• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Nonbelievers and Buddhism

Trent Wray

Unregistered
T
Joined
Jan 25, 2010
Messages
4,487
I'm familiar only with very basic concepts about Buddhism (VERY basic). But I do see it referenced quite a bit, directly, throughout this forum.

Is there a draw to Buddhism for the atheist, non-believer, etc ? If so, specifically why? What is it about Buddhism that speaks to you (regardless of your belief status)?

Thanx in advance for any responses ...
 
I have a very basic idea of, more the history of Buddhism. I have read the transcript of the The Four Noble Truths By The Venerable Ajahn Sumedho which I enjoyed thoroughly. I had a copy of it posted on my old Earthling website which I'm slowly beginning to resurrect and will include the history of Buddhism along with the Dhammapadda and Four Noble Truths eventually.
 
I find that a lot of unbelievers will quote Buddhism in reference to other religions ( logic being they do less crazy things, or are more in tune with reality than other religions. ) , but to be honest you can find nutcase buhddists through history as well.

When i look at buhddists, i see nothing more or less attractive about the religion than any others.
 
Buddhism, in the popular western imagination, is a "diet" religion -- same great taste (belief in afterlife / sense of purpose / serenity of knowledge), less filling (no hell / sin / guilt).

I am not saying Buddhism actually has no concept of sin, etc., mind you -- only that that's the way it's usually popularly portrayed.

To paraphrase Michael Shermer's claim about agnostics, in many cases, western "Buddhists" are actually simply atheists with no balls.
 
As an Atheist, I'm open to the principles in Buddhism (and Taoism) because they provide philosophical/psychological insight into this thing we call existence. And, it doesn't involve having to surrender myself to some fairy-tale sky daddy, or adopt a belief system.

Most people today are probably thinking of the 'popular' versions where you worship the Buddha or fox fairies (Taoism), etc. The originals were never about that. I think they were, to an extent, ahead of their time, and the main reason they were able to grow so large was because they were turned into religions (how sad is that? lol ). In Taoism, the observation of nature was central to its 'methods', so eventually nature became deified, with practitioners worshiping forest deities, etc.

A main point of Taoism is wei wu wei, or 'doing without doing'...action flows naturally without internal struggle. Observing nature can give you insight into this, for instance water seeking the lowest path. It's illustrated in a story from Chuang Tzu about a butcher who, instead of struggling and hacking the meat, makes a few relaxed, deft motions and the meat just crumbles apart.

In my college days, I was a deist and even minored in religion. I eventually shed my belief in God and religion, however, if you had to label me I guess I would be a 'Taoist-flavored Atheist'.
 
Last edited:
sadhatter said:
I find that a lot of unbelievers will quote Buddhism in reference to other religions ( logic being they do less crazy things, or are more in tune with reality than other religions. ) , but to be honest you can find nutcase buhddists through history as well.

When i look at buhddists, i see nothing more or less attractive about the religion than any others.
Click to expand...

There are manifestations of Buddhism that are clearly religious and have all the flaws of other religions, but there are also approaches that are more about a particular aesthetic approach to experience.

As with much of psychology, the way you feel and live is the final test of whether it works. If meditating and trying not to want things makes an individual feel more peaceful and happy, then more power to them, and for some forms of Buddhism, that's the extent of the claim.
 
There's certainly woo involved in many aspects of Buddhism, but as far as I can tell it's possibly the least offensive religion, and it does have good things going for it (in my view), although the current Dalai Lama is against oral sex which I would think would be a deal breaker for many of us.

Here's an excerpt from the Wikipedia "God in Buddhism" article:

Buddhism is usually considered a religion, but is also commonly described as a "spiritual philosophy", because it generally lacks an absolute creator god. (Though many insist that it must be classified as a religion because it does contain all other religious beliefs: an afterlife, miracles, various spirits, including gods, who may help an individual, spiritual practices including prayer and meditation, and other things.) The Buddhist approach is empirical and based on experience. In the Four Noble Truths, the Buddha analyzed the problem of suffering, diagnosed its root cause and prescribed a method to dispel suffering. He taught that through insight into the nature of existence and the wisdom of "not-self" or "selflessness" (anatta) [2] all sentient beings following the noble eightfold path can dispel ignorance and thereby suffering. Hence Buddhism does not hinge upon the concept of a Creator God but upon the personal practice of ethics, meditation, and wisdom[3]
Click to expand...
 
