Hinduism & Buddhism

[Churchwork]

Did you know the teaching of Hinduism is that its god's are amoral, that is, there is no right and wrong and he just "is"? How can you follow that impersonal god? If we are an extension of that source, then how can we choose rightly?

Did you know that Buddhism teaches that there are 8 stages to removing your desire, attachments and pleasure to reach an abstract void of Nirvana? But we have pleasure sensations in our body and accomplish great things through passion and desire, so to cut these off is to deaden oneself. Isn't the reason this is taught in India because Buddha tried to find a solution to the pain and suffering of their people?

[Apoche]

If we are an extension of that source, then how can we choose rightly?

You seem to be arguing that since Brahman is impersonal, all things that stem from it are also impersonal. As a matter of fact, most philosophical schools of Hinduism regard the self as an illusion; for example, in Samkhya, a school that was very prominent once but has died out, individual selfs arise when the primordial consciousness, purusha, wrongly identifies itself with matter, prakrti. Prakrti is a term that encompasses all tangle things, as well as the senses and the notion of existing; in other words, prakrti is sentience without a consciousness, and purusha is consciousness without a sentience. Purusha identifies itself with prakrti for some reason, and when the consciousness represented by the latter is added to the sentience of the former, the result is an illusion of individuality. So even though all humans percieve themselves as different, due to the 'taint' of prakrti, they are the same, as their consciousness is purusha.

Another way to argue how the notion of independence can arise when all is one is that parts of the original super-consciousness sort of 'mutate' awareness and declare themselves individuals. There are many differing schools, and as I said, Hinduism is way too complex to sum up in a single sentence like that.


But we have pleasure sensations in our body and accomplish great things through passion and desire, so to cut these off is to deaden oneself.

The line of thought is that desire leads to disappointment. It is not the desire, or the pleasure, as such that is the problem; it's the fact that all kinds of happiness are transient and have an end. Nothing is eternal if we are to believe Buddha.

[Churchwork]

I am not saying all things would be impersonal because Brahman is impersonal. Rather, since we are personal so would our Creator be, for we are made in His image. Hence, Brahman is false because it is impersonal. A negative consequence of believing the impersonal cause is to have no conscious purpose then and not be personal as our God is personal. How pointless. If there is pointlessness then there is sin and immorality. Satan wants sin, God does not. When I am being impersonal, I often sense the negative consequences, for it is unloving, selfish and self-centered. It is not healthy for you or others to follow the impersonal, especially if made up in your own mind's illusions. The mind is the battlefield from which Satan enters and seeks to gain footholds.

There might be a clue why something has died out? It is quite untenable.

When God breathed the breath of life into the body directly creating man's spirit, then the soul life was produced as Adam's spirit made contact with his body. The soul is made up of mind, will and emotions. Your soul has self-consciousness, whereas your spirit has God-consciousness. Your body has world-consciousness.

Those in Christ who are spiritual Christians walk by the intuitive Holy Spirit and do not deem themselves highly...as though having no consciousness of their own spiritual authority. But in no way does the spiritual Christian lose his own individuality. He is fully aware and conscious of his abiding in God's will and sensing His presence in his life. His self-consciousness in his feelings, mind and will remain vital function components of tripartite man.

With Samkhya and Hinduism, destroying individualism has negative consequences such as not taking responsibility by being susceptible to evil spirits who seek to control your will and remove your individualism through passivity. Such is the common approach in many religions.

To believe in such things in Hinduism sects is dangerously based on a mistaken assumption of saying consciousness "wrongly identifies" there is a self with matter. Just realize there is no evidence for this assumption. Similarly, there is no primordial consciousness. There is the uncreated Creator, there is His creation, both animate and inanimate. The danger lies in the assumptions that lead to further false beliefs and negative consequences.

God is using the vast universe for many great plans none of us even know yet. We do know the new city will be on the new earth which is Mars because the Bible says it will be without the sea when the old earth is burnt up without the sea also. Scientifically this agrees that the Sun will increase to the point Earth will be uninhabitable.

When man is resurrected, he still retains his self in his newly resurrected body as Jesus was resurrected.

Hinduism has many angles to be sure, but they are falsely based in a mutation of God. God does not mutate (He is immutable), but out of His glory He creates according to His good will and made man in His image. Man has self-awareness as God intended in his soul. To deny it is to deny His plan. What God is doing is getting Christians to divide our spirit, soul and body to walk by the spirit, because the spirit and soul have been fused due to our sin nature. Man has a hard time sensing the still small voice in his intuitive conscience to hear God's movements therein and so people walk by their outerman instead. Actually, the sinner can't hear God's voice in actuality because his spirit is dead to God. Not unless the person is regenerated with God's life and a quickened spirit will he be able to commune with God intuitively in his spirit by the indwelling Holy Spirit.

What you are recognizing is how God is dealing with man individually. He does so corporately also as the body of Christ. Whereas Hinduism, you have many heady ideas, but nothing too practical, because the individual is erased.

