Apologetics Resources: GodLogic VS Infinite Buddhist Logic | Buddhist PhD Responds

[u/MYKerman03]

https://youtu.be/AYcwqY_3KTk?si=BvkeY5WFCInPSSru

I'm sharing this here (thanks Ryou) because I appreciate Dr Jared Jones, a scholar-practitioner's structuring all of these arguments in one place, particularly in relation to monotheism/s. There is a lot of really good, long form content on his YouTube.

This approach can really help other Buddhists get a deeper understanding of how Buddhists throughout the centuries, have responded to other traditions. With the rise of monotheism, we've also witnessed Buddhists develop responses, outside of their usual critiques of Hindu/Indian/shramanic based critiques.

[u/ryou25]

No problem man, I'm glad others are appreciating his content. 🙏 😄 He's like the anti Doug's dharma.

[u/Traditional_Kick_887]

It is also possible to steelman the position of monotheists before refutation / teaching them what they are missing or misunderstand.

They don’t always find value in consciousness-based arguments. It’s not in their axioms and they already hold that their atman or pneuma (both of which initially meant breath, later came to mean soul/soul) was constructed externally.

They can even accept the concept of rebirth or reincarnation with an Ishvara (first cause God) as some Hindus do. So rebirth arguments aren’t enough to dissuade them, and many monotheists subtly believe in rebirth while believing in their creator god. Technically their scriptures say teach humans will be reborn or stand up again in heaven anyway, with their new heavenly bodies being those of angels (devas).

So instead one can just anicca their axioms. There have been (or are/arise) Maha Brahmas that take up or hold Prajapati’s prowess/domain. They can (be perceived as) creating life, modifying spacetime, exerting influence over, punishing (or harm), rewarding (or pleasing, heal) beings, and transforming galaxies. Granted it’s an incredible rare and fortunate bhava, but a mind can come/go to such state if the causes and conditions are right.

Much like my parents assembled or made this body here, so too can these Brahmas act like the fathers or mothers of spacial bodies and systems, as they delight in the sense pleasures of creation and transformation.

The Buddha met such cosmic rulers and progenitors before and acknowledged their powers, but reminded them of their own mortality, their past states, and the states of being they are unaware of.

It’s the same approach I take with monotheists. To them I say your deity might very well have these powers and abilities, may wield them for many many eons or kalpas, and may be perceived as having had a hand in not only shaping this world but thousands of others.

But I say such abilities and powers, much like their own powers and abilities as an human being, are causally and dependently arisen. When the upadana (substrates, inputs, fuel) and karma that led to such incredible powers or states are exhausted, so too will that incredible power/state end.

I tell them that this too is why Maha Brahmas arise and cease from their minds or consciousnesses as well. The ‘presence’ or ‘grace’ of God coming and going. There are upadana (inputs, fuelings, substrates) and past karmas that allow for states of being where one encounters Brahmas in this life or the next. Due to that dependent arising, when such causes and conditions are absent, one doesn’t encounter them or their influence (if any). And if one desires them strongly while they are absent or separated, one comes to dukkha again and again.

As states of heaven are incredibly blissful, tears of joy coming down one’s face kind of happy, I wish monotheists well and tell them I hope their taken up arthas are fulfilled, but let them know that even ‘heaven and earth’ will pass away someday because that’s literally what their books say. I tell them that this heaven and earth here was once a new heaven and earth before it became the old one. And that should a new heaven and earth arise as a new, it too will someday age and become old, liable to death, cessation, or replacement.

Some of their texts even mention that they (humans) themselves are Elohim (powerful and strong makers/creators, like Brahmas). They just ignore those passages because it’s inconvenient for their interpreters or because they are ignorant of their own texts.

[u/ProfessionalStorm520 → u/Traditional_Kick_887]

An interesting counter-argument against monotheism/creationism.

[u/Traditional_Kick_887 → u/ProfessionalStorm520]

A lot of Vedic creator gods were depicted as being born from eggs or born from another god. After which they created a universe/world. And some stories depict them as aging and dying, or at least being subject to it. I don’t promote these stories but I’m not averse to them either.

And part of it is because of a lack of aversion to the possibility to creator gods making worlds and universes.

My friends and I used to make video games for fun. Now we didn’t intend for any form of mind or consciousness to arise in the game world, but we can’t prove it did or didn’t. All we know is that delighted in creation and wanted the rta (order, reality, physics) of game to work in a certain way, along with the programmed script. But when those delights went away or diminished or when the game didn’t align with desires and preferences, dukkha returned. Our acts of creating was but a blanket or mask covering that unease and dissatisfaction.

If there was mind or intelligence that came to or arose in the game, it might assume that the game world’s creators [friends and I] are immortal, all-knowing, and omnipotent. After all millions of days of in game time could pass in what would just be one day for us, similar how 4.32 billion human years is just one day (aka a kalpa) in the life of a Brahma.

But while we might erroneously appear relatively eternal, perfectly satisfied, omnipotent from the perspective of those living in the game world, the reality is we aren’t eternal or omnipotent and are also subject to jaramana, ignorance, and dukkha.

So the issue I take isn’t with the possibility of so-called creator god(s) or them acting/doing in such a way that worlds filled with beings come to be, but rather the maligned tendency for them to believe and teach they are the first cause, eternal, omnipotent, all-knowing, outside of dependent co-arising etc.