Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources.
You are about to undo an edit. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, then publish the changes below to finish undoing the edit. If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary. Do not use the default message only. |
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
José Ignacio Cabezón notes that while Mahayana sources reject a universal creator God that stands apart from the world, as well as any single creation event for the entire universe, Mahayanists do accept "localized" creation of specific worlds by the Buddhas and bodhisattvas as well as the idea that any world is jointly created by the collective karmic forces of all the beings who reside in them.<ref name=":11">Cabezón, José Ignacio. "Three Buddhist Views of the Doctrines of Creation and Creator", In Schmidt-Leukel (2006) ''Buddhism, Christianity and the Question of Creation''. 1st Edition. Routledge. ISBN 9781315261218</ref> Buddha-created worlds are termed "[[Pure land|Buddha-fields]]" (or "pure lands"), and their creation is seen as a key activity of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas.<ref name=":11" /> |
José Ignacio Cabezón notes that while Mahayana sources reject a universal creator God that stands apart from the world, as well as any single creation event for the entire universe, Mahayanists do accept "localized" creation of specific worlds by the Buddhas and bodhisattvas as well as the idea that any world is jointly created by the collective karmic forces of all the beings who reside in them.<ref name=":11">Cabezón, José Ignacio. "Three Buddhist Views of the Doctrines of Creation and Creator", In Schmidt-Leukel (2006) ''Buddhism, Christianity and the Question of Creation''. 1st Edition. Routledge. ISBN 9781315261218</ref> Buddha-created worlds are termed "[[Pure land|Buddha-fields]]" (or "pure lands"), and their creation is seen as a key activity of the Buddhas and bodhisattvas.<ref name=":11" /> |
||
Much comparative work has also been done on Mahayana Buddhist thought and [[Alfred North Whitehead|Whiteheadian]] [[process theology]]. Scholars who have worked in this include [[Jay McDaniel|Jay B. McDaniel]], [[John B. Cobb|John B. Cobb, Jr.]], [[David Ray Griffin|David R. Griffin]], [[Vincent Shen]], John S. Yokota, Steve Odin, and Linyin Gu.<ref>Gu, L (2005) Dipolarity in Chan Buddhism and the Whiteheadian God. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32, 211–222.</ref><ref name=":9">McDaniel, J.B.B. (2003). [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/48073 Double Religious Belonging: A Process Approach.] ''Buddhist-Christian Studies'' ''23'', 67-76. {{doi|10.1353/bcs.2003.0024}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{Cite web |last=Cobb Jr |first=John B. |date=2002 |title=Whitehead and Buddhism – Religion Online |url=https://www.religion-online.org/article/whitehead-and-buddhism/ |access-date=12 March 2023}}</ref><ref>Odin, Steve (1982). ''Process Metaphysics and Hua-Yen Buddhism: A Critical Study of Cumulative Penetration vs. Interpretation.'' State University of New York Press.</ref><ref>Griffin, David R. (1974). ''[https://philpapers.org/rec/GRIBTA-3 Buddhist Thought and Whitehead's Philosophy]''. International Philosophical Quarterly 14 (3):261-284.</ref><ref>Shen, Vincent. ''Whitehead and Chinese Philosophy: The Ontological Principle and Huayan Buddhism's Concept of shi'' in Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought. {{doi|10.1515/9783110333299.1.613}}</ref><ref>Yokota, John S. ''[https://www.jstor.org/stable/44798802 Process Thought and the Conceptualization of Amida Buddha]''. Process Studies Vol. 23, No. 2, Special Issue on Process Thought and Buddhism (SUMMER 1994), pp. 87-97 (11 pages). University of Illinois Press.