Jump to content

Nontheistic religion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 82.16.58.234 (talk) at 03:26, 7 September 2013 (→See also: added Jediism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Nontheistic religions are traditions of thought within religions, some otherwise aligned with theism, others not, in which nontheism informs religious beliefs or practices.[1] Nontheism has been applied to the fields of Christian apologetics and general liberal theology, and plays significant roles in Buddhism and Hinduism.

Buddhism

Main article: God in Buddhism
An artist's portrayal of Buddha's entry into Parinirvana

Although Buddhism has a vast number of scriptures and practices, the fundamental core of Buddhism, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, do not have any mention of any god(s) or any notion of worship of any deity. They are purely ethical and meditative guidelines based on the truths of psychological suffering due to impermanence.

Since the time of the Buddha, the refutation of the existence of a creator has been seen as a key point in distinguishing Buddhist from non-Buddhist views.[2]

The Buddha said that gods (devas) exist, although he portrayed them as also caught in the cycle of samsara. He did not center his teaching around these gods, but instead around the explanation of dukkha (suffering, imperfection) and attaining freedom from it. The question of an independent Creator deity, however, was answered by Buddha in the Brahmajala Sutta. The Buddha denounced the view of a Creator and sees that such notions are related to the false view of eternalism, and like the 61 other views, this belief causes suffering when one is attached to it and states these views may lead to desire, aversion and delusion. At the end of the Sutta the Buddha says he knows these 62 views and he also knows the truth that surpasses them.

There are however, pantheistic elements in the doctrine of Adi-Buddha, among others present in Buddhism.

Belief and practice

On one occasion, when presented with a problem of metaphysics by the monk Malunkyaputta, Buddha responded with the Parable of the Poison Arrow. When a man is shot with an arrow thickly smeared with poison, his family summons the doctor to have the poison removed, and the doctor gives an antidote:

"But the man refuses to let the doctor do anything before certain questions can be answered. The wounded man demands to know who shot the arrow, what his caste and job is, and why he shot him. He wants to know what kind of bow the man used and how he acquired the ingredients used in preparing the poison. Malunkyaputta, such a man will die before getting the answers to his questions. It is no different for one who follows the Way. I teach only those things necessary to realize the Way. Things which are not helpful or necessary, I do not teach."[3]

Relative and ultimate truth

Some revolutionary Buddhist teachers teach that mention of divine beings in the scriptures does not refer to actual existing gods, but was a language employed by Buddha to bring about a meaning, which was subsequently misunderstood. An example of this is Ajahn Buddhadasa of Thailand.[citation needed] The majority of teachers, however, disagree with this revolutionary interpretation, and teach the orthodox teaching (from the Pali Canon and Mahayana Sutras) that conventional gods do exist and can influence our lives.[citation needed] These gods, however, cannot give people enlightenment, and they are themselves unenlightened and unaware of the true Dhamma.[citation needed]

Zen Master Bassui (1327–1387) had strong words for those applying notions of divinity to any separate beings, such as bodhisattvas:

"... so you should realize that all the names of the bodhisattvas are just different names for the nature of mind. As an expedient in the World-Honored-One's sermons, he defined things using certain names, and with these names he pointed to the truth. Ordinary people, unaware of this truth, become attached to the names and, in the hopes of attaining Buddhahood, seek the Buddha and Dharma outside their minds. It's like cooking sand in the hopes of producing rice."[4]

Christianity

Main articles: Secular theology and Christian atheism

A few liberal Christian theologians, define a "nontheistic God" as "the ground of all being" rather than as a personal divine being. John Shelby Spong refers to a theistic God as "a personal being with expanded supernatural, human, and parental qualities, which has shaped every religious idea of the Western world."[5]

From a nontheist, naturalist, and rationalist perspective, the concept of divine grace appears to be the same concept as luck.[6]

Bust of Paul Tillich

Many of them owe much of their theology to the work of Christian existentialist philosopher Paul Tillich, including the phrase "the ground of all being". Another quotation from Tillich is, "God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him."[7] This Tillich quotation summarizes his conception of God. He does not think of God as a being which exists in time and space, because that constrains God, and makes God finite. But all beings are finite, and if God is the Creator of all beings, God cannot logically be finite since a finite being cannot be the sustainer of an infinite variety of finite things. Thus God is considered beyond being, above finitude and limitation, the power or essence of being itself.[8]

