I've been reading some articles that attempt to explain the teaching of the Buddha to people who aren't familiar with it and the way that he taught about the idea of Gods and Goddesses was very interesting.
Here is an excerpt from a work called "Basic Buddhism" by Dr Victor A. Gunasekara:
In the Buddhist texts Mahâ Brahmâ is the equivalent of God and 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." (Dgha Nikya, II, 263).
The Buddha dismisses all these claims of Mahâ Brahmâ as being due to his own delusions brought about by ignorance. Mahâ-Brahmâ is seen simply a deva unenlightened and subject to the samsric process as determined by his kamma (cf the Brahmajla and the Aggañña Suttas). In the Khevadda Sutta he 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 Brahm acknowledges the superiority of the Buddha.
This could also be applied to the capital-G god described by Christianity and Islam, two religions founded long after the Buddha lived, or Judaism, which at the time was secluded to a small ethnic group. Basically stated: if God exists, he's as deluded about the nature of reality as the rest of us. 
Another thing I have been contemplating about the nature of reality is the concept of "I" vs "Other". At some point something became different than the rest of existance, was that first thing concious of itself being different from the "other"? I'm not sure, but it would obviously be "created" by the "other". Are the conciousnesses that reside in our brains sort of like self contained derivatives of this "I"? It's a neat thing to contemplate. |
