"Agnostic Buddhism"

[greenfield]

I've just read "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor and I think it's excellent

Has anyone else read it? Stephen tries to liberate Buddhism the philosophy and psychology from the magical thinking and institutionalism of much of Buddhism the religion: that ancient Asian ideas of karma and rebirth can be done away with or at least re-interpreted.

It set me thinking - while a lot of Abrahamic religious teaching are now regarded has bunk by many/most people in the secular West, many still romanticise Eastern religion. I'm thinking particularly of Hollywood actors being proclaimed reincarnations of dead Tibetan lamas, that kind of thing. I wonder why?

Thoughts on either of the above?

 

[Fruitloop]

Sounds ace, I'd probably put myself in that category but haven't read the book.

Idiot actors treat religion as a commodity; a pinch of kabbalah, a sprinkle of Dalai Llama. Most of them just need a smack upside the head.

 

[Belushi]

Isnt much of the more 'religious' aspects of Buddhism later additions?

 

[118118]

the magical bits are the bet bits tho! see the buddha - run him through.

 

[118118]

Sounds ace, I'd probably put myself in that category but haven't read the book.

yeah but, that doesn't sound massively rational..,. thinking that modern sceince hasn't isn't a more acurate psychology than the teachings of some religion

 

[118118]

their creation myth is fab. something about ethereal ceatures eating mud and then getting in argy over the mud - and hey presto - humans.

 

[fudgefactorfive]

I've just read "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor and I think it's excellent

Has anyone else read it? Stephen tries to liberate Buddhism the philosophy and psychology from the magical thinking and institutionalism of much of Buddhism the religion: that ancient Asian ideas of karma and rebirth can be done away with or at least re-interpreted.

sounds interesting

some different ways of looking at rebirth that have been suggested to me recently:

maybe it was a way to deal with the consequences of action actually reverberating onwards after your death, in a "chaos butterfly" sense - the knock-on effects of any action rapidly become unpredictable and, in a sense, never finish. in a sense, maybe it's possible that a "descendant" action, affected by the actions begun within in your life, cause a new birth to happen somewhere down the line, after your death.

it's a slight jump from that to "life after death" - for all i know, my final deathbed action might result instead in the eventual creation of a giant pink teapot - but hey, it's a religion, it's supposed to tidy these life-and-death questions up.

the word "karma" has become heavily invested with senses of retribution or some kind of cosmic justice that were entirely absent originally - it is literally just the accumulation of your actions. what you have done which got you to where and what you are now, the history of changes.

also, someone in this forum used the word "rebirth" on a buddhisty thread about consciousness, suggesting that some Chinese whispers have taken place: samsara, the world of suffering, can only be escaped by achieving enlightenment, which is when the "cycle of rebirth" ceases. but all that was meant by rebirth was the constant re-evocation of the ego in every moment - not a literal reincarnation or transmigration of essence beyond death. you still die - but while you are alive, you are constantly being reborn, which leads to suffering.

 

[118118]

but all that was meant by rebirth was the constant re-evocation of the ego in every moment - not a literal reincarnation or transmigration of essence beyond death

rubbish! what basis do you make that claim??

 

[118118]

yeah, sure, i'm sure that some people will say that what he said he meant metaphorically. maybe everyone will say the same after i'm dead. but its not the prevelent view, so hardly a chinese whisper. and you do know that Buddhism it idealist, presumabley the buddha to - unless you have any chinese whispers lying around.

 

[nosos]

That sounds awesome. The founder of the FWBO has a similar outlook.

The cultural apparatus of Buddhism is a means to an end and nothing more. If it works then use it and if it doesn’t then look elsewhere.

If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him.

 

[greenfield]

That sounds awesome. The founder of the FWBO has a similar outlook.

The cultural apparatus of Buddhism is a means to an end and nothing more. If it works then use it and if it doesn’t then look elsewhere.

If you see the Buddha on the road, kill him.