My desire to be with God for eternity will never disappoint me, so not all desire has negative consequences. Nor is all desire temporary. You might want to look to the motivation for your particular individualistic desire as the problem. Who can say when those arrive in hell are not plagued by those same unrighteous desires with eternal regret? Such feelings will never end.

You can see what is wrong with Buddhism, for it shuts down the mind into passivity and does not ascribe to man's full working being of spirit, soul and body. My happiness in Christ will never end. It is eternally planted in me by His Holy Spirit and the fruits thereof when God gave me His life.

Buddha wrongly tried to deal with pain and suffering by shutting off the mind, heart, soul, spirit and body. This was never God's intent.

God says there are no gods, they are just idols. Brahman says there are many gods, thus, many idols, which separate oneself from God. God says there is only One uncreated Creator. Buddhism are Hindusim are conflicted on this clear point of Christianity.

Amen.

[Apoche]

Rather, since we are personal so would our Creator be, for we are made in His image.

Hindus do not believe we are made in the image of Brahman, so your logic does not apply.


A negative consequence of believing the impersonal cause is to have no conscious purpose then and not be personal as our God is personal. How pointless. If there is pointlessness then there is sin and immorality.

This is just an assertion.


When I am being impersonal, I often sense the negative consequences, for it is unloving, selfish and self-centered.

Some people would disagree and say that when they're impersonal, they think logically, empathize with people, and are not clouded by the desires of the Ego.


There might be a clue why something has died out? It is quite untenable.

Samkhya philosophy lives on in the form of Yoga. The school is dead, but the ideas are not.


With Samkhya and Hinduism, destroying individualism has negative consequences such as not taking responsibility by being susceptible to evil spirits who seek to control your will and remove your individualism through passivity. Such is the common approach in many religions.

Individual responsibility exists in all Dharmic religions (Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism). Think of it this way: if everyone are the same, then why act cruelly towarda anyone else? You're just hurting yourself.


Similarly, there is no primordial consciousness. There is the uncreated Creator, there is His creation, both animate and inanimate.

Just realize there is no evidence for this assumption.


Scientifically this agrees that the Sun will increase to the point Earth will be uninhabitable.


In many billions of years, yes.


Hinduism has many angles to be sure, but they are falsely based in a mutation of God. God does not mutate (He is immutable), but out of His glory He creates according to His good will and made man in His image.

You are applying Christian ideas to a non-Christian religion.


You can see what is wrong with Buddhism, for it shuts down the mind into passivity and does not ascribe to man's full working being of spirit, soul and body.

Of course it does. It's just that if we bog ourselves down with too many desires, we will be disappointed in the end when our wishes are left unfulfilled.


Brahman says there are many gods, thus, many idols, which separate oneself from God.

Hinduism is widely regarded as a monotheistic and monistic religion, not a polytheistic one. A Hindu is not required to worship the numerous gods of the Vedas.

[Churchwork]

There is a healthy desire. Nirvana shuts it off to be no desire. An amoral God is no God, just an idol. We are moral personal relational beings as is our God. Our God then trumps your god because personal and moral trumps impersonal and amoral.

Then Hindus would be wrong, because who can deny the uniqueness of mankind in all of creation to know we are made in God's image as the Bible says.

You couldn't show the connection between impersonableness and personableness. Therefore, such a connection is just an assertion. It is more reasonable that the personal is personal who intended to have a personal people. That which is of like nature has its likeness. Those who are more personal sin less because they care for others' feelings and don't try to shut them off in Nirvana.

Being impersonal would be illogical, since we are relational beings. You see there is a kind of logic that is cold and the ego says it is empathetic, but in practice it is not the case at all. Christians live by faith, not in their heads nor by an unprincipled life of feeling. We walk by the spirit in faith following our intuitive conscience.

Yoga is stretching. Stretching is good physically. One must also address the spiritual and the soulical, for we are tripartite beings.

"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." (1 Thess. 5.23)

"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." (Heb. 4.12)

The reason why some people are cruel is because they have free-will that gives into the evil spirit and self and sin. Your individuality is wrapped up in your free-will, but individuality is lost if there is a collective conscience like the Borg in Star Trek. There is no primordial conscience. Rocks don't have a conscience. Nor do rocks have a consciousness. They are inanimate. Since you can't find any consciousness or conscience in rocks, you would be overassuming. Such silly ideas lead to other false beliefs as sin begets sin. But we who are made in God's image have self-consciousness in our soul and God-consciousness in our spirit.

The Bible deals with the billions of years, hence, the new earth which not our planet falls within that compass.

The problem is if you have an ever changing Brahman, who defines such changes to be God? That is just man's whimsical assumptions and following his own ego, but God of the Bible is immutable, unchanging, therefore He can be trusted and is not subject to man's changing view of their god of Brahman.

Denying the self life is empowered upon a person when they have died on the cross with Christ by receiving His precious blood in the gift of atonement as the perfect sacrifice. Only a perfect sacrifice can do this to wash away sin. And only God is perfect enough to take all our sins upon Himself. This is not afforded in Hinduism and Buddhism reincarnation where you get new lives to try to do better, but that is works. We shall not be saved by works, but be justified only by faith. You won't appreciate this is you don't appreciate you are sinner.

