On Buddhism, samsara, and science [more original content]

nbouscal · 7 months

Sam Harris wrote a fantastic article about Buddhism entitled Killing the Buddha, which I would strongly encourage everyone interested in the subject to read. The sad part about Buddhism is that Gautama's teachings are almost all excellent, but the religion that sprung from them is kind of like a slap in his face. This is the guy who said "Do not believe anything that you’ve been told, unless it agrees with your own common sense." He was not about the supernatural, he was about eliminating suffering.

ristoril · 7 months

I listened to the Dalai Lama's new book, Beyond Religion - which was free on Audible when I got it - and throughout the whole book he specifically avoided proselytizing. He specifically encouraged people to rely on scientific discovery. He specifically referenced scientific research to bolster his arguments.

What didn't he do? Try to convert me. Berate me for not being a Buddhist. Claim that his path was the only path. Claim that morality only comes from religion.

I don't believe in anything supernatural, but I'm not an enemy of people who do. If that's what "atheism" means, that's not me. If Buddhists aren't actively trying to ruin the world, they're not my enemy. I also don't have a problem with people who are culturally religious, and respect science and reality.

TOO_MUCH_SKOOMA · 7 months

Zen Buddhism...?

oneLumana · 7 months

I would be interested in seeing someone clarify the final point that the 'core principles' of Buddhism are unsound. I am not aware of which these are.

Cosmology is not considered a core principle to any practitioners or monks that I have ever encountered. I would argue that the core principle that all Buddhists share is simply the following:

Suffering exists. Our suffering results from our desires. It is possible to be free of desire. The way to do this is through practicing honing one's views, intentions, speech, actions, livelihood, efforts, mindfulness, and concentration. If one can master these eight elements, one can be free from suffering.

The Buddha makes it very clear that upon this path even our most coveted beliefs must be released. That even his own teachings will be discarded in time. Why does releasing a hold of supernatural elements not fall under this category?

What about the art of Upaya, where one tells someone what they must hear to progress, whether or not it is objectively true? Any moderately literate individual on the subject would know that Buddhist texts are told in context. At the time of its teaching it was said this way, with this backing, under this notion. It written with the texts of Buddhism from each school that what was once needed to be held true may not later be needed to be held true. Time passes. We grow. The thoughts of a child need not be the thoughts of the adult.

It is the child who sees the field ridden with weeds and says the weeds will prevent a good crop. It is the adult who sees the field ridden with weeds and says the weeds must simply be removed to have a good crop. It takes dogmatism to argue that because something was once (mind you a few thousand years ago) considered true that anyone who "really is a Buddhist" has to feel the same way.

There is no place in any Buddhist canon that says one must believe the cosmology. There is a historical tradition of treating it literally, but that doesn't mean the religion demands it. There is no place in any Buddhist canon that says supernatural beliefs are needed to practice. There is a historical tradition of practicing reinforced by a set of supernatural beliefs.

Children grow up. Religions and philosophies may mature. We do not need to pretend we must remain the same to use the same name. You can no more say a Buddhist must believe the supernatural to be a Buddhist than you can claim a Christian must believe Revelations is heretical (which is was widely regarded as prior to the compilation of the Synoptic canon) to be a Christian.

GavinZac · 7 months

Just to point out that in Theravada Buddhism at least, you do not 'come back' as anything, or 'go to hell'. You do not have a soul. When you die your energy is dispersed; It is not Hinduistic reincarnation where you are punished by becoming a cockroach, it is more a cross between the the law of conservation of energy and humanist philosphy - what you do in life (khamma) influences the world for long after you're gone. That's not to say there aren't supernatural things in Theravada but reincarnation as depicted by The Simpsons is not one of them.

The problem, of course, is that one can call oneself Buddhist and not be Zen, Maha, Veja or Thera. A literal reading of the Buddha's word, without exposure to Hindu or existing Buddhist culture, would not result in devas and nagas etc. We are dealing with a millenia old text with stories using analogies involving devils and apparitions because that was the language of the day. It's important to be able to differentiate between a message and a culture. I could say I am a Buddhist, because I would like to adhere to the message of the Buddha; but I do not call myself Buddhist because where I live, Buddhism involves going to temples and making merit.

