For "Secular" Buddhists: On Nihilism

MindGate

A question posed to the 'Stephen Bachelor' Buddhists, Secular Buddhists, etc, among us:

While rejecting the metaphysical and supernatural bits of Buddhism (although to the extent of something such as rebirth being "supernatural" or beyond science is debatable, I will assume from a secular standpoint that it is), how does one keep themselves from becoming nihilists (even yet, existential nihilists), a concept the Buddha was full-heartedly against? Without the belief in a continuation of consciousness or karma, whatever interpretation of rebirth you wish, or other such beliefs, what stops you from becoming nihilistic? Or, if you are nihilistic, how could you defend that belief to be part of "Buddhism" when it was a concept so inherently against what the Buddha taught (to my knowledge)?

Thank you.

[As for some background information from where this question is coming from, I have been becoming a more cynical individual since my departure from Buddhism over the passed two years. I've also grown to become an existential nihilist in most aspects of my life and view of the world. While I do believe that existential nihilism is the correct view of the world (at least at this point in my life), I am not at all happy about it and am desperately looking for other answers. It is an idea that has caused me great distress, and coupled with many other things, is part of the reason I have begun a long descent into depression. I am hoping that delving into Buddhism again will bring light to my now dark world.]

vinlyn

@MindGate, don't assume that secular Buddhists go to extremes.

MindGate

@vinlyn

Only you (well, that is a lie) would respond with such an unhelpful comment such as that. Rather than responding with a one-liner that doesn't actually answer the question and points posed, why don't you go more in-depth? Do you mean that secular Buddhists do believe in literal rebirth? Or, do you mean that secular Buddhists do not fall into nihilism? And, do you know what I mean by secular? I do not mean a non-sectarian Buddhist. I am speaking of the Sam Harris/Stephen Bachelor "Buddhist Atheist" type Buddhists. Please do try to be more helpful if you bother responding.

lobster

Thanks mindgate. That is a deeply felt question. Most of my life I have always had a sense of deity. I can understand most peoples viewpoint but not a Nihilistic standpoint. Like you I developed an interest in scepticism and atheism. I entered the atheistic viewpoint. Experienced the certainty and truth of it. I lived there for a couple of years. I had found truth but not happiness. So . . . if god, meaning, the middle way, the Mahayana vow - whatever projection was false but maybe was happier - what to do?

Fake it.

In other words practice the falsities until they take on their own reality or truth. You can not be convinced by argument or mental dialog. The day I decided to choose 'meaning' or practice over nihilism was the way to transcend both emptiness and chaos and order and meaning. If something like prostrations is impossible for you, then maybe at least do something to help others suffering . . .

Emptiness is Form and Form is Emptiness
might be a good point to begin . . . .

vinlyn

First, you can't peg all secular Buddhists as carbon copies of each other. I would say we are more a group of people on a broad continuum within various schools of Buddhism.

Secondly, how are you defining nihilism? Miriam-Websters defines it as, "a viewpoint that traditional values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless; and a doctrine that denies any objective ground of truth and especially of moral truths". It would seem to me that anyone that has that viewpoint is simply not a Buddhist.

Because we secular Buddhists are on such a wide continuum, I can't speak for secular Buddhists. But as for myself, I believe Buddha was a brilliant teacher who taught compassion, a moral system, and the means to alleviate suffering. I do not believe that Buddhism encompasses all that is important in this world or the next (if there is a "next"). I see Buddhism to be an effective philosophy of life for some, and an effective religion for others, although I don't believe there is one "right" religion, but there are some "wrong" religions. I am open-minded about the aspects of Buddhism that cannot be proven, but I don't just swallow everything, and I try to be humble enough to realize that almost anything which I believe might just be not reality.

Cinorjer

You mean by nihilism, the viewpoint that existence is senseless, meaningless, etc? Well, I see instead that a belief in reincarnation and such as being what robs this life of meaning. If the only purpose or goal in life is to accumulate enough good karma so that you can escape this world entirely (Nirvana or Heaven or whatever) then your life today is reduced to the level of a video game, where getting killed without reaching your goal or accumulating enough good karma points means you have to go back and do it again.

What a meaningless, trivial life that is, in my eyes.