There are aspects of Buddhism that I feel can be of use to modern man; the idea of non-attachment, for instance. Much human suffering is caused by our stubborn refusal to "let go" of things.
However, there's plenty of superstition to go 'round...

Likewise Taoism, which started out a rather simple statement of philosophy, became the state religion of China in a comparatively short time, absorbing all sorts of superstitious nonsense along the way.
Divination, magic, rituals...All of which would likely have made poor old Lao Tzu quiver in his grave.
 
Skeptic said:
Buddhism, in the popular western imagination, is a "diet" religion -- same great taste (belief in afterlife / sense of purpose / serenity of knowledge), less filling (no hell / sin / guilt).

I am not saying Buddhism actually has no concept of sin, etc., mind you -- only that that's the way it's usually popularly portrayed.

To paraphrase Michael Shermer's claim about agnostics, in many cases, western "Buddhists" are actually simply atheists with no balls.
Click to expand...
So most religion is either hard liquor, diet sodas, or poison ... and Buddhism is flavored water with no chaser ? :)

Cavemonster said:
There are manifestations of Buddhism that are clearly religious and have all the flaws of other religions, but there are also approaches that are more about a particular aesthetic approach to experience.

As with much of psychology, the way you feel and live is the final test of whether it works. If meditating and trying not to want things makes an individual feel more peaceful and happy, then more power to them, and for some forms of Buddhism, that's the extent of the claim.
Click to expand...
Okay .... the peaceful and happy thing. I know this might sound utterly ridiculous to ask, but why is peace and happiness such a preference?

What about those of us who are essentially unable to experience peace and happiness without a great effort? IOW, we are always on either side of peace and happiness but rarely find a chair to sit down in when we get there? Is Buddhism the "best path"?

I think it's easy to say that our environment effects our peace and happiness. But what if you "try all environments" that you know to try, and attempt all the mental gymnastics you know to attempt, and go to the "best psychologists, therapists, get the best drugs, etc", but to no avail? Are you just SOL? (I'm speaking hypothetically :) )

jimtron said:
There's certainly woo involved in many aspects of Buddhism, but as far as I can tell it's possibly the least offensive religion, and it does have good things going for it (in my view), although the current Dalai Lama is against oral sex which I would think would be a deal breaker for many of us.
Click to expand...
If the Dalai Lama really believes it, I'm out. And I won't say "what he can go do," because it's too obvious ... ;)
 
I recently watched a PBS documentary on The Buddha. Two things I recall made me wonder about the draw for an atheist: first, when the Buddha achieved enlightenment, they said he became aware of all his past incarnations. Which sounds like a bit of the woo wagon. But once when asked by a follower why he hadn't told them about what happens after death, he told them it was because they didn't need to know that to live life well.

So I'm not sure whether that makes it appealing, or not.
 
Bikewer said:
There are aspects of Buddhism that I feel can be of use to modern man; the idea of non-attachment, for instance. Much human suffering is caused by our stubborn refusal to "let go" of things.
However, there's plenty of superstition to go 'round...

Likewise Taoism, which started out a rather simple statement of philosophy, became the state religion of China in a comparatively short time, absorbing all sorts of superstitious nonsense along the way.
Divination, magic, rituals...All of which would likely have made poor old Lao Tzu quiver in his grave.
Click to expand...
And I'm extremely familiar with Taoism. But the idea of "letting go" ..... hmm ..... seems at times to be a cowardly way out. Like giving up and giving in. How does one know when to do that? That is an extremely complicated idea I think.
 
