I read in a Buddhist mailing list that Karen Armstrong’s new book ‘The Case for God’, which is somewhat apologetics for the ‘invisible ruler’, surprisingly ended with a paragraph on the Buddha. I checked it out at a bookstore. Here it is:
Excerpt: One day a Brahmin priest came across the Buddha sitting in contemplation under a tree and was astonished by his serenity, stillness and self-discipline. The impression of immense strength channelled creatively into an extraordinary peace reminded him of a great tusker elephant. ‘Are you a god, sir?’ the priest asked. ‘Are you an angel… or a spirit?’ No, the Buddha replied. He explained that he has simply revealed a new potential in human nature. It was possible to live in this world of conflict and pain at peace and in harmony with one’s fellow creatures. There was no point in merely believing it; you would only discover its truth if you practised his method, systematically cutting off egotism at the root. You would then live at the peak of your capacity, activate parts of the psyche that normally lie dormant, and become fully enlightened human beings. ‘Remember me,’ the Buddha told the curious priest, ‘as one who is awake.’
Comments: Am not sure if Armstrong read a little too much into the incident, though what she wrote above is generally in line with the Buddha’s teachings. You can see the Dona Sutta, which records the actual event at http://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.036.than.html The Buddha didn’t discover a ‘new potential in human nature’; what he awakened to was a timeless potential within all sentient beings – Buddha-nature. To clarify, the Buddha in the sutta denied being a human, albeit being a perfected human being. He defined himself instead as an ‘awakened’ one – a Buddha. ‘Fully enlightened human beings’ are thus not mere humans. I think it is significant that her book ended with the above passage – for several reasons:
(1) ‘The Case for God’ subtly became a case against gods, because the Buddha said he was awakened, and thus beyond all notions of unawakened gods.
(2) There was emphasis that belief in Buddha-nature (though not spelled out explicitly as so) is useless if its reality is not realised via practice of the Buddha’s teachings – to sever the root of delusion. Suddenly, this becomes a case for urging practice of Buddhism – that beyond god-centric beliefs.
(3) ‘Cutting off egotism at the root’ became the ideal. However, in god-centric beliefs, the one apparently with the greatest ego is often the Godhead, when he commands respect and condemns those lacking it to eternal damnation. This is the opposite of universal compassion proposed by the Buddha – since such superlative egotism perpetuates a ‘world of conflict and pain’ that is not ‘at peace and in harmony with one’s fellow creatures.’
I browsed the index and there are a few other mentions of the Buddha in the rest of the book. Am not sure if they require clarification- yet. Below are bestseller books from last year, which present ‘cases against God’.
Related Article:
Books which present ‘cases against God’ (and Buddha?)
https://moonpointer.com/new/2009/01/books-some-bestsellers
(Read Buddhist review of book below in link above)
[ad#endoffaith]
Like some of you here, I have Christian friends and have personally visited retail Christian bookshops. There are many books of similar nature in the global and local Christian community. .
As a Buddhist and an individual, I have always been interested in reading up such books which strongly advocate or suggest via various kinds of reasoning that God, a creator of all things around us or the Biblical God does exist. To ensure that my views do not lean on either side of the argument on existence or non-existence of God, I also read up books that propose an opposite or alternative views; I especially make it a point to read those written by both aetheists and Buddhists, among others.
In that sense, most fellow Buddhists may consider me to be someone sitting on the fence and not a true Buddhist at all. If so, I wouldn’t say they are entirely wrong. Yet, it is the spirit of free yet responsible enquiry of Buddhism that attracts me; that keeps me from becoming a Christain despite being surrounded by various Christian influences in real life since I was small.
I wish to encourage all those like me to really consider reading up on and understanding as much as possible, the Kalama Sutta.
This sutta guides any one, Buddhist or non-Buddhist to reflect deeply on what are the right attitudes to cultivate and maintain in the process of encouraging free and responsible enquiry in oneself and others as well.
By slowly understanding and adopting the principles laid out in the Sutta, any person can help him or herself to be free from any kind of dogmatic thinking or behaviour.
Yes, you can be free; and yet responsible, humble, sincere and respectful.
Here’s a balanced response from Master Shengyen on the subject:
Are Buddhists Prohibited from Reading Literature of Other Religions?
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/zeph/message/1231
(*)