The Buddhist Attitude to God
by Dr V. A. Gunasekara
Statement made to a
Multi-religious Seminar
First Published: February 1993
Second Edition: April 1997
CONTENTS
1. Introduction
2. Buddhism as a Non-Theistic religion
3. The Notion of God
4. The Buddhist View of God
5. The God-Concept and Buddhism
6. The Persistence of the God-Idea
1. Introduction
The standpoint adopted here is primarily that of Theravâda Buddhism. But
most of what is said will be applicable to most other Buddhist traditions. The
Theravâda tradition, also called the Southern school of Buddhism, is based
on texts maintained in the Pali language which are the oldest of the existing
Canons of Buddhism and reputed to be the closest to the teaching of the Buddha
himself.
There is no place for God in the Mahayana traditions of Buddhism as well, and
indeed some of the early Indian Mahayana philosophers have denounced god-worship
in terms which are even stronger than those expressed in the Theravada literature.
Some later Mahayana schools which flourished outside India ascribed some degree
of divinity to a transcendent Buddha, considering living Buddhas to a be a manifestation
of this âdhi-buddha. But even here it cannot be said that the Buddha was
converted into a Divinity comparable to the God of the monotheistic religions.
2. Buddhism as a Non-Theistic Religion
Buddhism is unique amongst the religions of the world because it does not have
any place for God in its soteriology. Indeed most Asian religions (with the
possible exception of some extremely devotional forms of Hinduism) are essentially
non-theistic, in that God does not occupy the central place that is accorded
to him in monotheistic religious traditions. But Buddhism goes beyond most of
these other religions in that it is positively anti-theistic because the very
notion of God conflicts with some principles which are fundamental to the Buddhist
view of the world and the role of humans in it (see section 5 below).
However Buddhism is not atheistic in the sense that modern secularism, rationalism,
humanism, etc. could be regarded to be atheistic (although it has much in common
with them). Buddhism is not concerned primarily with refuting the notion of
God (as some atheistic writers have done). It is principally concerned with
developing a method of escape from the worldly ills. This involves undertaking
a method of mental discipline and a code of conduct which is sufficient to satisfy
the most demanding of spiritual requirements. Indeed only very little of the
Buddha's voluminous discourses deal directly with the question of God. He was
more interested in expounding a way to personal salvation, and to improve the
weal of mankind both in this world and in the worlds to come. It is this task
that informs most of the discourses of the Buddha which later came to be compiled
into the various Canons of Buddhism.
The Buddha did not take an ambiguous or agnostic position on the question of
God as he is sometimes represented as having taken by theistically inclined
writers. The Buddha has stated his position on God in clear and unequivocal
terms.
3. The Notion of God
It is first of all necessary to establish what is meant by the term "God".
This term is used to designate a Supreme Being endowed with the qualities of
omnipotence and omniscience, who is the creator of the universe with all its
contents, and the chief law-giver for humans. God is generally considered as
being concerned with the welfare of his human creatures, and the ultimate salvation
of those who follow his dictates. God is therefore a person of some kind, and
the question whether such an entity exists or not is fundamental to all theistic
systems.
In contrast to this notion of a personal God some modern theologians have interpreted
the term "God" as representing some kind of abstract principle of
good (or "ground of being"). This view was first developed in the
ancient Indian Upanishads where God is equated with an abstract principle (Brahman).
The ancient Indian philosophers could entertain such a view because they also
had a theory of karma which really does away with the need for a personal God.
Buddhists too have a theory of karma, which is different from that of the Hindus,
and which even more unequivocally dispenses with the need for a Deity. The use
of the term "God' to denote an abstract reality by monotheistic theologians
who have no theory of karma is difficult to justify; one suspects that this
is merely a device to explain away the contradictions that arise from the notion
of a personal God. In fact the actual practice of theistic religion proceeds
as if God is a real person of some kind or other.
Just as Buddhism rejects the notion of a Supreme God it also rejects the notion
of an abstract God-principle operating in the universe. The notion of Brahman
(in the neuter) is not discussed at all in the Buddhist texts, and even in India
it may well be a post-Buddhist development resulting from the attempt to reconcile
the belief in God(s) with the powerful critique of the Buddha. It is therefore
the attitude of Buddhism to the notion of a supreme personal God animating the
Universe that we must consider.