Secular humanist Sidney Hook wrote in an essay called "The Atheism of Paul Tillich":

With amazing courage Tillich boldly says that the God of the multitudes does not exist, and further, that to believe in His existence is to believe in an idol and ultimately to embrace superstition. God cannot be an entity among entities, even the highest. He is being-in-itself. In this sense Tillich's God is like the God of Spinoza and the God of Hegel. Both Spinoza and Hegel were denounced for their atheism by the theologians of the past because their God was not a Being or an Entity. Tillich, however, is one of the foremost theologians of our time.

Nontheist Friend

Logo of the Society of Nontheist Friends
Main article: Nontheist Friend

A nontheist Friend or an atheist Quaker is someone who affiliates with, identifies with, engages in and/or affirms Quaker practices and processes, but who does not accept a belief in a theistic understanding of God, a Supreme Being, the divine, the soul or the supernatural. Like theistic Friends, nontheist Friends are actively interested in realizing centered peace, simplicity, integrity, community, equality, love, happiness and social justice in the Society of Friends and beyond.

Hinduism

Main article: Atheism in Hinduism

Hinduism is generally regarded as being characterised by extremely diverse beliefs and practises.[9] In the words of R.C. Zaehner, "it is perfectly possible to be a good Hindu whether one's personal views incline toward monism, monotheism, polytheism, or even atheism."[10] He goes on to say that it is a religion that neither depends on the existence or non-existence of God or Gods.[11] More broadly, Hinduism can be seen as having three more important strands: one featuring a personal Creator or Divine Being, one that emphasises an impersonal Absolute and a third pluralistic and non-absolute.[12] Some scholars regard devotion to a personal deity as the ultimate reality is the last and perhaps most significant stage of Hinduism's development.[10] This article will focus on the latter two traditions - which can be seen as nontheistic.[13]

Although the Vedas are broadly concerned with the completion of ritual, there are some elements that can be interpreted as either nontheistic or precursors to the later developments of the nontheistic tradition. The oldest Hindu scripture, the Rig Veda mentions that 'There is only one god though the sages may give it various names' (1.164.46). Max Müller termed this henotheism, and it can be seen as indicating one, non-dual divine reality, with little emphasis on personality.[14] The famous Nasadiya Sukta, the 129th Hymn of the tenth and final Mandala (or chapter) of the Rig Veda, considers creation and asks "The gods came afterwards, with the creation of this universe. /Who then knows whence it has arisen?".[15] This can be seen to contain the intuition that there must be a single principle behind all phenomena: 'That one' (tad ekam), self-sufficient, to which distinctions cannot be applied.[16][17]

It is with the Upanishads, reckoned to be written in the first millennia (coeval with the ritualistic Brahmanas), that the Vedic emphasis on ritual was challenged. The Upanishads can be seen as the expression of new sources of power in India. Also, separate from the Upanishadic tradition were bands of wandering ascetics called Vadins whose largely nontheistic notions rejected the notion that religious knowledge was the property of the Brahmins. Many of these were shramanas, who represented a non-Vedic tradition rooted in India's pre-Aryan history.[18] The emphasis of the Upanishads turned to knowledge, specifically the ultimate identity of all phenomena.[19] This is expressed in the notion of Brahman, the key idea of the Upanishads, and much later philosophizing has been taken up with deciding whether Brahman is personal or impersonal.[20] The understanding of the nature of Brahman as impersonal is based in the definition of it as 'ekam eva advitiyam' (Chandogya Upanishad 6.2.1) - it is one without a second and to which no substantive predicates can be attached.[21] Further, both the Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka Upanishads assert that the individual atman and the impersonal Brahman are one.[22] The mahāvākya statement Tat Tvam Asi, found in the Chandogya Upanishad, can be taken to indicate this unity.[23] The latter Upanishad uses the negative term Neti neti to 'describe' the divine.