Cassandra_Was_Right · 7 months

The Dalai Lama has continuously addressed the need for acceptance of Science over blind faith. In Buddhism, experience and reasoning come first, and then scripture. I get that you want to introduce the supernatural aspect as a delusion, but some folks really do understand allegory and interact with that aspect of the teachings as literature. While I applaud the work you are doing to inform, it's dismissive to assume that non-theistic, atheistic, non-supernatural Buddhism is unattainable.

My mom's a Pro-Choice Catholic. When I was younger we'd argue about it over and over and she stands by the mantra, "It is the privilege of the believer to define the parameters of their beliefs." I call myself an Apatheist when asked to publicly identify. In my heart, I am an Atheist/Buddhist. It's only up to me to as to how I chose to address those inconsistencies.

The crab was really cute, by the way.

hierocles · 7 months

This is ridiculous nitpicking. As an Atheist, I'm not concerned with people believing in what essentially are multiple universes, or that some people believe in reincarnation. I'm concerned with people believing in a deity so much that they forsake science and reason in favor of blindly believing that there's some guy shaping the world before them.

Buddhism may have supernatural elements, but it is not a supernatural belief. Whoever made this picture has a very elementary understanding of Buddhism. What this image doesn't tell you that is samsara is merely a background for the Eightfold Path. Buddhists don't latch onto a heavenly realm (which, by the way, is just as full of suffering as all the other realms) and ignore the world. That would be antithetical to achieving nirvana.

To concern yourself with the cosmology would likely be frowned upon in serious Buddhist settings. If you're not concerned with the world you're in, then you won't be able to achieve nirvana. This is why many "Western" philosophers and commentators consider Buddhism to be a material, rather than supernatural, religion.

DumbUsername420 · 7 months

You left out the fact that you can still practice Buddhism and not believe in any of the supernatural aspects. There is nothing in Buddhism that relies on faith. As the Buddha said "Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." You will not be considered any less of a Buddhist by any monk for choosing not to believe in anything they teach (not preach). I am beginning to feel like this subreddit is becoming r/anti-religion. As a Buddhist I have been feeling more and more unwelcome here, and this really disappoints me as I am an atheist who dislikes many of the negative aspects of religion, but hating on Buddhism (heh that's ironic) does NOTHING helpful. No war has ever been fought over Buddhism, and no Buddhist fundamentalist group has ever protested at any funerals. And with that, I feel it is time to unsubscribe.

Edit: Or at least stop browsing for today. Who am I kidding, I would miss all the hilarious fundie facebook conversations too much.

soldiercrabs · 7 months

... and I already found a typo. Sorry, guys: I meant to say that Theravada buddhism is the predominant branch in South Asia with 120+ million adherents, and Mahayana buddhism the predominant branch in East Asia with 180+ million adherents; not the other way around. Sorry!

rabidllama · 7 months

It's true that many of the practitioners of Buddhism take its teachings literally. However, that doesn't mean that every person that tries to adhere to Buddhism has to. Buddha himself said not to blindly believe any of his teachings if they don't agree with your own reason or common sense, so why can't we take some of the best parts of Buddhism and leave out the spiritual or supernatual stuff? Perhaps Buddhism won't literally help you escape from Samsara, but who's to say it can't be a path to inner peace?

Realwizard · 7 months

The core of Buddhism consists of the Four Noble Truths:

Suffering exists
Suffering arises from attachment to desires
Suffering ceases when attachment to desire ceases
Freedom from suffering is possible by practicing the Eightfold Path

The Eight Fold Path:

Wisdom 1. Right View 2. Right Intention Ethical Conduct 3. Right Speech 4. Right Action 5. Right Livelihood Mental Development/Meditation 6. Right Effort 7. Right Mindfulness 8. Right Concentration

None of this assumes anything supernatural or requires one to believe anything other than this to practice Buddhism.

The foundation of Buddhism as a practice or a religion consists of the Three Jewels:

The Buddha: (the historical Buddha/ or Buddha Nature)
The Dharma: which is the teachings (body of Buddhism, that can broadly be interpreted as essentially the 4 Noble Truths)
Sangha: which is the community of enlightened beings that can help one on the path.

Again, there is nothing here to support anything supernatural, anything that isn't rational or has a logical basis or that can't be tested and affirmed for ones self.