Buddhism speaks of the existence of category of beings called devas. This term
is generally translated as "gods" (with a simple `g' and in the plural).
The term deva literally means a shining or radiant being, and describes their
physical appearance rather than their supernatural powers (as the translation
"gods" seems to imply). To prevent confusion with the notion of a
supreme personal God we shall refer to these beings of Buddhist cosmology as
devas. Many other religions also postulate the existence of non-human beings
who are referred to as `gods' or `angels' if they are considered to be in a
better position than humans (with respect to their material conditions of existence).
Buddhist cosmology recognises 32 planes of existence some of the higher planes
being either states of meditative abstraction or actual domains for the devas.
Generally we have direct experience of only two of these 32 planes (those of
humans and animals). Planes of existence below these two realms are also said
to exist and are characterised by greater degrees of suffering and discomfort.
The actual physical location of these planes need not concern us here because
the dimensions of the Buddhist universe are even greater than those envisaged
by modern astronomy and will contain enough places to accommodate all these
planes of existence.
We can easily dispose of the devas in the context of the Buddhist attitude to
God because the devas are essentially irrelevant to the human situation. Beings
are born in the deva-worlds because of particular karmic factors they have accumulated,
and after these karmic factors are exhausted they could revert to any of the
other planes of existence depending on their unexpended karma. The devas are
not particularly endowed with special powers to influence others, and far from
saving anyone else they themselves are not "saved". Salvation in Buddhism
comes only from full enlightenment, which could be best accomplished from the
human plane of existence.
The Vedic and Brahmanical religion of the Buddha's day postulated a large number
of gods, many of them personifications of natural forces. However Brahmanical
theology had advanced to the point that one of these gods was considered to
be superior to all others, and was even considered to be the creator-god (Ishvara).
This supreme god could then be considered as the equivalent to the single God
of the monotheistic religions which emerged in the Middle East.
Different names have been given to the supreme god in the Brahmanical and later
Hindu literature, but in Buddhist texts the supreme god is referred to as Mahâ-Brahmâ
(or simply Brahmâ) who was the chief of a class of gods called the Brahmâs.
Brahmâ of the Buddhist texts may be considered to be the equivalent of
the God of the three monotheistic religions that was to emerge in the middle
east. The first of these was Judaism which promoted one its gods Yahweh as the
one God sometime about the 6th century BCE. Next Christianity adopted the same
god under the name of Jehovah who is represented as the "Father" of
Jesus. Finally Islam adopted the name of Allah for their only God. To get the
Buddha's views on God we must therefore consider his views on Brahmâ.
One popular misconception of Buddhism must be dismissed at this point. This
is view that the Buddha is some kind of God figure. In the Theravada tradition
the Buddha is regarded as a supremely enlightened human teacher who has come
to his last birth in samsâra (the Buddhist cycle of existence). Even Mahayana
traditions which tend to think in terms of transcendental Buddhas do not directly
make a claim for Buddha as God. Thus the Buddha cannot be considered as playing
a God-like role in Buddhism.
4. The Buddhist View of God
In the Buddhist texts Mahâ Brahmâ is represented as claiming the
following attributes for himself:
"I am Brahmâ, the Great Brahmâ, the Supreme One, the Mighty,
the All-seeing, the Ruler, the Lord of all, the Maker, the Creator, the Chief
of all appointing to each his place, the Ancient of days, the Father of all
that is and will be." (Dîgha Nikâya, II, 263).
The Buddha dismisses all these claims of Mahâ Brahmâ as being due
to his own delusions brought about by ignorance. He argues that Mahâ-Brahmâ
is simply another deva, perhaps with greater karmic force than the other gods,
but nonetheless a deva and therefore unenlightened and subject to the samsâric
process as determined by his karma. In such suttas as the Brahmajâla sutta
and the Agga¤¤a Sutta the Buddha refutes the claims of Maha Brahmâ
and shows him to be subject to karmic law (i.e. cosmic law). Even though long-lived
Mahâ Brahmâ will be eliminated in each cycle of inevitable world
dissolution and re-evolution. In the Khevadda Sutta Mahâ Brahmâ
is forced to admit to an inquiring monk that he is unable to answer a question
that is posed to him, and advises the monk to consult the Buddha. This clearly
shows the Brahmâ acknowledges the superiority of the Buddha.