I've heard some funny things about the FWBO, but I've not had much experience of them, so I'm certainly not one to judge. Anyway completely agree with your post

 

[Idaho]

The book sounds very interesting. The FWBO are weirdos though.

 

[fela fan]

It set me thinking - while a lot of Abrahamic religious teaching are now regarded has bunk by many/most people in the secular West, many still romanticise Eastern religion. I'm thinking particularly of Hollywood actors being proclaimed reincarnations of dead Tibetan lamas, that kind of thing. I wonder why?

Thoughts on either of the above?

Spiritualism (not religion) is virtually non-existent in america. Those who have 'made it', who have no worries over money, who have apparantly met with great 'success' have come to realise that their life is still somewhat empty. The east is known for spiritualism, and hence it's a great place to turn to when you realise your life is empty.

In a nutshell, the west, purveyors of extreme capitalism, worshippers of the bank note, have ditched spiritualism, and sooner or later this will be felt by individuals. The lucky ones are those that come to realise...

 

[118118]

The cultural apparatus of Buddhism is a means to an end and nothing more. If it works then use it and if it doesn’t then look elsewhere.

yes thats certainly philosophical opinion on Buddha, as I understand it.

 

[Jazzz]

I've just read "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor and I think it's excellent

Has anyone else read it? Stephen tries to liberate Buddhism the philosophy and psychology from the magical thinking and institutionalism of much of Buddhism the religion: that ancient Asian ideas of karma and rebirth can be done away with or at least re-interpreted.

I haven't read the book... but dear god, why miss out on the juicy bits? I'll have the full meal please!

As if they could do you any harm!!!

 

[118118]

jazzzz: google pseudo-psychosis and meditation. apparently a fair few westerners and easterners suffer from it, after practiving meditation in the wrong way.

 

[118118]

Jazzz?

 

[Jazzz]

why do you ask?

e2a: ah, I get it. Well, maybe meditating wrong can possibly lead to unwanted side effects, but can you blame a belief in reincarnation for that?

 

[118118]

i ask what you think about it? i know that you are interested in buddha... i assume?

 

[118118]

imvho, the magical stuff may be the stuff that actually makes one better off, suffer less, be a nicer person etc. i have no proof.

funny story, may alreay have said: i wrote an email to my psyc professor, one lonely friday night a few yers ago, about what i wanted to do my dissertation on: me being the buddha!

i never got a reply. weird huh

 

[118118]

i was once a bit of a conspiracy bod. never got my words out tho... never got passed the "wtf, why isn't this all over the internet" phase. fwiw, i really lacked the ability to stand on two feet at the time. bbs have really helped me talk and tackle mini life problems and shit.

thanks!

 

[118118]

why do you ask?

e2a: ah, I get it. Well, maybe meditating wrong can possibly lead to unwanted side effects, but can you blame a belief in reincarnation for that?

yeah, have the googled it

its v interesting, i think fwiw.

i don't think one can blame actual metempsychosis (f*ing love that word) for it, but dunno about the concept.

 

[Jazzz]

just tried to pm you but your box is full 118118

 

[118118]

I'll delete all those phildwyer one's lol.

 

[118118]

your box jazzz.

 

[Jazzz]

 

[Dr Jon]

Most religions encapsulate nuggets of truth / wisdom. They have to do this to lend some credibility to all the rest of their thought-free nonsense. Buddhism seems to have more nuggets than other religions. Anything that further decouples it from superstition and irrationality is to be welcomed.

 

[Jonti]

sounds interesting

some different ways of looking at rebirth that have been suggested to me recently:

maybe it was a way to deal with the consequences of action actually reverberating onwards after your death, in a "chaos butterfly" sense - the knock-on effects of any action rapidly become unpredictable and, in a sense, never finish. in a sense, maybe it's possible that a "descendant" action, affected by the actions begun within in your life, cause a new birth to happen somewhere down the line, after your death.

it's a slight jump from that to "life after death" - for all i know, my final deathbed action might result instead in the eventual creation of a giant pink teapot - but hey, it's a religion, it's supposed to tidy these life-and-death questions up.

the word "karma" has become heavily invested with senses of retribution or some kind of cosmic justice that were entirely absent originally - it is literally just the accumulation of your actions. what you have done which got you to where and what you are now, the history of changes.

also, someone in this forum used the word "rebirth" on a buddhisty thread about consciousness, suggesting that some Chinese whispers have taken place: samsara, the world of suffering, can only be escaped by achieving enlightenment, which is when the "cycle of rebirth" ceases. but all that was meant by rebirth was the constant re-evocation of the ego in every moment - not a literal reincarnation or transmigration of essence beyond death. you still die - but while you are alive, you are constantly being reborn, which leads to suffering.

That's pretty much what I learned at this place, many years ago.

Karma is (postulated as) the law of action and reaction on the moral plain. Like ripples in water, the influence of one's actions spreads and rebounds in the world. Choppy waters result from a lack of karmic harmony!

There is an idea of reincarnation that quite naturally comes out of this way of thinking: Drop something into the left side of a circular bowl of water, and the ripples spread out, reflect of the sides of the bowl, and come back to a focus on the right hand side. Then they spread out from that point as if something had just been dropped in there ...

But this idea of 'reincarnation' is a very long way from the 'soul as transmigrating quasi-substantial thing' suggested by the indo-eurporean ideas of atman and avatar.

 

[118118]

But this idea of 'reincarnation' is a very long way from the 'soul as transmigrating quasi-substantial thing'

well, yes and no, metempsychosis is heavily involved in buddhist 'karma'. tho of course there is no soul, so...

 

[ska invita]

Buddhism it seems to me has countless branches and divisions, and it is hard to talk about them all without a fair amount of study.

However, to differing degrees they all have the following in common, I would say: they are gnostic traditions, in that through meditation and practice you can come to know and experience the true nature of the universe (particularly so in Zen Buddhism) - and they are atheist, or perhaps more accurately non-theistic - the forming of churches and the worshipping of deities is fiercely ruled out by Buddha.

Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, people have blurred that line a little, and in some places gods have been added. Not all Buddhists are atheists, but there are quite a few. The atheists are however gnostic-atheists, or strong atheists - through direct experience and practice they claim to know god doesnt exist.

But in a direct parralel to atheists on the atheism vs agnostic thread, these buddhist atheists resolutely choose not answer the question of how creation came to be - just like modern physicists! Avoiding this question makes any statements they may make on theism absolutely redundant in my opinion - if you dont ask the question you're not allowed to give an answer!

The Buddha typically retained a pointed silence in regard to these sorts of questions, so much so that at one point he was directly asked how the universe and life came to be and simply refused to answer. This refusal to answer should not be interpreted to imply ignorance-- there were competing theories at the time which the Buddha had undoubtedly heard of. Rather, this non-response is usually understood to mean that the question is irrelevant to Buddhist theory. One does not need to know the origin of life, nor agree with Buddha's position on scientific topics, in order to become awakened. [again, the same argument of physicists]

Put another way, Buddhism is not an overly metaphysical religion. It is more oriented toward phenomenology rather than metaphysics, which has contributed to some questions as to whether Buddhism should be regarded as a religion at all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_evolution

Going back to the book in the OP, taking out those bits he doesnt like doesnt make his version of Buddhism agnostic - I havent read it so cant say for certain, but it is likely that it is still gnostic, as it encourages a direct knowledge of the universe through meditation, and probably follows the atheist position that runs through Buddhism, so it too will be gnostic-atheist.

If it drops that atheist position it has dropped so much as not to be called Buddhism anymore, I would suggest, and is just a piece of neo-gnostic, transcendental meditaiton, within a modern skeptical agnostic tradition - which I'm all for - but its nothing much to do with Buddhism anymore.