Patañjali statue in Pantanjali Yog Peeth Haridwar

Classical Samkhya, Mimamsa, early Vaisheshika and early Nyaya schools of Hinduism do not accept the notion of an omnipotent creator God at all.[24][25] While the Sankhya and Mimamsa schools no longer have significant followings in India, they are both influential in the development of later schools of philosophy.[26][27] The Yoga of Patanjali is the school that probably owes most to the Samkhya thought. This school is dualistic, in the sense that there is a division between 'spirit' (Sanskrit: purusha) and 'nature' (Sanskrit: prakṛti).[28] It holds Samadhi or 'concentrative union' as its ultimate goal[29] and it does not consider God's existence as either essential or necessary to achieving this.[30]

The Bhagavad Gita, contains both passages which bear a monistic reading and others which bear a theistic reading.[31] Generally, the book as a whole has been interpreted by some who see it as containing a primarily nontheistic message,[32] and by others who stress its theistic message.[33] These broadly either follow after either Sankara or Ramanuja[34] An example of a nontheistic passage might be "The supreme Brahman is without any beginning. That is called neither being nor non-being." Which was interpreted by Sankara to mean that Brahman can only be talked of in terms of negation of all attributes - 'Neti neti'.[35]

The Advaita Vedanta of Gaudapada and Sankara rejects theism as a consequence of its insistence that Brahman is "Without attributes, indivisible, subtle, inconceivable, and without blemish, Brahman is one and without a second. There is nothing other than He."[36] This means that it lacks properties usually associated with God such as omniscience, perfect goodness, omnipotence, and additionally is identical with the whole of reality, rather than being a causal agent or ruler of it.[37]

Jainism

Main article: God in Jainism
Further information: Jainism and non-creationism

Jain texts claims that the universe consists of jiva (life force or souls) and ajiva (lifeless objects). According to Jain doctrine, the universe and its constituents -soul, matter, space, time, and principles of motion- have always existed. The universe and the matter and souls within it are eternal and uncreated, and there is no omnipotent creator god. Jainism offers an elaborate cosmology, including heavenly beings/devas, but these heavenly beings are not viewed as creators, they are subject to suffering and change like all other living beings, and are portrayed as mortal.

According to the Jain concept of divinity, any soul who destroys its karmas and desires, achieves liberation/Nirvana. A soul who destroys all its passions and desires has no desire to interfere in the working of the universe. If godliness is defined as the state of having freed one's soul from karmas and the attainment of enlightenment/Nirvana and a God as one who exists in such a state, then those who have achieved such a state can be termed gods (Tirthankara).

Besides scriptural authority, Jains also employ syllogism and deductive reasoning to refute creationist theories. Various views on divinity and the universe held by the vedics, sāmkhyas, mimimsas, Buddhists, and other school of thoughts were criticized by Jain Ācāryas, such as Jinasena in Mahāpurāna.