The Buddhist view is that gods may lead more comfortable lives and be addicted
to all the sense pleasures, but in terms of wisdom might be inferior to humans.
They are even represented as coming to receive instruction from monks and even
lay persons. Later on with the Hindu revival and proliferation of God-cults
the Buddhists were increasingly vocal against the pretensions of God and his
retinue of lesser gods. Nâgarjunâ the Indian Buddhist philosopher
of the 2nd century CE expressed a commonly shared Buddhist view when he wrote:
The gods are all eternal scoundrels
Incapable of dissolving the suffering of impermanence.
Those who serve them and venerate them
May even in this world sink into a sea of sorrow.
We know the gods are false and have no concrete being;
Therefore the wise man believes them not
The fate of the world depends on causes and conditions
Therefore the wise man many not rely on gods.
Mahâpajâpâramitâshâstra [Lamotte trans. I,
p.141]
In the West a number of "arguments" have been adduced to prove or
disprove the existence of God. Some of these were anticipated by the Buddha.
One of the most popular is the "first cause" argument according to
which everything must have a cause, and God is considered the first cause of
the Universe. The Buddhist theory of causation says that every thing must have
preconditions for its existence, and this law must also extend to "God"
should such an entity exist. But while the "first cause" claims that
God creates everything, it exempts God from the ambit of this law. However if
exemptions are made with respect to God such exemptions could be made with respect
to other things also hereby contradicting the principle of the first cause.
But the argument which the Buddha most frequently uses is what is now called
the "argument from evil" which in the Buddhist sense could be stated
as the argument from dukkha (suffering or unsatisfactoriness). This states that
the empirical fact of the existence of dukkha cannot be reconciled with the
existence of an omnipotent and omniscient being who is also all good. The following
verses from the Bhûridatta Jataka bring this out clearly:
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? sace hi so issaro sabbaloke
Brahmâ bahûbhûtapati pajâna.m
ki.m sabbaloke vidah alakkhi.m
ki.m sabbaloka.m na sukhi.m akâsi
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? sace hi so issaro sabbaloke
Brahmâ bahûbhûtapati pajâna.m
mâyâmusâvajjamadena c'api
loka.m adhammena kimatthakâsi
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! sace hi so issaro sabbaloke
Brahmâ bahûbhûtapati pajâna.m
adhammiyo bhûtapat Ari.t.tha
dhamme sat yo vidahi adhamma.m
Translated by the Author
The Buddha argues that the three most commonly given attributes of God, viz.
omnipotence, omniscience and benevolence towards humanity cannot all be mutually
compatible with the existential fact of dukkha.
From the Buddhist standpoint the classic theistic statement that "God created
man in his (i.e God's) image" has actually to be reversed. It is man who
has created God in his (i.e. man's) image! And as man's own image changes so
does that of his God. Thus in the present time with the rise of feminism there
is an attempt to change the gender of God from a man to a woman (or perhaps
even to a neuter). To liberate himself mankind has to shed his delusions, and
one of these is the existence of God
5. The God-Concept and Buddhist Principles
Quite apart from explicit statements refuting the God-idea there is a fundamental
incompatibility between the notion of God and basic Buddhist principles. We
have already mentioned that God cannot be reconciled with the Buddhist notion
of causality which is contained in the theory of "dependent origination"
which is one of the discoveries of the Buddha during his enlightenment. Certainly
nothing like this theory has been propounded prior to the Buddha.
A fundamental Buddhist belief is that all phenomena without exemption (including
all animate beings) have three essential characteristics. These are dukkha (explained
above), anicca (impermanence), and anatta (insubstantiality, "no-soul").
The attributes of God are not consistent with these universal marks of existence.
Thus God must be free from dukkha; he must be eternal (and hence not subject
to anicca); finally he must have a distinct unchanging identity (and therefore
lack the characteristic of anatta).
Another concomitant of the God-idea that is fundamentally incompatible with
Buddhism is the belief that God acts as the final judge and could determine
if individuals go to heaven or hell. According to Buddhism the destination of
individuals is determined by the karmic law which cannot be interfered by any
external process. Only individuals can effect their karmic destinies; even a
Buddha cannot "pardon" or otherwise interfere with the karmic process.