We must each answer, what makes life worth living? Remember, the ultimate goal of classic Buddhism is Nirvana, or the extinguishing of the self, the unique consciousness that is you. Somehow, the question of why this doesn't amount to nihilism doesn't crop up very often. Probably because people don't believe they'll ever make it, not if they're honest with themselves. Be good enough so you're reborn as a human in pretty good circumstances, and you can sit around and talk about how great it would be, to be Enlightened, for another lifetime.

Here's the open secret to Buddhism. People talk a good game, but they don't really want to be Enlightened, because that would mean letting go of all those fun things you're doing right now. You'd drop what you're doing and join some temple and be a monk and go for it seriously, not dabble with it like almost everyone does.

And that's OK. This life we're living right now is, in my mind, all there is for me. For the person inside this body. That makes it a precious thing. I don't have countless multiple lifetimes to screw around. That's hardly nihilism.

Does that begin to answer your question?

how

Allow me to skirt the edges of Buddhist heresy.

As time goes on, the practise unfolds perfectly without this particular nebulous being needing to believe in anything. In 40 years of sitting I do not remember belief or dis belief ever being requested of me in meditation.
I say this because perhaps the focus on such questions for you might only be a distraction on the path to the cessation of suffering. Perhaps faith is just leaving such questions for ones meditation to address if and when they ever might need to be. Perhaps there may not be a spiritual need for you to possess the answers to what will eventually unfold.
Perhaps that whatever needs such a possession is the only real darkness in your world?

zenff

MindGate said:

While rejecting the metaphysical and supernatural bits of Buddhism (although to the extent of something such as rebirth being "supernatural" or beyond science is debatable, I will assume from a secular standpoint that it is), how does one keep themselves from becoming nihilists (even yet, existential nihilists), a concept the Buddha was full-heartedly against? Without the belief in a continuation of consciousness or karma, whatever interpretation of rebirth you wish, or other such beliefs, what stops you from becoming nihilistic? Or, if you are nihilistic, how could you defend that belief to be part of "Buddhism" when it was a concept so inherently against what the Buddha taught (to my knowledge)?

Thank you.

For me the key is to have faith in practice.
I don’t honestly believe every magical nonsense in Buddhism: there is so much nonsense in other religions why would ours be any different from theirs?

But I can believe in practice; that is in meditation and in keeping the basic precepts.
This practice is meaningful. I’m reading in Dogen’s Shobogenzo now (just finished chapter 1). Keeping precepts (the gradual approach) is essential. We need to do it for our meditation (the sudden approach) to get going.

When our practice is consistent and whole hearted, some “magic” is going to happen; but this magic is awakening to the Way.
I’ll just throw in a quote, which gives you an idea of what I’m reading at the moment:

Nothing,up to and including realizing enlightenment and nirvana, is excluded from the innate nature of your mind. Each and every thing throughout the whole of the universe is simply ‘the One Mind’ from which nothing whatsoever is excluded. All Gates to the Teaching are equally of this One Mind. To assert that there are no differences whatsoever is the way the Buddhist family understands the nature of Mind. So, within this one all-inclusive Dharma, how can you separate body from mind or split ‘birth and death’ off from ‘nirvana’?

There’s a free download on the site of Shasta Abbey. http://www.shastaabbey.org/

Jason

MindGate said:

A question posed to the 'Stephen Bachelor' Buddhists, Secular Buddhists, etc, among us:

While rejecting the metaphysical and supernatural bits of Buddhism (although to the extent of something such as rebirth being "supernatural" or beyond science is debatable, I will assume from a secular standpoint that it is), how does one keep themselves from becoming nihilists (even yet, existential nihilists), a concept the Buddha was full-heartedly against?

I'm more of a skeptical yet open-minded Buddhist myself; but for me, the answer is fairly simple: Because actions still have consequences; and just as a human being, I care about whether or not I cause suffering for myself and others in this life, regardless of what happens after death. Moreover, I want to be happy, and so do those around me. The Buddha himself pointed out that there's no one that's as dear to us as ourselves (SN 3.8), which is a fairly decent and logical reason to desire the happiness of others as well as our own. The reasoning behind this is simple. If our happiness comes at the expense of others' happiness, they'll do everything in their power to upset ours. Conversely, if others were to infringe upon ours, wouldn't it follow that we'd do everything in our power to upset theirs? It seems like a vicious circle to me, and one of the ways to break this circle is to adopt an ethical framework or way of living that takes the happiness of others into consideration, much like that posited by Buddhism and other spiritual traditions. In essence, even if there's not point to life, and no possibility of life after death, I still give a shit about what happens to me in this life; and for whatever reason, I'd rather try to live it well than act like an asshole or end it prematurely.