Monistics are wrong, because God has His substance, and there is nature which is another substance, that which He created out of His glory. Never confuse the Creator with the created; Satan is continually working to convince you that the created is the Creator. That which is uncreated is always distinct and separate from the Creator. As I have not always existed, nor have you. But God has. And Hinduism is widely recognized as having many gods, where Christianity has no gods. They are just idols. You ought to recognize the gods of Hinduism as idols, but you might not be able to do that because you cling to them still and do not trust God's loving Word there are no gods. There are no gods before God. Optional worship of hindu gods is against God's will.

[Apoche]

An amoral God is no God, just an idol. We are moral personal relational beings as is our God.

Hinduism believes morals to be a part of the universe rather than authored by some kind of deity. It's the whole karmic law thing, and I am sure you are familiar with it. Furthermore, I can very well imagine an amoral or even an immoral God who is nevertheless a real, existing God. You are just saying stuff without any substance to it.


Our God then trumps your god because personal and moral trumps impersonal and amoral.

This is akin to a child saying "my dad is better than yours because he is a policeman." It means nothing in a scholarly debate. I am not trying to prove that Brahman exists, nor that it is better somehow than the Christian God, but that you have grave misconceptions of Hinduism and all other Dharmic religions.


You couldn't show the connection between impersonableness and personableness. Therefore, such a connection is just an assertion.

I have just told you that the experience of having a self is regarded as illusory by several branches of Hindu philosophy. I have already told you about Samkhya.


Yoga is stretching. Stretching is good physically. One must also address the spiritual and the soulical, for we are tripartite beings.

Raja Yoga is a philosophical school of Hinduism.


There is no primordial conscience. Rocks don't have a conscience. Nor do rocks have a consciousness. They are inanimate. Since you can't find any consciousness or conscience in rocks, you would be overassuming.

We're focusing on Samkhya, so I will rebut your comment from the perspective of that school. You see, Samkhya is dualistic, and believes that there are two substances--consciousness, purusha, and matter, prakrti. The former is the so-called primordial consciousness, the latter is all tangible things as well as some intangible, abstract concepts like the sense of self we all experience and sentience. From a Samkhya perspective, a rock is not conscious.


But we who are made in God's image have self-consciousness in our soul and God-consciousness in our spirit.

You keep asserting this without any evidence.


That is just man's whimsical assumptions and following his own ego, but God of the Bible is immutable, unchanging, therefore He can be trusted and is not subject to man's changing view of their god of Brahman.

In fact, I can call the God of the Bible the results of man's whimsical assumption too, if you want. You prove nothing by this paragraph.

[Churchwork]

The universe and the stars and planets have no morality to them though it was designed with God's morals in view to account for all the things God's people will go through in the universe. But, man made in God's image has clear morals. Nobody will deny that.

I can't imagine the meaning of existence of an evil God that you surmise. That which is eternal would necessitate being infinite, holy, righteous and true. You sound negative to think God could be evil. Hinduism and Buddhism are designed around the mentality of a suffering people to try to solve suffering. Man's way of trying to solve suffering ultimately fails.

You haven't shown any misconceptions I possess about Hinduism and Buddhism. I don't think your example of my dad is better than your dad because he is a policeman compares because we are not talking about various kinds of jobs which are all necessary and legitimate. We are talking about the fact that the uncreated can't be evil because evil is punished and God does not punish Himself. He glorifies in His goodness. He wants goodness in you, but He won't force it on you. You have the free-choice.

Considering self an illusion is just an assumption with negative consequences. Since I am really me and you really identify yourself as you, it is not an illusion. The reason why someone wants to make our identity an illusion is because they (or should I say you?) want to engage in sin wittingly or unwittingly. Because when you denounce your individual responsibility, your sin will increase. Since God is not an evil God, He does not like sinful ideas the self is an illusion. Remember the reason why Hinduism and Buddhism teach these similar things is to deal with pain and suffering, for it was thought by shutting one's mind down and discounting individual responsibility as an illusion, that could lessen pain. In reality it is just a temporary patch and actually the sore will get worse.

There is consciousness, for I have consciousness. There is matter, for I my body is made of matter. These are obvious statements, but what matters is God entering into His creation through Jesus dying on the cross for our sins, to pay the penalty for sin and give eternal life to any who receive Him. I have eternal life which can never be lost. God chose me before the foundations of the world and greatly comforts me, but you don't have that and that makes me sad for you.

You can't say God of the Bible is derived by whimsical assumptions, for since the uncreated Creator is proven (see the 4 Steps) and Jesus' resurrection is fully proven, then you know He is God. Believe and you shall receive His life. You don't need a miraculous experience to accompany your believing in His only begotten Son, for we live by faith and when God decides to give a 3rd Heaven experience that is His prerogative and righteous timing to do so. We don't place any selfish or unecessary expectations or demands upon what God should or should not do but let Him guide us by His Holy Spirit in agreement with His Word. Amen.