See also

References

  1. ^ Williams, J. Paul (1962). "The Nature of Religion". Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 2 (1). Blackwell Publishing: 3–17. doi:10.2307/1384088. JSTOR 1384088. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  2. ^ B. Alan Wallace, Contemplative Science. Columbia University Press, 2007, pages 97-98.
  3. ^ Nhat Hanh, Thich (1991). Old Path White Clouds: walking in the footsteps of the Buddha. Parallax Press. p. 299. ISBN 0-938077-26-0.
  4. ^ Braverman, Arthur (2002). Mud and Water: The Teachings of Zen Master Bassui. Wisdom Publications. p. 56. ISBN 0-86171-320-6.
  5. ^ A New Christianity for a New World: Why Traditional Faith Is Dying and How a New Faith Is Being Born, ISBN 0-06-067063-0
  6. ^ Kaufman, Arnold S. "Ability", The Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 60, No. 19
  7. ^ Tillich, Paul. (1951) Systematic Theology, p.205.
  8. ^ Sidney Hook, "The Atheism of Paul Tillich", in Religious Experience and Truth: A Symposium ed. Sidney Hook. (New York University Press, 1961).
  9. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 17.
  10. ^ a b Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 51.
  11. ^ R. C. Zaehner, (1966) Hinduism, P.1-2, Oxford University Press.
  12. ^ Smart, Ninian,(1999) World Philosophies. Routledge, ISBN 0-415-18466-5 p.35
  13. ^ Griffiths, Paul J, (2005) Nontheistic Conceptions of the Divine Ch. 3. in The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion by William J Wainwright, p.59 . Oxford University Press US, ISBN 0-19-513809-0
  14. ^ Masih, Y. A comparative study of religions, P.164, Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2000 ISBN 81-208-0815-0
  15. ^ O'Flaherty, Wendy Doniger, (1981)The Rig Veda: An Anthology of One Hundred Eight Hymns (Classic) Penguin
  16. ^ Collinson, Diané and Wilkinson, Robert Thirty-Five Oriental Philosophers, P. 39, Routledge, 1994 ISBN 0-415-02596-6
  17. ^ Mohanty, Jitendranath (2000), Classical Indian Philosophy: An Introductory Text, p:1 Rowman & Littlefield, ISBN 0-8476-8933-6
  18. ^ Jaroslav Krejčí, Anna Krejčová (1990) Before the European Challenge: The Great Civilizations of Asia and the Middle East, p:170, SUNY Press, ISBN 0-7914-0168-5
  19. ^ Doniger,Wendy, (1990) Merriam-Webster's Encyclopedia of World Religions,P. 441, Merriam-Webster, ISBN 0-87779-044-2
  20. ^ Smart, Ninian (1998) The World's Religions P.73-74, CUP ISBN 0-521-63748-1
  21. ^ Wainwright, William J. (2005) Ch.3 Nontheistic conceptions of the divine. The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Religion p.67 OUP, ISBN 0-19-513809-0
  22. ^ Jones, Richard H. (2004) Mysticism and Morality: A New Look at Old Questions, P. 80, Lexington Books, ISBN 0-7391-0784-4
  23. ^ Brown, Robert L,(1991) Ganesh: Studies of an Asian God, SUNY Press, ISBN 079140656.
  24. ^ Larson, Gerald James, Ch. Indian Conceptions of Reality and Divinity found in A Companion to World Philosophies By Eliot Deutsch, Ronald Bontekoe, P. 352, Blackwell, ISBN 0-631-21327-9
  25. ^ Morgan, Kenneth W. and Sarma, D S, Eds. (1953) Ch. 5. P.207 Hindu Religious Thought by Satis Chandra Chatterjee, The Religion of the Hindus: Interpreted by Hindus, Ronald Press. ISBN 81-208-0387-6
  26. ^ Flood, Gavin D, An Introduction to Hinduism,(p.232) CUP, ISBN 052143878
  27. ^ Larson, Gerald James,(1999) Classical Samkhya, Motilal Banarsidass Publishers, ISBN 81-208-0503-8
  28. ^ Feuerstein, Georg (1989), Yoga: The Technology of Ecstasy, Tarcher, ISBN 0-87477-520-5
  29. ^ King, Richard (1999) Indian Philosophy: An Introduction to Hindu and Buddhist Thought, p:191, Edinburgh University Press, ISBN 0-7486-0954-7
  30. ^ Clements, Richard Pauranik, Being a Witness in Theory and Practice of Yoga by Knut A. Jacobsen
  31. ^ Yandell, Keith. E., On Interpreting the "Bhagavadgītā", Philosophy East and West 32, no 1 (January, 1982).
  32. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, page 45, 98, 115, 136.
  33. ^ Catherine Robinson, Interpretations of the Bhagavad-Gītā and Images of the Hindu Tradition: The Song of the Lord. Routledge Press, 1992, pages 47, 51.
  34. ^ Flood, Gavin D, An Introduction to Hinduism, (pps 239-234) CUP, ISBN 052143878
  35. ^ Swami Gambhirananda, (1995), Bhagavadgita: with the Commentary of Sankaracharya, Ch. 13. Vs. 13, Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta ISBN 81-7505-150-7
  36. ^ Richards, John, Viveka-Chudamani of Shankara Vs 468.
  37. ^ Wainright, William, (2006), Concepts of God, Stanford Encyclopedia of Religion

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nontheistic_religion&oldid=571868108"