OneLifeForm

Cinorjer said:

You mean by nihilism, the viewpoint that existence is senseless, meaningless, etc? Well, I see instead that a belief in reincarnation and such as being what robs this life of meaning. If the only purpose or goal in life is to accumulate enough good karma so that you can escape this world entirely (Nirvana or Heaven or whatever) then your life today is reduced to the level of a video game, where getting killed without reaching your goal or accumulating enough good karma points means you have to go back and do it again.

What a meaningless, trivial life that is, in my eyes.

We must each answer, what makes life worth living? Remember, the ultimate goal of classic Buddhism is Nirvana, or the extinguishing of the self, the unique consciousness that is you. Somehow, the question of why this doesn't amount to nihilism doesn't crop up very often. Probably because people don't believe they'll ever make it, not if they're honest with themselves. Be good enough so you're reborn as a human in pretty good circumstances, and you can sit around and talk about how great it would be, to be Enlightened, for another lifetime.

Here's the open secret to Buddhism. People talk a good game, but they don't really want to be Enlightened, because that would mean letting go of all those fun things you're doing right now. You'd drop what you're doing and join some temple and be a monk and go for it seriously, not dabble with it like almost everyone does.

And that's OK. This life we're living right now is, in my mind, all there is for me. For the person inside this body. That makes it a precious thing. I don't have countless multiple lifetimes to screw around. That's hardly nihilism.

Does that begin to answer your question?

"In your eyes" are the key words of this post.

What a ridiculous thing to type.. people don't really want to be completely free of suffering.. right.. that makes sense.

lobster

What a ridiculous thing to type.. people don't really want to be completely free of suffering.. right.. that makes sense.

That may be. However by their continual repeat of behaviour that is known to result in suffering. By their avoidace of a good ethical life and its positive feedback, by the road to nihilistic thought and so on, it is clear that many pepople do not really want any emancipation. We are very much attached to destructive relationships, environments, intoxicants and so on.

we love the devil we know . . .
it may not make sense but how many of us recognise the human condition in such behaviour?
. . . ridiculous it may be,
. . . familiar?

Cinorjer

@onelifeform I am aware it might sound ridiculous, but if we believe as Buddha said, that anyone can be enlightened and that it is only a matter of putting in the right effort, then why aren't you enlightened? What's stopping you? What's stopping any of us in this lifetime?

Because enlightenment carries a steep price. You have to let go of what you are now to become something else, and we want to keep our old lives. We want just enough enlightenment to be special without letting go of our cherished ego. We don't want to pay the price, so we wade around a bit in the Dharma instead of jumping in head first and letting go of everything we cling to in life.

I call it being human. We set our goal way up on top of a mountain and claim it's almost impossible to reach, and that lets us off the hook. We don't really expect to reach it, personally. Only the rare special person can actually do that. That's what I mean by my statement. What's stopping any of us from being enlightened today? All you have to do is understand the Dharma. It's not difficult to understand. The Buddha gave us the 4 Noble Truths and they're simple enough, a child can understand the words.

If not now, then when?

music

@cinorjer, we can't become instantly enlightened because there is so much residual karma to be worked out. It isn't a matter of choice - we don't just decide one day to become enlightened. It happens when it will. All we can do is plant the seeds and wait. Karma isn't easy to overcome through will power or any other trick. It has to be gone through for thousands of births - then and then only do we become enlightened. It is a long, hard road ahead. Patience is what we need. Liberation is what we get.

Linc

OneLifeForm said:

What a ridiculous thing to type.. people don't really want to be completely free of suffering.. right.. that makes sense.

Disagree? That's cool. Ridicule? Not cool. It's a fine line and you're treading on the wrong side.

taiyaki

Well with practice and study is how we avoid the pitfalls of Nihilism.