There are a lot of traditions, a lot of different beliefs, a lot of misunderstandings that have grown out of and around Buddhism, but they aren't what Buddhism is. These teachings are the core of Buddhism which are shared between every tradition and branch of Buddhism.

A lot of the superstitions and belief structures that can be associated with Buddhism are exactly that; superstition, beliefs and assumptions. They don't in and of themselves have anything to do with Buddhism as a practice.

MountainMan121 · 7 months

But where do you see Buddhists ramming their beliefs down other people's throats? Where do you see Buddhists killing (other than themselves) in the name of their beliefs? Where do you see Buddhists trying to control "non-believer's" lives?

That's the whole point. People can believe what they want, regardless if it's compatible with today's science or not, but it doesn't mean they can do all of the above, which buddhists do not. They also believe you're in this world on your own, no one else will 'save' you from Samsara, only yourself can attain enlightenment and Moksha.

Live and Let Live.

UnicornsBeforeJesus · 7 months

I liked this. I really did. But I have no qualms with Buddhism. As unscientific, unfounded and ludicrous as its stories and explanations for natural phenomena are, it comes down to this for me;

I've never been accosted by an evangelical Buddhist on campus or on a public sidewalk.

I've never heard of Buddhists blowing themselves, or others, up because their own theology and that of the people being blown up was not the same.

And I've never heard of Buddhists condemning a demographic of people solely based on their own inner prejudice shrouded in miscellaneous verses from their holy book.

When (or if they already have, someone enlighten me, please [not condescending here, just legitimately wanting to know]) they begin to do these kinds of things, I will be against Buddhism. From my current perspective, as ignorant as it may be, Buddhists only encourage tolerance, peace, love, and humility. What their goal is in doing this is not my concern.

So long as they do not actively impede scientific progress, force their theology on others, or harm others for not believing in what they do, they can believe that the Earth is flat and that we are the center of the universe for all I care.

TL;DR Very good post. Well done, Mr. soldiercrabs.

Wangchung265 · 7 months

I have been raised for 22 years as a Buddhist. I have never heard of any of this nonsense. My grandmothers have both decided to live monk like lifestyles. Buddhism is a philosophy. Never has been about religion. Siddhartha refused to define himself as anything his disciples called him (Teacher, prophet, god, etc) only considered himself as "awake". Buddhism has but one goal, to seek the truth.

Belanos · 7 months

Stephen Batchelor has written two excellent books on being a Buddhist and an Atheist..which is what I am. "Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist" and "Buddhism Without Beliefs." Read up!

click_here_to_wait · 7 months

Surprised to see so much disagreement with the OP here.

Sam Harris' "Killing the Buddha" says it best, but here it is again: sure, buddhism may have lots of great teachings in it, and sure, buddhists may be great people.

But what's the point of calling yourself a "buddhist"?

Joining a religion implicitly validates the whole enterprise of "religion": it's like calling yourself a "werewolf" because you like red meat and wear long sideburns. Harmlessly silly in itself - but potentially irresponsible when you're aware that some people out there sincerely believe that they're zombies, vampires, etc, and kill and feed accordingly.

Of course, we should acknowledge good insights, whatever their origin - but we don't need to wear the old, historically charged armbands to do that.

Hoelt · 7 months

Buddhism is such an interesting and useful philosophy.

Hinduism is also such an interesting and useful philosophy. I love the idea of humans knowing little, of their perceptions being very limited and illusory. Thinking about these ways of thinking is mind bending opening, and makes humanity more interesting.

But this is a perfect infostrip. As much as bits and pieces of these philosophies are interesting ways of seeing the world, and have kernels of truth not just about morality and the smallness of human existence, the fundamental concepts of the religions require unbelievable mental gymnastics. The spiritual components, with the gods or the spiritual realms, are interesting but do not really make any sense from a scientific point of view. They are complicated, and learning and understanding is an important exercise of the mind, but I cannot imagine accepting them as anything near reality.

FireclawDrake · 7 months

This doesn't fit into much of what I learned about Zen Buddhism... are the two really so different? Or have I simply been misinformed once again by western culture? (I mean, I specifically read a book by Zen practitioners, and there was really no mention of samsara at all)

live_for_coffee · 7 months

I think one very important distinction, for R/Atheism. Buddhists aren't generally known for actively persecuting people that believe differently then themselves. It's important to remember, the abrahamic faiths are faiths of murder, rape and death. Kill or convert, is their only real goals.

