

Blessings of love and understanding. :wub: :wub: :wub:

 

You'd probably end up becoming a "Direct Path Advaita" devotee.

[RongzomFan]

You'd probably end up becoming a "Direct Path Advaita" devotee.

 

Atleast call it Nondirect Path.

 

It has no direct introduction.

[RongzomFan]

Hamsters Practice......

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/17629-what-made-you-laugh-todaytonight/?p=502760

 

 

My hamster had a boner. I don't think he was conserving semen.

[RongzomFan]

To understand everything is illusion, you only need Madhyamaka reasoning. Logic.

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6185&sid=66bfdf5114f9a42b5804d855d6dac9e4&start=220#p74244

 

First, if an appearance is an existent, can it arise from another existent? Or does it arise from a non-existent? As for the first, an existent does not arise from another existent because the arising of something existent is a contradiction in terms; and the arising of an existent from a non-existent is impossible. To address this, Nāḡrjuna writes:

An existent does not arise from an existent;
an existent does not arise from a non-existent;
a non-existent does arise from an existent;
a non-existent does not arise from a non-existent —
where then can there be an instance of arising?

If the arising of existents is not established, the arising of appearances is not established. If arising is not established, remaining is not established, and likewise, perishing is not established. If the three, arising, remaining and perishing, are not established, then there is no reason to accept the charge of annihilationism since I never suggested that there was an existent entity that could perish.

All we are left with is empty appearances: they are not real because no existence, etc., can be ascertained regarding them; they are not unreal since they appear. All we can say about them is that they arise in dependence. - Loppon Namdrol

[RongzomFan]

Link to the verses above:

 

Mulamadhyamakakarika of Nagarjuna Chapter 21, verses 12-13

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=38WJRwP3nLgC&pg=PA297&dq=Mulamadhyamakakarika+of+Nagarjuna+An+existent+does+not+arise+from+an+existent;+neither+does+an+existent+arise+from+a+non-existent.&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fnGiUtuWMPPMsQSzkIDwCA&ved=0CDgQuwUwAQ#v=onepage&q=Mulamadhyamakakarika%20of%20Nagarjuna%20An%20existent%20does%20not%20arise%20from%20an%20existent%3B%20neither%20does%20an%20existent%20arise%20from%20a%20non-existent.&f=false

Edited December 7, 2013 by RongzomFan

[Isimsiz Biri]

 

 

You are right. I believe Allah is a mundane ghost of some kind.

I know you are a server of Mara

[Helixer]

Up above so below, everything is a fractal, small and infinitely large in time and space. So in a sense there is a God as we are ourselves Gods over the microcosm of our body and similarly it's a chicken-egg-story(who created the parents?)or a circle instead of a straight line with beginning and end points. God's consciousness pervades the Universe like our consciousness pervades our body. Life and death is analogous to wake and sleep again a fractal spanning a life instead of a day. To refreshen the soul instead of the body

[adept]

It's obvious the way that this thread has run that anyone who disagrees with Buddhism is basically told they are inferior. A pack mentality has developed where Buddhists gang up and deride posters.

[gatito]

It's obvious the way that this thread has run that anyone who disagrees with Buddhism is basically told they are inferior. A pack mentality has developed where Buddhists gang up and deride posters.

 

Yes, although I think that having said that there's a a huge difference between those who label themselves as Buddhists and de facto Buddhists - who don't behave like that.

[gatito]

And here's de facto Buddhism - originally posted by a de facto Buddhist (C.T.): -

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/23512-bells-of-mindfulness/?hl=%2Bbells+%2Bmindfulness

(://thetaobums.com/topic/23512-bells-of-mindfulness/?hl=%2Bbells+%2Bmindfulness)

[rex]

No easy answers here. Could it be said that Buddhism denies the concept of God but not the nature of God? What's the difference in the Heart Sutra's 'beyond thoughts, beyond words, beyond form .. ' and a 'Creator who exists beyond the capacity of religious framework or human comprehension' (1)

 

Edit: tpyos & more tyops

Edited December 7, 2013 by rex

[johndoe2012]

There is a weakness around "us vs them" on this forum which is I guess is why there is a higher number of these conflicts here than on other "spiritual" forums.

[adept]

No easy answers here.Could it be said that Buddhism denies the concept of God but not the nature of God? What's the difference in the Heat Sutra's 'beyond thoughts, beyond words, beyond form .. ' and a 'Creator who exists beyond the capacity of religious framework or human comprehension' (1)

 

Edit: tpyos

Nice article about magic there rex. That could well be the valid path I'm looking for. Thanks for sharing.

[ralis]

The Kabbalists use the term Ein-sof which means totality which is unexplainable. Kabbalists such as Abraham Abulafia et al. Not New Age types.

Edited December 7, 2013 by ralis

[Simple_Jack]

It's obvious the way that this thread has run that anyone who disagrees with Buddhism is basically told they are inferior. A pack mentality has developed where Buddhists gang up and deride posters.

 

I wasn't specifically mentioning Buddhism when I indicated that Dharmic religions consider it unnecessary to posit a creator god in order to understand the nature of afflictions.

 

There is a weakness around "us vs them" on this forum which is I guess is why there is a higher number of these conflicts here than on other "spiritual" forums.

 

The Vedas and Upanishads are shruti i.e. uncreated and eternal.

[Simple_Jack]

Yes, although I think that having said that there's a a huge difference between those who label themselves as Buddhists and de facto Buddhists - who don't behave like that.

 

Yes, although I think that having said that there's a a huge difference between those who label themselves as Vedantins and de facto Vedantins - who aren't reliant on double standards.

[RongzomFan]

Yes, although I think that having said that there's a a huge difference between those who label themselves as Buddhists and de facto Buddhists - who don't behave like that.

 

LMAO, you are the guy who promotes this thing called Direct Path, really Nondirect Path.

[gatito]

LMAO, you are the guy who promotes this thing called Direct Path, really Nondirect Path.

 

and my wife (of 15 years) is a de facto Buddhist

[RongzomFan]

and my wife (of 15 years) is a de facto Buddhist

 

I'm tired of your made up definitions like "Direct Path" an "defacto Buddhist".

[gatito]

and my wife (of 15 years) is a de facto Buddhist

 

.......as am I.

[Simple_Jack]

The Kabbalists use the term Ein-sof which means totality which is unexplainable. Kabbalists such as Abraham Abulafia et al. Not New Age types.

 

What I see here are statements in regards to beings from divine realms commanding adherence to absolute rules for teaching/transmission. Can that be proven, or is the belief in such, blind faith? Can a rational discourse such as what Kabbalists insist on prove the existence of a divine realm that Kabbalists defer to without question? Are the so called divine realms pure myth?

 

These are reasonable questions.

[ralis]

How long will this thread take to resolve? Never, as long as Buddhists state their absolutist fundamental ideology based on circular reasoning. That is one reason why I left the Buddhist trip.

[RongzomFan]

.......as am I.

 

I believe in Allah the demiurge. I am Muslim.

[RongzomFan]

How long will this thread take to resolve? Never, as long as Buddhists state their absolutist fundamental ideology based on circular reasoning. That is one reason why I left the Buddhist trip.

 

And that ideology is what?

[gatito]

I love practicing Buddhists