Nihilism is interesting because we generally only ascribe to this philosophy when convenient.

But its rather easy. For there to be nothing there has to be something. Thus nothing is also a construction, fabrication.

In meditation one can access deep state of nothingness. And even these states can be seen to be fabrication, thus relinquished.

Buddhadharma is to be lived. If we cling to wrong views such as nihilism, then that conditions how we view the world, which in turn constructs our interactions/relationships etc.

True buddhadharma begins with having the correct view, which brings investigation into reality, which in turn allows for letting go and freedom.

All views have a function. Be it rebirth or emptiness. They are ways of seeing which bring letting go. There are no ontological truths or objective truths.

Whether we affirm or reject certain parts of Buddhism is irrelevant. Buddhism is an idea. The real Buddhism is the four yana journey that flowers when we are ready to face ourselves nakedly. This is a natural human procession, which requires deep inquiry and intimacy.

My two cents.

caz

Either you believe what Buddha taught was accurate or you don't. Buddhism requires a measure of faith as verifying the accuracy of Buddha statements requires a highly refined mind.

This secular Buddhism is an excuse for people to simply hold on to their views about the world instead of challenging their delusions.

Jeffrey

@Cinorjer, at the level of a Bodhisattva you directly realize that all beings can reach enlightenment.

Until then I do my meditation and study every day. Isn't that what we are supposed to do?

We also have the example of sangha members and others who uphold the dharma as living examples.

Cinorjer

Jeffrey said:

@Cinorjer, at the level of a Bodhisattva you directly realize that all beings can reach enlightenment.

Until then I do my meditation and study every day. Isn't that what we are supposed to do?

We also have the example of sangha members and others who uphold the dharma as living examples.

Of course. One thing I must ask those who say past karma is weighing them down...our karma got us to where we are today, but it's our present actions that determine where we go from here. Buddha taught freedom from karma as fate. He taught that anyone can be enlightened at any time, given the right effort. So is your goal to be enlightened in this lifetime, or to accumulate good karma for a future life? I really am interested in how people define their purpose in life.

Jeffrey

Why in this life? Why not in the next five minutes?

David

caz said:

Either you believe what Buddha taught was accurate or you don't. Buddhism requires a measure of faith as verifying the accuracy of Buddha statements requires a highly refined mind.

This secular Buddhism is an excuse for people to simply hold on to their views about the world instead of challenging their delusions.

How do you know it isn't the other way around?

Personally, I hold fast to the 4 Noble Truths and the Eightfold Path. Any further teachings that do not either reinforce these or expand on one aspect are up for critical examination before I believe they are true teachings of Buddha.

Just because somebody said that Buddha performed miracles doesn't mean I accept that. Why would he need to fly for example? Do we need flying to overcome suffering? It makes little sense to bother interjecting magic when the dharma speaks for itself without the bells and whistles.

Supernatural seems to me a funny word because either the conditions allow for a thing to happen or they don't. If something happens, it happenes naturally.

I accept karma and I accept rebirth but I don't subscribe to any one belief on how the two may work together.

I think the Buddha would want us to examine things and be agnostic towards that which doesn't move the dharma forward.

I could be considered a secular Buddhist in a way but I've never heard of this Stephen Batchelor fellow. Is he supposed to represent my views or something?

Metallica

Stephen Bachelor isn't a Buddhist. He is slandering the Dharma by deliberate present wrong views onto people who wants to study the Dharma. This sort of action leads to Avici Hell.

STEPHEN BACHELOR is bad news. Anyone who is interest to BUDDHISM should not read his books.

Read a book by Monastics!!!!

Tosh

caz said:

Either you believe what Buddha taught was accurate or you don't. Buddhism requires a measure of faith as verifying the accuracy of Buddha statements requires a highly refined mind.

This secular Buddhism is an excuse for people to simply hold on to their views about the world instead of challenging their delusions.

Don't you think this is a very dogmatic approach? I remember not long ago I quizzed a monk about his views on karma - they were very mechanical - (he gave an example that if you had your wallet stolen that was because you stole a wallet in this or a previous life). Anyway, his answer to my question was "Well that's what [insert name of spiritual director] teaches!".

