Follow on from Atheist V Theist Thread
Kundo
Sydney, Australia Veteran
Hi all,
Following on from a closed thread : -
It is an "itchy" matter for me. The longer I practice Buddhism, the less I need to believe, and the more I am just mindful.
Still, there is this desire to think I "know" the answers to these unknowable questions. The itch doesn't go away. It becomes >more and more a shrug-your-shoulders kind of itch.
After all, the only thing that is truly knowable is this very moment. And this very moment seems to be very much grounded >in material consciousness.
I've found that the longer I study/practise Buddhism, the less I know or CARE if I'm atheist, theist, agnostic or calathumpian. I just care about being the best person I can be now.
Sorry @federica if this is off topic or a dead topic you can close the thread.
Namaste,
_ /\ _
Comments
for me studying Buddhism and perhaps more life experiences made me feel less pressured about what to think about God. I became more aware that the Christians had just been brought up that way. I guess I was more comfortable with myself and didn't feel like I needed to feud with them.
I want to be calathumpian!
Indeed.
It is a minor consideration. Want to eat burgers. OK. Want to believe you will come back as a cow. Good luck.
Theism is for some experiential, ingrained and even skilfull. For example our beloved moderator @Jason is a Christian mystic. Also knows more about Theravada than is decent in mixed company. @dhammachick is following dharma and Judaism. I worship my dishwasher as it saves much suffering. Though to be fair I love dishwashing as a mindfullness practice.
@Jeffrey is following a lama taught by a source I am highly critical of but without a doubt he and his lama are genuine practitioners.
My relationship with the SkyFish is complicated.
Just look at the Old Testament. They didn't go out with the army first. They sent the musicians out - Michael W. Smith
"The longer I practice Buddhism, the less I need to believe, and the more I am just mindful."
Me too. Practising mindfulness seems to make these beliefs irrelevant, even counter-productive. Best to get rid of them!
And if the goal of Buddhist practice is to "see things as they really are", how on earth does a head full of unsubstantiated beliefs help?
A Pagan I fully respect and admire once said to me "Witchcraft can be performed in the mind's eye. All the pentacles, athames, herbs and incense are just tools to help you focus, nothing more"
The Jew in me sees the ritual of prayer, kiddush, Tehilim and beliefs about God as tools to focus on the daily goals of living well and "doing the right thing". It's like when I recite mantras it helps me focus on the goal of the Eightfold Noble Path. Perhaps then these unsubstantiated beliefs act as tools towards remembering "thou shalt love they neighbour as thyself" "thou shalt not steal" etc etc. To be honest, if believing in a deity helps someone stop themself from being a complete douchecanoe, I'm all for it.
Just my 0.02
_ /\ _
Prayer can be a form of concentration meditation.
Mooji also talks about devotion and surrender to what is. Why not call it god?
Why bother calling it anything...?
It might make some Christians happier
if they talk about God, then I can jump in! 
"God is everywhere"
I agree!
God is love.
I agree!
Hahah then we are all happy!
Or all deluded? No thanks!
Are you saying you are not deluded?
If you are deluded, you may as well be happy and make others happy haha.
Plus I wouldn't even call myself buddhist all that often. I've read what you Buddhists do.
Tantric sex practices, trying to collect merit points like super Mario, and pretending I'm a deity with 4 arms.
Don't forget the zeniths with their sticks and the Hinayanists imprisoning people for kissing statues.
Here to help
....But as I said, if Buddhist practice is about seeing things as they really are, then it seems odd to use unsubstantiated beliefs as tools. And what about the right tools for the job? In the case of Buddhist practice meditation and mindfulness seem better fitted and less convoluted.
But of course it depends what you are trying to do.
No, I'm saying I don't want to add to the delusion with a load of weird beliefs, including the Buddhist ones.
I'd point out a distinction between healthy exploration and faith in dogma.
I don't care what kind of "ism" suits me best for my views but I do know I am agnostic when it comes to any beliefs and my own especially.
I feel Theists and Atheists alike are trying too hard. That's really none of my business until it gets made into policy.
@SpinyNorman are you sure it's just Buddhism, or is age at least part of it? I ask because my parents most certainly aren't Buddhism. But they care less about the same things you mentioned and more about the same things you mentioned. how much of our giving up caring about titles and labels and learning how to just be has to do simply with getting older regardless of what your beliefs are?
Yes, I think that's probably true, though I'd associate the letting go of beliefs specifically with Buddhist practice.
BTW @SpinyNorman I didn't mean to suggest you are old or anything
I just see the same thing in my parents and have found it interesting to observe and assumed it probably happens to a lot of older people. Although it seems to be particular to older people who have more open-minds. I know others who stayed so set in their beliefs and ways that they get more crochety and crabby about it as they get older. So, you're not OLD or anything! 
I'm older than you, but not that old.
That's one way of looking at, one that I myself tended to take. But I've since come to the opinion that the teachings of the Buddha, like many of the teachings in the Bible and other religious texts, are symbols, fingers pointing towards the moon (albeit pointing towards different parts of the same moon perhaps).
For me, it's not about collecting a head full of unsubstantiated beliefs so much as getting a fuller picture of religious experience and knowledge. Rebirth, if we hold it one way, is just an unsubstantiated belief for most of us. But it's also a finger pointing us towards the continuity that underlies experience in the form of our actions and their results (one that doesn't necessarily end at death), the purpose being to encourage us to develop awareness of casual patterns in life involving our intentional actions of body, speech, and mind with a soteriological eye towards reshaping our experience of the present in ways that limit and even eliminate suffering.
Other spiritual traditions have similar tools that I, and many others, find helpful. One example is the gospel reading from Friday:
It was a reminder for me of Jesus' true message, which I believe is ultimately one of compassion, contemplation, and renunciation. The first passage is a reminder that worldly things are ephemeral, transient, subject to change and dissolution, not worth clinging to. Instead, Jesus points us towards another kind of treasure, a heavenly (i.e., non-worldly) treasure, much like the Buddha: "Indeed, the path that leads to worldly gain is one and the Path that leads to Nibbana is another" (Dhp 75).
And the second, I think, isn't referring to our physical eyes so much as the 'eye of wisdom' that cuts through the darkness of ignorance and, in the words of Bhikkhu Nanamoli, "sees directly into the true nature of existence ordinarily hidden from us by our greed, aversion and delusion."
That doesn't mean, however, that they can't be mishandled, just like grabbing the proverbial snake by the tail instead of its head. If we cling to the words themselves, we tend to lose their deeper meaning, what they're encouraging us to do and see. I find today's gospel reading surprisingly relevant here:
To me, Jesus is pointing towards a moral form of causality here, not unlike the Buddhist concept of kamma. And if someone is mishandling and/or misinterpreting a particular teaching, it's not up to us to judge them. We're the owners of our own actions, not those of others. It's up to us to remove the beam/ignorance from our own eyes first, then we can try to help others remove theirs.
Nicely written, @Jason. You have the ability to bring people together.
While I tend to agree, that basically means that we never have the right to "correct" others, because none of us will completely have removed our own ignorance.
I have problems with this because I think there are many instances where it would be better to speak out and prevent others from being mislead rather than sit idly by.
What if a mishandling or misinterpretation meant that people were being led into a dangerous cult? While it's their own kamma, don't we as holders of the knowledge that harm is being done have a responsibility to stop it?
It seems to me there's a fine line here. While I think we should speak out about those who are on the wrong path, how do you know that "you" are correct? Yes, in extreme cases it may be obvious, but most cases are not extreme.
Well, I never said we can't address these things or correct others when we think they're wrong; I said "it's not up to us to judge them." Those are entirely two different things in my book, and I was more suggesting that we not belittle someone or pounce on others for their beliefs, but rather focus on our own practice. But I think we can always try to address what we perceive to be 'mishandlings' with wisdom and kindness, or at the very least, restraint.