In Buddhism there is simply no place for a God even if one were to exist.
There is also no place for the notion of vicarious salvation, or atonement for
human sins by a "suffering" God. The Buddha affirms that "by
oneself is kamma done and by oneself is kamma undone". According to Buddhism
no one (and this includes gods or God) can save another. This is a cardinal
principle of the Buddha which cannot be reconciled with the declared attributes
and actions of God.
The Buddhist path to salvation is based on deeds (including mental culture through
"meditation") not prayer. God appears to Buddhists to be a vain being
expecting all others to pray to him and worship him. Indeed such prayer seems
to be the most decisive factor in a person's salvation, not necessarily any
good or bad deeds by him. But as mentioned above in Buddhism it is volitional
action with determines the karma of an individual.
There is no doubt some similarities in the moral codes of Buddhism and some
theistic religions. Things like compassion are inculcated in all religions.
But in Buddhism this does not arise from a heavenly dictate and there is no
limitation in the exercise of these virtues as occurs in some theistic religion.
6. The Persistence of the God-Idea
The Buddha's refutation of the God-concept was formulated some 2500 years ago,
perhaps at the very time that the idea of a single supreme God was mooted in
India and in the Middle East. With the rise of modern science, and the discovery
of natural causes for phenomena which were formerly ascribed to the action of
God, some philosophers have restated the basic fallacies of the God-hypothesis
using modern science and logic (and not the Buddha's dhamma) as their point
of departure. Yet many people in the world formally subscribe to the notion
of God. What is the Buddhist explanation for this phenomenon?
There are many causes for the persistence of the God-idea. Some of these are
induced by social and other factors. These include the institutionalisation
of theistic religion, the use of vast economic resources to propagate it including
the mass media, and the legal right given to parents to impose their religions
on their children. There is also the attractiveness of vicarious salvation,
or salvation through prayer or forgiveness which permits the committing of many
moral crimes for which the doer does not "pay". We shall not consider
these here. From the Buddhist point of view the root causes are ignorance and
fear, with fear itself ultimately the product of ignorance. Atheistic materialism
has failed to dislodge the God-idea not because of any deficiency of its arguments
when compared to those put forward by the theists, but because it too has not
been able to eliminate ignorance.
The ignorance (avijjâ) that is meant here cannot be eliminated by formal
education and the propagation of scientific knowledge. After all some leading
scientists are themselves completely deluded by theistic suppositions. The progress
of science has resulted only in a minor diminution in the power of theistic
religion, and in any case theologians have become adept at "reinterpreting"
dogma while the general followers continue to do what they have always done.
The Buddha himself grasped the overpervading nature of ignorance because of
his titanic struggle to liberate himself. He even initially displayed some reluctance
to propagate his knowledge because of the formidable nature of the task. Nonetheless
he proclaimed his knowledge out of compassion for the world because he felt
that at least a few "with little dust in their eyes" would be able
to benefit fully from his ideas. From the Buddhist point of view the persistence
of theism, with all its evil consequences seen in history, is a necessary consequence
of the persistence of ignorance.
While intellectual and scientific knowledge is not the sole (or even essential)
constituent of wisdom (pa¤¤â) it could in the modern world
with high levels of educational attainment be a good basis for it. But what
is really required is the cultivation of the mind (bhâvanâ, samâdhi).
This is usually referred to as "meditation" even though this term
is quite inadequate to convey the full implications of what is meant. Many modern-day
"meditation teachers" do not give instruction in Buddhist mental culture,
and even some of those who claim to do so may take a literal view of a few classic
Buddhist texts on the subject. The Buddhist path requires a correct balance
between three components: wisdom, morality and mental culture. Progress in all
these three areas must be made simultaneously, and exclusive concentration on
any one these, especially "meditation" of a highly stylised form,
is not the balanced path. The Buddha has asked all his disciples to go to the
Dhamma as their guide rather than to specific teachers. The Buddha's final instruction
to his followers was to "work out your own salvation with diligence"
with the Buddha's teaching (the dhamma) as the only guide.
The path of the Buddha cannot be followed if a person is deluded by the notion
of God. This is why a correct understanding of all the ramifications of the
God-idea is essential for anyone seeking to progress along the Buddhist path
to total liberation.