If you walk up to a buddhist, and tell him you don't believe any of their religious doctrine, most likely, they'll just say "ok, I wish you a fantastic day!"

z3ntropy · 7 months

As a lifelong hindu that's studied the subject, most of the concepts in this picture are hindu ones

C-16 · 7 months

I think the one thing that ISN'T mentioned here is that no one in East Asia except for the few Buddhist monks don't actually take ANY religion all too seriously. Any "religious" rituals are more of cultural superstition without any general rules. The gods also play an extremely marginal role in a Buddhist's lifestyle. I'm usually the last one to jump and defend a religion but hey, if it's not hurting anyone then why should you call it out and treat it like no one should believe in it? Especially when it doesn't breed the ignorance that most other religions encourage.

The most violent thing I've ever seen a Buddhist do for religion was a Vietnamese monk who lit himself on fire in protest of the Vietnamese persecution of Buddhists. If only American Christians held such dedication yet respect for others.

eldoloroso · 7 months

It he tradition of religions everywhere, I hereby formalize the new non-superstitious form of Buddhism as described by Stephen Batchelor in "Buddhism without Beliefs". It is hereby a sect of Buddhism, and this cartoon, while interesting, is no longer valid.

/atheist //non-superstitious Buddhist

Piratiko · 7 months

Dude, I fucking love your comics.

Noybola · 7 months

Wtf? If you care for reason and logic then why look for a "reason" to yet hate on another religion? I guess it makes perfect "logic" to also include Buddhisms on the list of things you must shit on. Seriously atheists, stop looking for reasons and being assholes because I'm sure that's working awesomely for you in terms of representing yourselves as reasonable and logical. Fuck. So tired of all this anti-theism. Why can't you live and let be and understand that a population of people on this earth have religion for comfort and understanding. You're no different than the crazies at Westboro at this point.

Give me all your delicious downvotes, assholes.

Chilloutitsjustmetal · 7 months

Stop the presses. I'm taking orders from an anthropomorphic crab? And it's making fun of impossibility. Okay.

loveandpolitics · 7 months

And this is the kind of informative post I come to /r/atheism for. Good job!

proud_lurker · 7 months

You're not too familiar with allegory and mythology, are you? Even Plato and Socrates had mythological origin stories that weren't grounded in scientific reasoning. Can I see a citation on your statement that "This cosmology is meant to be interpreted LITERALLY. None of this is a metaphor."?

yayclarissa · 7 months

I'm a practising Buddhist Agnostic, and I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say.

1) Even if the central point of Buddhism was based on the supernatural, the entirety of the doctrine is also based on not forcing your viewpoints on other people through wars or being a dickhead in general.

2) Buddhism doesn't pretend to know all the answers. Buddha himself said:

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense."

3) The practise of Zen Buddhism nearly abandoned all of supernatural teachings including samsara.

Essentially, Buddhism does have supernatural bits to it, but even if you don't believe in it doesn't mean that you aren't a Buddhist. The central point of the belief system is not to worship any deity, but to seek enlightenment and lead a better life and if you follow that, then of course you can consider yourself to be a Buddhist.

[deleted] · 7 months

I'm an atheist, and sorry soldiercrabs, but you're going way to deep with this. This is beyond nitpicking: it's assuming that all sects of Buddhism believe these superstitions.

They don't.

What's interesting about Buddhism is how vastly different its sects operate from the sects of the current monotheistic religions. Within Christianity, there are several hundred different denominations, but each one shares a very distinct core set of beliefs and principles.

You seem to suggest the same thing about Buddhism, but this is not factually so. Buddhist sects do not take their "orders" from the "mother ship" so-to-speak. In other words, Zen Buddhism is completely separate and distinct from any other sect of Buddhism, as well as the umbrella term "Buddhism." They don't believe in any form of supernaturalism.

To make one more point abundantly clear: terms such as "karma," "reincarnation," and "non-existence" get lost in Western translations of themselves. I'd suggest that you do some research on these terms and learn about what they actually mean. HINT: none of them involve supernaturalism.

I hope this helps.

ThatBernie · 7 months

OK, a couple things.