Trent Wray said:
Okay .... the peaceful and happy thing. I know this might sound utterly ridiculous to ask, but why is peace and happiness such a preference?
Click to expand...
It's my personal preference because I enjoy it. I like a little conflict too, but overall I enjoy more peace and happiness. Most people want at least some of that. If you don't enjoy them and have different goals, more power to you.


Trent Wray said:
What about those of us who are essentially unable to experience peace and happiness without a great effort? IOW, we are always on either side of peace and happiness but rarely find a chair to sit down in when we get there? Is Buddhism the "best path"?
Click to expand...
I think "best path" isn't a useful concept. Some people get something they want out of buddhism that they can't get elsewhere. The same can be said for volunteer work or collecting stamps.
Trent Wray said:
I think it's easy to say that our environment effects our peace and happiness. But what if you "try all environments" that you know to try, and attempt all the mental gymnastics you know to attempt, and go to the "best psychologists, therapists, get the best drugs, etc", but to no avail? Are you just SOL? (I'm speaking hypothetically :) )
Click to expand...

If you want any X and you've tried all approaches to getting X to no avail, you are SOL in your quest for X (until you can think of another approach). A best course of action would be to try to stop wanting X, ironically a buddhist concept. ;)
 
At least 3 gurus (Meyer Baba, Ram Chandra of Shajahanpur, and Rev. Moon) explain that God developed from an underlying root reality that is eternally unchanging, undeveloping, but having a quality that is the potential to experience Love. Buddha skipped God (who created man and woman in His Image in order to experience Love as the Subject of Love with man and woman as His Object...so the appearance of God and people was inevitable) and instead emphasized the experience of the underlying reality (TriKaya in Mahayana Buddhism) check out Enlightenment Central slide show set at NordaVinci's (Peter Nordquist) Flickr.com There is a Buddhist Tree of Life that compares with the Hindu, Jewish, Taoist etc.
 
As far as the popular draw, consider Bruce Lee and the modern day Dr. Jeung who throws people around without even touching them using his understanding of energy human fields (more to electromagnetism...it has consciousness). I would post a link to the YouTube Video, but I haven't posted 15 posts here yet, so I can't......But I'll just tell you the name is "Energie Bubble Demonstratiom" (misspelled like that) put up there by username "klaussh2". The video is from Pathgate Institute in which you can read Dr. Jeung's explanation of energy fields. Dr. Jeung is Lama Dondrup Dorje....I think he could give Randi a run for his money (Million Dollar Challenge) Definitely appeals to atheists.
 
Trent Wray said:
I'm familiar only with very basic concepts about Buddhism (VERY basic). But I do see it referenced quite a bit, directly, throughout this forum.

Is there a draw to Buddhism for the atheist, non-believer, etc ? If so, specifically why? What is it about Buddhism that speaks to you (regardless of your belief status)?

Thanx in advance for any responses ...
Click to expand...



When the Buddha was asked about God, he answered by asking whether man's mind was finite, or infinite. Of course, the answer is finite. When asked about God's mind, the answer was "infinite". So, can a finite mind understand an infinite one? Of course not.

So, the Buddha concluded, there's really no point in worrying about what God wants, because you wouldn't understand it anyway. Actually, he went farther than that. He said that there is no reason to speculate about whether such an entity exists or not, because, if it did exist, you couldn't comprehend what it would mean for such an entity to exist.

In other words, Buddhism is a "strong agnostic" religion, meaning it asserts that it is impossible to know whether God exists, and says we shouldn't worry about it. It just isn't part of the religion.

As for other wooish things that Buddhists often believe, they do believe them, but they aren't actually part of Buddhist doctrine. It is possible to be a Buddhist and not believe any wooish things. While I can't see James Randi becoming Buddhist, there is nothing in Buddhism that is incompatible with his message.

One thing commonly associated with Buddhism that would appear to contradict that lack of wooishness is reincarnation. However, the Buddhist concept of reincarnation is widely misunderstood. In America, that is partly because Tibetan Buddhism is bettern known than some other varieties, and Tibetan Buddhism is far outside the main stream of Buddhist thought. Even many Buddhists, though, don't really understand the Buddha's teachings on reincarnation. As I read them, I see him talking about living many lives, but in the most famous teaching on reincarnation, he notes that "we", our identity, is made up of five elements, none of which survive death. So, what is being reincarnated?