</ref> Some of these figures have also been involved in [[Buddhism and Christianity|Buddhist–Christian]] dialogue.<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":10" /> Cobb sees many affinities with the Buddhist ideas of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] and [[Anattā|not-self]] and Whitehead's view of God. He has incorporated these into his own process theology.<ref>Ingram Paul O (2011). ''The Process of Buddhist-Christian Dialogue'', pp. 34-35. ISD LLC.</ref> In a similar fashion, some Buddhist thinkers, like [[Dennis Hirota]] and John S. Yokota, have developed Buddhist theologies that draw on process theology.<ref>Hirota, Dennis (editor) (2000) ''Toward a Contemporary Understanding of Pure Land Buddhism: Creating a Shin Buddhist Theology in a Religiously Plural World,'' p. 97. State University of New York Press.</ref> |
Much comparative work has also been done on Mahayana Buddhist thought and [[Alfred North Whitehead|Whiteheadian]] [[process theology]]. Scholars who have worked in this include [[Jay McDaniel|Jay B. McDaniel]], [[John B. Cobb|John B. Cobb, Jr.]], [[David Ray Griffin|David R. Griffin]], [[Vincent Shen]], John S. Yokota, Steve Odin, and Linyin Gu.<ref>Gu, L (2005) Dipolarity in Chan Buddhism and the Whiteheadian God. Journal of Chinese Philosophy 32, 211–222.</ref><ref name=":9">McDaniel, J.B.B. (2003). [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/48073 Double Religious Belonging: A Process Approach.] ''Buddhist-Christian Studies'' ''23'', 67-76. {{doi|10.1353/bcs.2003.0024.}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{Cite web |last=Cobb Jr |first=John B. |date=2002 |title=Whitehead and Buddhism – Religion Online |url=https://www.religion-online.org/article/whitehead-and-buddhism/ |access-date=12 March 2023}}</ref><ref>Odin, Steve (1982). ''Process Metaphysics and Hua-Yen Buddhism: A Critical Study of Cumulative Penetration vs. Interpretation.'' State University of New York Press.</ref><ref>Griffin, David R. (1974). ''[https://philpapers.org/rec/GRIBTA-3 Buddhist Thought and Whitehead's Philosophy]''. International Philosophical Quarterly 14 (3):261-284.</ref><ref>Shen, Vincent. ''Whitehead and Chinese Philosophy: The Ontological Principle and Huayan Buddhism's Concept of shi'' in Handbook of Whiteheadian Process Thought. {{doi|10.1515/9783110333299.1.613}}</ref><ref>Yokota, John S. ''[https://www.jstor.org/stable/44798802 Process Thought and the Conceptualization of Amida Buddha]''. Process Studies Vol. 23, No. 2, Special Issue on Process Thought and Buddhism (SUMMER 1994), pp. 87-97 (11 pages). University of Illinois Press.</ref> Some of these figures have also been involved in [[Buddhism and Christianity|Buddhist–Christian]] dialogue.<ref name=":9" /><ref name=":10" /> Cobb sees many affinities with the Buddhist ideas of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]] and [[Anattā|not-self]] and Whitehead's view of God. He has incorporated these into his own process theology.<ref>Ingram Paul O (2011). ''The Process of Buddhist-Christian Dialogue'', pp. 34-35. ISD LLC.</ref> In a similar fashion, some Buddhist thinkers, like [[Dennis Hirota]] and John S. Yokota, have developed Buddhist theologies that draw on process theology.<ref>Hirota, Dennis (editor) (2000) ''Toward a Contemporary Understanding of Pure Land Buddhism: Creating a Shin Buddhist Theology in a Religiously Plural World,'' p. 97. State University of New York Press.</ref> |
||
===East Asian Buddhism and theism=== |
===East Asian Buddhism and theism=== |
||
| Line 145: | Line 145: | ||
[[Thích Nhất Hạnh]], meanwhile, has written that the idea of the Buddha's "cosmic body", who is both the cosmos and its creator, "is very close to the idea of God in the theistic religions".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Thich Nhat Hanh |date=26 June 2015 |title=Connecting to Our Root Teacher, the Buddha |url=https://plumvillage.org/about/thich-nhat-hanh/letters/connecting-to-our-root-teacher-a-letter-from-thay-27-sept-2014/ |access-date=24 March 2023 |website=Plum Village}}</ref> Similarly, Lin Weiyu writes that the Huayan school interprets Vairocana as "omnipresent, omnipotent and identical to the universe itself".<ref name=":03">LIN Weiyu 林威宇 (UBC): Vairocana of the ''Avataṃsaka Sūtra'' as Interpreted by Fazang 法藏 (643-712): A Comparative Reflection on "Creator" and "Creation" 法藏（643-712）筆下《華嚴經》中的盧舍那：談佛教中的創世者和創世</ref> According to Lin, the Huayan commentator [[Fazang]]'s conception of Vairocana contains "elements that approach Vairocana to the monotheistic God".<ref name=":03" /> However, Lin also notes that this Buddha is contained within a broader Buddhist metaphysics of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]], which tempers the reification of this Buddha as a monotheistic creator god.<ref name=":03" /> |
[[Thích Nhất Hạnh]], meanwhile, has written that the idea of the Buddha's "cosmic body", who is both the cosmos and its creator, "is very close to the idea of God in the theistic religions".<ref>{{Cite web |last=Thich Nhat Hanh |date=26 June 2015 |title=Connecting to Our Root Teacher, the Buddha |url=https://plumvillage.org/about/thich-nhat-hanh/letters/connecting-to-our-root-teacher-a-letter-from-thay-27-sept-2014/ |access-date=24 March 2023 |website=Plum Village}}</ref> Similarly, Lin Weiyu writes that the Huayan school interprets Vairocana as "omnipresent, omnipotent and identical to the universe itself".<ref name=":03">LIN Weiyu 林威宇 (UBC): Vairocana of the ''Avataṃsaka Sūtra'' as Interpreted by Fazang 法藏 (643-712): A Comparative Reflection on "Creator" and "Creation" 法藏（643-712）筆下《華嚴經》中的盧舍那：談佛教中的創世者和創世</ref> According to Lin, the Huayan commentator [[Fazang]]'s conception of Vairocana contains "elements that approach Vairocana to the monotheistic God".<ref name=":03" /> However, Lin also notes that this Buddha is contained within a broader Buddhist metaphysics of [[Śūnyatā|emptiness]], which tempers the reification of this Buddha as a monotheistic creator god.<ref name=":03" /> |
||
The [[Shingon Buddhism|Shingon]] Buddhist view of the Supreme Buddha [[Vairocana|Mahāvairocana]], whose body is seen as being the whole universe, has also been called "[[cosmotheism]]" (the idea that the cosmos is God) by scholars like Charles Eliot, [[Hajime Nakamura]], and Masaharu Anesaki.<ref>Eliot, Charles (2014). ''Japanese Buddhism,'' p. 340. Routledge.</ref><ref>Hajime Nakamura (1992). ''A Comparative History of Ideas'', p. 434. Motilal Banarsidass Publ.</ref><ref>Masaharu Anesaki (1915). ''Buddhist Art in Its Relation to Buddhist Ideals,'' p. 15. Houghton Mifflin.</ref> Fabio Rambelli terms it a kind of pantheism, the main doctrine of which is that Mahāvairocana's [[Dharmakāya|Dharma body]] is co-substantial with the universe and is the very substance that the universe consists of. Furthermore, this cosmic Buddha is seen as making use of all the sounds, thoughts, and forms in the universe to preach the Buddha's teaching to others. Thus, all forms, thoughts, and sounds in the universe are seen as manifestations and teachings of the Buddha.<ref>Teeuwen, M. (2014). [Review of the book ''A Buddhist Theory of Semiotics: Signs, Ontology, and Salvation in Japanese Esoteric Buddhism'', by Fabio Rambelli]. ''Monumenta Nipponica'' ''69''(2), 259-263. {{doi|10.1353/mni.2014.0025}}</ref> |
The [[Shingon Buddhism|Shingon]] Buddhist view of the Supreme Buddha [[Vairocana|Mahāvairocana]], whose body is seen as being the whole universe, has also been called "[[cosmotheism]]" (the idea that the cosmos is God) by scholars like Charles Eliot, [[Hajime Nakamura]], and Masaharu Anesaki.<ref>Eliot, Charles (2014). ''Japanese Buddhism,'' p. 340. Routledge.</ref><ref>Hajime Nakamura (1992). ''A Comparative History of Ideas'', p. 434. Motilal Banarsidass Publ.</ref><ref>Masaharu Anesaki (1915). ''Buddhist Art in Its Relation to Buddhist Ideals,'' p. 15. Houghton Mifflin.</ref> Fabio Rambelli terms it a kind of pantheism, the main doctrine of which is that Mahāvairocana's [[Dharmakāya|Dharma body]] is co-substantial with the universe and is the very substance that the universe consists of. Furthermore, this cosmic Buddha is seen as making use of all the sounds, thoughts, and forms in the universe to preach the Buddha's teaching to others. Thus, all forms, thoughts, and sounds in the universe are seen as manifestations and teachings of the Buddha.<ref>Teeuwen, M. (2014). [Review of the book ''A Buddhist Theory of Semiotics: Signs, Ontology, and Salvation in Japanese Esoteric Buddhism'', by Fabio Rambelli]. ''Monumenta Nipponica'' ''69''(2), 259-263. {{doi|10.1353/mni.2014.0025.}}</ref> |
||
===Tantric Adi-Buddha theory and theism=== |
===Tantric Adi-Buddha theory and theism=== |
||
Copy and paste: – — ° ′ ″ ≈ ≠ ≤ ≥ ± − × ÷ ← → · § Cite your sources: <ref></ref>
{{}} {{{}}} | [] [[]] [[Category:]] #REDIRECT [[]] <s></s> <sup></sup> <sub></sub> <code></code> <pre></pre> <blockquote></blockquote> <ref></ref> <ref name="" /> {{Reflist}} <references /> <includeonly></includeonly> <noinclude></noinclude> {{DEFAULTSORT:}} <nowiki></nowiki> <!-- --> <span class="plainlinks"></span>
Symbols: ~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • ¶ # ∞ ‹› «» ¤ ₳ ฿ ₵ ¢ ₡ ₢ $ ₫ ₯ € ₠ ₣ ƒ ₴ ₭ ₤ ℳ ₥ ₦ № ₧ ₰ £ ៛ ₨ ₪ ৳ ₮ ₩ ¥ ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦ 𝄫 ♭ ♮ ♯ 𝄪 © ® ™
Latin: A a Á á À à  â Ä ä Ǎ ǎ Ă ă Ā ā à ã Å å Ą ą Æ æ Ǣ ǣ B b C c Ć ć Ċ ċ Ĉ ĉ Č č Ç ç D d Ď ď Đ đ Ḍ ḍ Ð ð E e É é È è Ė ė Ê ê Ë ë Ě ě Ĕ ĕ Ē ē Ẽ ẽ Ę ę Ẹ ẹ Ɛ ɛ Ǝ ǝ Ə ə F f G g Ġ ġ Ĝ ĝ Ğ ğ Ģ ģ H h Ĥ ĥ Ħ ħ Ḥ ḥ I i İ ı Í í Ì ì Î î Ï ï Ǐ ǐ Ĭ ĭ Ī ī Ĩ ĩ Į į Ị ị J j Ĵ ĵ K k Ķ ķ L l Ĺ ĺ Ŀ ŀ Ľ ľ Ļ ļ Ł ł Ḷ ḷ Ḹ ḹ M m Ṃ ṃ N n Ń ń Ň ň Ñ ñ Ņ ņ Ṇ ṇ Ŋ ŋ O o Ó ó Ò ò Ô ô Ö ö Ǒ ǒ Ŏ ŏ Ō ō Õ õ Ǫ ǫ Ọ ọ Ő ő Ø ø Œ œ Ɔ ɔ P p Q q R r Ŕ ŕ Ř ř Ŗ ŗ Ṛ ṛ Ṝ ṝ S s Ś ś Ŝ ŝ Š š Ş ş Ș ș Ṣ ṣ ß T t Ť ť Ţ ţ Ț ț Ṭ ṭ Þ þ U u Ú ú Ù ù Û û Ü ü Ǔ ǔ Ŭ ŭ Ū ū Ũ ũ Ů ů Ų ų Ụ ụ Ű ű Ǘ ǘ Ǜ ǜ Ǚ ǚ Ǖ ǖ V v W w Ŵ ŵ X x Y y Ý ý Ŷ ŷ Ÿ ÿ Ỹ ỹ Ȳ ȳ Z z Ź ź Ż ż Ž ž ß Ð ð Þ þ Ŋ ŋ Ə ə
Greek: Ά ά Έ έ Ή ή Ί ί Ό ό Ύ ύ Ώ ώ Α α Β β Γ γ Δ δ Ε ε Ζ ζ Η η Θ θ Ι ι Κ κ Λ λ Μ μ Ν ν Ξ ξ Ο ο Π π Ρ ρ Σ σ ς Τ τ Υ υ Φ φ Χ χ Ψ ψ Ω ω {{Polytonic|}}
Cyrillic: А а Б б В в Г г Ґ ґ Ѓ ѓ Д д Ђ ђ Е е Ё ё Є є Ж ж З з Ѕ ѕ И и І і Ї ї Й й Ј ј К к Ќ ќ Л л Љ љ М м Н н Њ њ О о П п Р р С с Т т Ћ ћ У у Ў ў Ф ф Х х Ц ц Ч ч Џ џ Ш ш Щ щ Ъ ъ Ы ы Ь ь Э э Ю ю Я я ́
IPA: t̪ d̪ ʈ ɖ ɟ ɡ ɢ ʡ ʔ ɸ β θ ð ʃ ʒ ɕ ʑ ʂ ʐ ç ʝ ɣ χ ʁ ħ ʕ ʜ ʢ ɦ ɱ ɳ ɲ ŋ ɴ ʋ ɹ ɻ ɰ ʙ ⱱ ʀ ɾ ɽ ɫ ɬ ɮ ɺ ɭ ʎ ʟ ɥ ʍ ɧ ʼ ɓ ɗ ʄ ɠ ʛ ʘ ǀ ǃ ǂ ǁ ɨ ʉ ɯ ɪ ʏ ʊ ø ɘ ɵ ɤ ə ɚ ɛ œ ɜ ɝ ɞ ʌ ɔ æ ɐ ɶ ɑ ɒ ʰ ʱ ʷ ʲ ˠ ˤ ⁿ ˡ ˈ ˌ ː ˑ ̪ {{IPA|}}
Wikidata entities used in this page
Pages transcluded onto the current version of this page (help):
This page is a member of 11 hidden categories (help):