That didn't do it for me. I can't force a belief (even if at times I would like to) and neither can I just believe something because someone tells me it's true or it's written in some crusty old scripture.

I prefer the 'don't know' approach when faced with this kind of stuff, rather than the "I do know because it's in a book, or someone very special teaches it" approach.

Vastmind

Look....ssonghhill dropped by tonight lololololol

Metallica

It seems people on here are open minded and tolerant toward anything except Buddhist teachings

Vastmind

I just dont like slandering other people, that's all.
Even if they slander the Dharma. I have my own shit to
worry about.
Teach me, by all means. Well...not all...but you get my point.
hahahaha
Trust me that I can make the difference.
My bull shitter meter works, if that's what
you want to know.

Metallica

The symptoms of the modern runs deep. It's sad number of young people will lose the way as soon as they develope interest for the Dharma and jump onto the internet for this information. Some with enough merit and inner fortune are actually pure and open minded enough to obtain right views even from a misguided forum like this. Unfortunaetly many others are simply trying to find more clever ways to argue their own view. You might as interchange "I am a Buddhist" with "I am a new wave indie rocker" etc.

I suppose it's understandable, we have so much merit to be reborn in this western first world society. Where are needs are met and our egos are high, so when encountering something like the Dharma, we just cannot change ourselves, instead we twist the "perceived meanings" as excuses. Not to mention arrogantly slander High practitioners and monks as less wise than our own views.

caz

Tosh said:

caz said:

Either you believe what Buddha taught was accurate or you don't. Buddhism requires a measure of faith as verifying the accuracy of Buddha statements requires a highly refined mind.

This secular Buddhism is an excuse for people to simply hold on to their views about the world instead of challenging their delusions.

Don't you think this is a very dogmatic approach? I remember not long ago I quizzed a monk about his views on karma - they were very mechanical - (he gave an example that if you had your wallet stolen that was because you stole a wallet in this or a previous life). Anyway, his answer to my question was "Well that's what [insert name of spiritual director] teaches!".

That didn't do it for me. I can't force a belief (even if at times I would like to) and neither can I just believe something because someone tells me it's true or it's written in some crusty old scripture.

I prefer the 'don't know' approach when faced with this kind of stuff, rather than the "I do know because it's in a book, or someone very special teaches it" approach.

This is how it has always been to avoid the dilution of Buddhism, In order to do so it requires you keep an open mind and not to close it with wrong worldly views.

Those who persist in wrong views and teach wrong views slander Buddha and Dharma, Not even Buddha expected people to simply believe, But rather keep an open mind and test the teachings. Some teachings cannot be tested so easily because as I previously said they require a very refined mind to apprehend. Buddhism has a set view on the nature of things it is not a New age junk shop free for all as some would wish it to be there are Right and wrong views as said by the Buddha.

Metallica

lol, I love Caz, dude's got compassion and paitence

how

@Metallica
WoW..Monastics have the light, the truth and the way.
Where have you been hiding!
I have spent some years on other sites trying to help address the Avici Hells that some other monastic's have and continue to create.
Delusion is not the prerogative of the laity.
But thanks for the author review.

Wasn't he once a monastic?

David

Would it still make sense if somebody other than the Buddha said it?

If not, he probably never said it.

JMO

vinlyn

Metallica said:

It seems people on here are open minded and tolerant toward anything except Buddhist teachings

To be honest with you, the more you and Songhill preach against Batchelor, the more interested I am in reading him. In fact, started one of his books a couple of days ago.
Thanks for helping to broaden my perspective!

DaftChris

Metallica said:

It seems people on here are open minded and tolerant toward anything except Buddhist teachings

Yet you aren't open to Batchelor. Isn't one of the teachings of Buddhism to be open to other views and paths; even if we don't agree with them?

I don't really agree with him either, but he has the right to believe (or rather not believe) what he wants.

lobster

@Mindgate, many of us Buddhists, non-buddhists and fellow samsara dwellers illustrate so well, the descent into karmic hindrances.
To enter into a post trivia or suffering mind frame, takes a conscious decision to follow a beneficial life style such as the 8 fold path . . .

OneLifeForm

Cinorjer said:

@onelifeform I am aware it might sound ridiculous, but if we believe as Buddha said, that anyone can be enlightened and that it is only a matter of putting in the right effort, then why aren't you enlightened? What's stopping you? What's stopping any of us in this lifetime?