I took that to mean that when we die, something of us does indeed go on. Our bodies still exist, although they will be transformed through decomposition. Our thoughts live on in papers we wrote and in memories of those who knew us. Whatever we did continues to have an effect. In fact, when we die, there is no, true, "I" or "we" that dies, nor is there any "I" to come back. It's just a transformation. This doctrine is the "anatta", which means "no self", or "no soul".

This is in stark contrast to the Hindu concept of reincarnation, which is the kind of thing we are more likely to think about as reincarnation, in which my soul comes back, but in a different body. The Buddha had some bad things to say about that teaching, along with most of Hinduism.

In short, Buddhism appeals to the atheist because it's completely compatible with atheism, and with what we call skepticism (i.e. lack of belief in paranormal powers.) Of course, one can still ask whether it's a waste of time, and that is a more dificult question to answer. During the brief period of practicing Buddhism, I found it somewhat beneficial.

Final thought: Although completely opposite in doctrine, I was surprised to find there was so much in common between Buddhism and Judaism.
 
Cavemonster said:
If you want any X and you've tried all approaches to getting X to no avail, you are SOL in your quest for X (until you can think of another approach). A best course of action would be to try to stop wanting X, ironically a buddhist concept. ;)
Click to expand...
:)

I'm reminded of this:

 
Trent Wray said:
I'm familiar only with very basic concepts about Buddhism (VERY basic). But I do see it referenced quite a bit, directly, throughout this forum.

Is there a draw to Buddhism for the atheist, non-believer, etc ? If so, specifically why? What is it about Buddhism that speaks to you (regardless of your belief status)?

Thanx in advance for any responses ...
Click to expand...


First off, I wouldn't consider myself a Buddhist, but I have studied it quite a bit and find quite a bit of it useful for daily living. For me, the main draw of Buddhism is that the whole approach is one of learning how to solve problems, rather than hoping someone/thing will solve them for you. The quote most often cited by critical thinkers when discussing Buddhism is the following from the Kalama Sutta.

Kalama Sutta said:
Do not go by revelation;
Do not go by tradition;
Do not go by hearsay;
Do not go on the authority of sacred texts;
Do not go on the grounds of pure logic;
Do not go by a view that seems rational;
Do not go by reflecting on mere appearances;
Do not go along with a considered view because you agree with it;
Do not go along on the grounds that the person is competent;
Do not go along because [thinking] 'the recluse is our teacher'.

Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are unwholesome, these things are blameworthy; these things are censured by the wise; and when undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill, abandon them...
Kalamas, when you know for yourselves: These are wholesome; these things are not blameworthy; these things are praised by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to benefit and happiness, having undertaken them, abide in them.
Click to expand...


Note, this passage is often misinterpreted to mean that you should only trust your own opinions, but it really means that you can't simply take what you hear at face value, but must put teachings into practice in order to trust what you have been taught. This whole notion of being shown tools and encouraged to use them, rather than simply being dictated to by some higher being, is something I personally find compelling.

For example, "Thou shalt not steal" is an absolute directive. It is quite clear that there are no circumstances under which stealing is acceptable. This is an example of where the thinking is being done for me, rather than my being encouraged to think about why stealing is bad (increases suffering in the world), or allowing for a situation in which stleaing might actually be good (reducing suffering in the world).

On a more practical note, I find breath control meditation very useful for dealing with stressful situations such as being stuck in traffic or stranded in airports. It does force me to slow down, be more mindful of the reality of the situation (it is just a traffic jam, not the end of the world), and let go of the frustration. There really isn't anything mystical about that.

But of course, as others have mentioned, there is much in Buddhism that is complete nonsense.

To answer the OP directly, I wouldn't say that Buddhism is compatible with atheism, as it is equally compatible with theism/deism/pantheism/etc. What draws me is Buddhism's compatibility with critical thinking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom