The Samsara reveals that the human cycle is a journey. People go through a cycle of desire and suffering because of their ego and ignorance. As a result, they go through a cycle and series of rebirths until they can escape the treadmill.
Karma imprisons an individual by the transmigratory cycle. Every action has its effects. One should build up good karma and reduce bad karma so that one may escape the bondage of karma by surrendering to God and enlightenment (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
When one renounces the desires, one enters the Nirvana, which is the permanent liberation from the cycle of rebirth. It is the merging of the individual into the ultimate reality, which is Brahman (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Buddha’s truths reveal that there is suffering. It has distinct and identifiable causes. The individual can cause suffering to come to an end. It is through enlightened living that one can end suffering. One should meditate to end the suffering in Nirvana. One does not think that this idea is correct (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
The first two paths deal with the mental outlook of an individual that one should have the right view and right aim. The next four help one to have the appropriate behavior through right action, right speech, right living, and right effort (Moore & Bruder, 2011). The last two, which are right mindfulness and right contemplation, refer to the higher mental and spiritual qualities. It is a philosophy that is applicable. It is comforting to know how to control oneself to accomplish the path (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Lao Tzu believed that the Tao was both natural and eternal. Yang is one of the products resulting from Tao. Yin is also a result of this power. Tao is like an empty bowl that holds and yields vital energy in all things (Moore & Bruder, 2011). It is also a mean by which things attain fulfillment.
He believed that violence is the last resort, and one can avoid it by anticipation or reconciliation and resolving conflicts as they arise. Things must be left to continue as they are. He rewards evil with goodness. He thought his way was a superior lifestyle (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Confucius believed that everything continues according to its nature. Heaven works through the principle of Mean. It provides a standard of measure for all things. People should avoid extremes and operate in mutual dependence for mutual benefit.
Murasaki Shikibu lived at a time that women’s rights, even in religion, were non-existent. They needed to reincarnate as men so that they can earn their respect in society, and also reach their psychological state of Nirvana (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
The community regarded women like those men who had reincarnated. Women did not have the rights. She shows that apart from the reincarnation as men, women can still reach their enlightenment. They can begin the process in their current life by living according to the teachings of Shinto and Buddhism (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Upanishads explain the theories of Brahma. It is the source and sustainer of all things. It has a lower manifestation called Brahma, which is a deity or personal god. Atman is the principle of individual life. Through mediation, the Brahma, and the Atman is the same thing (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
The ontological argument attributed to the Bible claimed that God did not exist. According to St. Anselm, one cannot claim that God is nonexistent in reality, yet in one’s mind, one thinks the opposite. He argued that the idea did one act in a self-contradictory position. He said that God was the greatest being conceivable (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Gaunilo used Anselm’s reasoning to confound his mystery. He thought that if one would think of a perfect Island and found that the Island existed in reality, then it was a fact. But one cannot say that what one thinks is perfect without producing the real facts.
St. Thomas disapproved of the ontological argument by stating that one would not prove God’s existence by just considering the words of God. There would be a need to presume to know God’s essence first.
He came up with five ways. The first way claimed that all natural things are in motion (Moore & Bruder, 2011). The second claimed that nothing causes itself. The third was that anything that exists and that one can lay hands on could have necessarily not existed. It is only evident that God exists to cause things to happen (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
The fourth way was that since all natural things possess some level of goodness, truth, nobility, among other good qualities, there must be a source somewhere (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
The fifth proof was that all-natural things live to serve a purpose. That means they operate on some design or a plan. Therefore the intelligent being they serve must be God.
Leibniz argues that God is that necessary being outside the series of events that causes things to happen. God made a choice for creation to exist in this world because it is the most perfect of all worlds for existence. His notion is correct because if one thinks of any other planet to live on, there are very many things that are missing there. The earth supersedes them all by being sufficient to nurture all living things (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Friedrich said that God was dead. He meant that God had never existed and that human intelligence could prove that to be true. Peace and harmony exist because that is what the human mind perceives. He argues that philosophy, science, and religion inculcated all these opinions on men, and they believed in a fallacy that made them look weak. He says that the weakling human idea can become a new kind of a human being called Ubermensch (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
James argued that God existed. The non-intellectual nature of man influences man’s convictions. William believed that it was better to accept the truth than to avoid it because one wants to avoid errors. It is not good for one to find out later that it would have been better if he had believed (Moore & Bruder, 2011).
Belief in the existence of God is real, and there are valid reasons. One believes that the Universe was created by God and that God has given his creation free will. It is hard to find it otherwise because, historically, many atheist philosophers and scientists have never held the same view on the origin of the Universe. It then becomes logical to agree that it is only God who knows the end from the beginning.
Reference
Moore, B., & Bruder, K. (2011). Philosophy the power of ideas (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.