Because enlightenment carries a steep price. You have to let go of what you are now to become something else, and we want to keep our old lives. We want just enough enlightenment to be special without letting go of our cherished ego. We don't want to pay the price, so we wade around a bit in the Dharma instead of jumping in head first and letting go of everything we cling to in life.

I call it being human. We set our goal way up on top of a mountain and claim it's almost impossible to reach, and that lets us off the hook. We don't really expect to reach it, personally. Only the rare special person can actually do that. That's what I mean by my statement. What's stopping any of us from being enlightened today? All you have to do is understand the Dharma. It's not difficult to understand. The Buddha gave us the 4 Noble Truths and they're simple enough, a child can understand the words.

If not now, then when?

I can kind of understand where you are coming from but what you were saying is just SUCH a blanket statement and I found it to be ridiculous. Still do.


You have to understand that we can only be where we are.


I have had personal experience with understanding of emptiness.. it is as follows..

I read all different kinds of books when first getting into Buddhism. A lot of truly great stuff.

Each one of those books had stuff about emptiness in them but because of the causes and conditions that led to my perceptions all those different occasions I literally was not able to see anything about emptiness.

I was completely blind to it.

Couldn't see it at all even though I "read" about it.

It was like a blind man reading braille about what the color purple is like.

Then I received a teaching on Wisdom and it all came together so nicely.

HOW SIMPLE IS THIS!?!!! HOW COULD I EVER THINK OTHERWISE!?!?!?!?!!?!?!!?!?

Causes and conditions came together and I gained some understanding about the subject matter and it has since been a great deal of help to me.


I typed all that to simply illustrate that we can only be where we are man.

That is it.


It is great that you want everybody to be able to have the insights that you do and that you see they are helpful but saying that -> "People talk a good game, but they don't really want to be Enlightened, because that would mean letting go of all those fun things you're doing right now." is ridiculous, and that is just my opinion.

People do not want to suffer, at all. Even ones that have some insight, we still find ourselves clinging to the same old habitual routines. We are ignorant/afraid.


I get what you are saying though, it is difficult to let go of that stuff and most people don't seem willing to "give it their all". It isn't up to you or I to judge other peoples growth though.


For most the following quote holds true.

"When the pain of remaining the same becomes greater than the fear of change, we will surely let go."

Most of the time for me that is what it takes.


Hope this helps.. and I didn't mean to offend anyone by what I typed.

Nevermind

how does one keep themselves from becoming nihilists?

As though anyone could see it coming... but anyway, once nihilisized it might be best to just accept the situation and allow the thoughts and feelings to take their corse and fade away.

pegembara

Clinging to this body and mind as ours leads to both extremes. On the one hand there is annihilation when the body/mind dies. Or eternalism when there is a refusal to accept death and a wish for some form of continuation.

The way out of this conundrum is through the Middle Way.

"This world, Kaccāyana, for the most part, bases its views on two things: on existence and non-exis­tence. Now, Kac­cāyana, to one who with right wisdom sees the arising of the world as it is, the view of non-existence regarding the world does not occur. And to one who with right wisdom sees the cessation of the world as it really is, the view of existence regarding the world does not occur." (ie. emptiness or sunyata. We live in a world of illusion and don't see the world as it is. Note that emptiness is not no thing but that things lack inherent existence. Things change from moment to moment like a flowing river.)

"`Everything exists', Kaccāyana, is one extreme. `Nothing ex­ists' is the other extreme. Not approaching either of those ex­tremes, Kac­cāyana, the Tathāgata teaches the Dhamma by the middle way:

From ignorance as condition,................. from becoming as condi­tion, birth comes to be; and from birth as condition, decay-and-death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair come to be. Such is the arising of this entire mass of suf­fering. (Paticcasamupada)

Kaccāyanagottasutta

Patr

As mentioned, Buddhist Dharma is very vast, very deep and profound, cant expect just anyone to understand all topics, especially those in the Abdhidharma.
The topics for everyday living, such as 4 Noble truths are more relevant and easily digestable to all.

Lets for example look at Physics, gravity, friction, motion are like the 4 NT everyday stuff. But if we go into quarks, strings, dark matter, 4th dimension, the size of the Universe, how many of us would comprehend??
For those that dont, they should be kept to one side, until we have achieved a certain of understanding. Its alright to disbelieve, but not to disparage or label it as nonsense.

Coming back, the people who understand the Dharma and those that dont, the above OP topic spells it out clearly. Nothing wrong with that though.... Its only when those who dont have the wisdom, spreads the wrong teachings.

Theres a huge difference between saying" I dont understand and I dont believe" and then writing a book about it.

I've not read Batchelors books, so its not a post about him, just that there are many like what I described.

caz

DaftChris said:

Metallica said:

It seems people on here are open minded and tolerant toward anything except Buddhist teachings

Yet you aren't open to Batchelor. Isn't one of the teachings of Buddhism to be open to other views and paths; even if we don't agree with them?

I don't really agree with him either, but he has the right to believe (or rather not believe) what he wants.

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

Cinorjer

OneLifeForm said:

I can kind of understand where you are coming from but what you were saying is just SUCH a blanket statement and I found it to be ridiculous. Still do.
You have to understand that we can only be where we are.
I have had personal experience with understanding of emptiness.. it is as follows..
I read all different kinds of books when first getting into Buddhism. A lot of truly great stuff.
Each one of those books had stuff about emptiness in them but because of the causes and conditions that led to my perceptions all those different occasions I literally was not able to see anything about emptiness.
I was completely blind to it.
Couldn't see it at all even though I "read" about it.
It was like a blind man reading braille about what the color purple is like.
Then I received a teaching on Wisdom and it all came together so nicely.
HOW SIMPLE IS THIS!?!!! HOW COULD I EVER THINK OTHERWISE!?!?!?!?!!?!?!!?!?
Causes and conditions came together and I gained some understanding about the subject matter and it has since been a great deal of help to me.
I typed all that to simply illustrate that we can only be where we are man.
That is it.

It is great that you want everybody to be able to have the insights that you do and that you see they are helpful but saying that -> "People talk a good game, but they don't really want to be Enlightened, because that would mean letting go of all those fun things you're doing right now." is ridiculous, and that is just my opinion.
People do not want to suffer, at all. Even ones that have some insight, we still find ourselves clinging to the same old habitual routines. We are ignorant/afraid.

I get what you are saying though, it is difficult to let go of that stuff and most people don't seem willing to "give it their all". It isn't up to you or I to judge other peoples growth though.

For most the following quote holds true.
"When the pain of remaining the same becomes greater than the fear of change, we will surely let go."
Most of the time for me that is what it takes.
Hope this helps.. and I didn't mean to offend anyone by what I typed.

Heh. If I put my wild ideas out there for criticism, I can hardly be offended when someone takes me up on the offer, can I? And I think you made a compelling counter-argument. A lot of what holds us back is old baggage we all carry around with us: past hurts and experiences and teachings and beliefs that we don't or can't let go of. Just how far back that goes and to what extent we can't let go of it can be debated, but even we skeptical Buddhists can observe that we all have past karma from at least this life to deal with and that past karma affects who we are right now and our present actions. It's the consequence part of "actions have consequences".

Cinorjer

Metallica said:

The symptoms of the modern runs deep. It's sad number of young people will lose the way as soon as they develope interest for the Dharma and jump onto the internet for this information. Some with enough merit and inner fortune are actually pure and open minded enough to obtain right views even from a misguided forum like this. Unfortunaetly many others are simply trying to find more clever ways to argue their own view. You might as interchange "I am a Buddhist" with "I am a new wave indie rocker" etc.

I suppose it's understandable, we have so much merit to be reborn in this western first world society. Where are needs are met and our egos are high, so when encountering something like the Dharma, we just cannot change ourselves, instead we twist the "perceived meanings" as excuses. Not to mention arrogantly slander High practitioners and monks as less wise than our own views.

Or, these modern young people might discover on this board that unlike many other religions, Buddhism welcomes people with different ways of looking at the world and welcomes healthy debate instead of shouting "Because Buddha said so, that's why. So sit down, shut up and believe what we tell you to believe! If you don't believe everything I believe, you're defiling Buddhism!"

Replace the name Buddha with Christ, and that's exactly the intolerent attitude to questioning my religion that drove me away from my family's church to begin with. Seeing it applied to Buddhism gives me a sour taste in my mouth.

The only way I can respond is to say first, you vastly overestimate the power of something like anonymous posts on an internet board to change people's beliefs and opinions. Trust the Dharma to stand up to a bit of questioning and exploring different ways of following the Middle Way. It has done so for thousands of years now, and will continue to do so. Personally, I think the willingness to toss people the ball and let them run with it is one of its great strengths.

Oh, and I have never and will never slander a monk, arrogantly or otherwise. But I will question their words and actions at times and discuss how their understanding and behavior fits into what the sutras say or I believe. Yes, I know some Buddhists have been taught that monks and other advanced practitioners operate on an advanced spiritual level and we cannot question their actions or words. The monks I've known were great people but just people.

seeker242

MindGate said:

It is an idea that has caused me great distress, and coupled with many other things, is part of the reason I have begun a long descent into depression. I am hoping that delving into Buddhism again will bring light to my now dark world.

Do you do meditation practice?

vinlyn

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

seeker242

vinlyn said:

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

Some good points. But at the same time "skeptical doubt" has always been considered one of the ten fetters and one of the five hindrances, hasn't it? It appears to me that the Buddha did actually teach that.

vinlyn

seeker242 said:

vinlyn said:

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

Some good points. But at the same time "skeptical doubt" has always been considered one of the ten fetters and one of the five hindrances, hasn't it?

I would guess it's a question of degrees, and my perception is that every religion has those "lines in the sand" that are rather nebulous. The real question here -- and I think it's a key question -- is does Buddhism allow freedom of thought?

seeker242

vinlyn said:

seeker242 said:

vinlyn said:

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

Some good points. But at the same time "skeptical doubt" has always been considered one of the ten fetters and one of the five hindrances, hasn't it?

I would guess it's a question of degrees, and my perception is that every religion has those "lines in the sand" that are rather nebulous. The real question here -- and I think it's a key question -- is does Buddhism allow freedom of thought?

I think it does. But at the same time is also says things like: "There are some kinds of thoughts that lead to suffering (AKA wrong views) and some kinds of thoughts that lead away from suffering. (AKA right views).

Which does not mean that you aren't free to think what you like. For example, you are free to think that money can buy happiness, but if you do think that, you will suffer. So it's not really saying you aren't free to think that. It's more just stating the consequences of different kinds of thinking. Or something like that.

vinlyn

^ Yes, but the question we're talking about here is -- is there freedom of thought to question teachings by Buddha. Without that, there is no freedom of thought in Buddhism. Funny thing about freedom of thought -- you either have it or you don't...there's no in-between.

caz

vinlyn said:

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

Buddhism is a mind science not a physical one.

caz

vinlyn said:

seeker242 said:

vinlyn said:

caz said:

Its one of the refuge vows is to avoid those people who preach what is contradictory to Buddhadharma and not be influenced by such teachers, As I said its fine to remain sceptical about certain topics but it is not right to reject them or disparage them as superstition, These are teachings of the Buddha coming from his very deep insight into the nature of things.

You practice the teachings gain confidence in them and keep your mind open. Then when your ready take a leap of faith as Buddha suggested, A virtuous mind of faith makes quick with progress where as a constant sceptic will never make any progress in deep examination.

So that eliminates the concept of Buddhism being a more scientific religion, because that kind of thinking is exactly the opposite of what science stands for.

You make Buddhism sound like old-fashioned communism. You must vote in the election...for the one and only candidate who is backed by the communist party.

You are free to contemplate and think, providing that you contemplate and think what I tell you to contemplate and think.

Some good points. But at the same time "skeptical doubt" has always been considered one of the ten fetters and one of the five hindrances, hasn't it?

I would guess it's a question of degrees, and my perception is that every religion has those "lines in the sand" that are rather nebulous. The real question here -- and I think it's a key question -- is does Buddhism allow freedom of thought?

You can think what you wish whether it adds up with the teachings is a different matter one thing you may be familiar with is that most freedom of thought happens to be tainted by deep rooted Ignorance so certain peoples musings on things are not worth their weight in consideration.