1: Theravada is mainly practiced in South and Southeast Asia, while Mahayana is practiced in East Asia. These are mixed up in the post.

2: Although OP makes lip service to the fact that there is a great diversity of traditions within Buddhism, he then proceeds to speak as though Buddhism is in fact one monolithic thing by giving his own views of the supposedly definitive teachings of Buddhism. This is intellectually dishonest. Either Buddhism is one thing or it's many.

3: Probably the most important statement in the entire argument is that the traditional Buddhist cosmology (which is presented as some kind of Frankenstein mash-up of various Asian traditions) should be interpreted literally. Oddly enough this is also the weakest link in the argument. No explanation, no rationale. Just "cuz I said so."

4: Let's not forget certain traditions that appear more philosophical than religious. Zen Buddhism, for example, does away with all theoretical or intellectual conceptions of reality, and focuses solely on the experiential factor. Clearly the whole argument about cosmology doesn't work in such cases.

5: Let's also not forget that the historical Buddha refused to answer many questions, including these famous 14, on the grounds that they are purely speculative. And the Buddha also explicitly denounced blind faith.

The point is, if one wants to understand Buddhism as a whole, then it is best understood not as a fixed school of fixed doctrines, but rather as a tradition that is constantly reviving and re-inventing itself. The tree diagram presented in the comic is not historically accurate. Vajrayana is not a specific school, it is a series of schools who are the result of a particular movement within Mahayana schools. Likewise the Mahayana schools are the result of a philosophical revolution within the earliest schools (of which Theravada is the only surviving member). And even Theravada has undergone some very massive changes in the past 150 years as the result of modernization. Such a history suggests a tradition which is constantly re-inventing itself. And I think modern Western Buddhism (à la Stephen Bachelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs") is itself another re-invention, along more secular lines.

mintchan · 7 months

the story of the three realms was not any part of buddhism original text. it was a separated text used in the ancient time for exercising and testing translation ability of the translators. buddhism scholars would not consider the story of the three realms as a part buddhism teaching.

cyborgx7 · 7 months

Thank you. I've had this opinion for quite a while, you know. If I knew there was so much potential karma, I would have made this post myself.

p0ssum · 7 months

My deal is, it's not the fucking buddhists trying to teach my kid creation, its not them trying to deny people equal rights. I don't care about what they buddhists do, because they don't matter in my life.

UnIKrafTr · 7 months

At least they aren't shoving it down anyone's throats as far as I'm aware of.

Kolja0406 · 7 months

You should look into the difference between Buddhism as you describe it and Zen Buddhism... Besides, there are other forms of looking at the universe besides scientific method: poetry, philosophy, contemplation, etc. The only problem is when someone tries to impose their own views upon others. I think that`s what r/atheism is against...

WhyteMagez · 7 months

I've saved all of the crab comics. I'm becoming a big fan of you, soldiercrabs. Have yet another of my upvotes.

CheesieBalls · 7 months

mothafuckin soldier crabs.

DC-Jaxx · 7 months

Someone is quoted as saying that there are 16'000 different ways to practice Buddhism. Not all of us believe in the religious side of it.

I come from an atheist-Buddhist family and I've never heard of most of this stuff.

pngwn56 · 7 months

Yeah, but there are also forms of Buddhism that has nothing to do with reincarnation or karma...

vorvesj · 7 months

Oh Capital! This was most excellent and an enjoyable read! I was one of those Atheists who overlooked Buddhism, although I did not overlook the Tibetan form of it (because I do have knowledge of that particular sect), but I had no idea of the others! I am, however, a practitioner of Zen Meditation, etc. and there's nothing magical about that, yet people consider it "Zen Buddhism". Now, this was already mentioned in the comments, so I'll let it be. Also, side question: Is there anything in the Buddhist or Hindu texts/gitas that advocate violence, etc. etc. much like the Bible, Torah, and Koran?

iemfi · 7 months

As an atheist living in a majority buddhist country you guys are all missing the damn point. Of course there will be sects who don't believe in the supernatural, the OPs point is that the western non-supernatural version of Buddism makes up a tiny tiny TINY portion of practitioners.

It may be a relatively benign religion, but it is still religion with all it's trappings. Anyone who says it isn't about the supernatural has never visited a buddhist country and seen the thousands of minor deitys being worshiped at temples. There are even many Christian converts who convert because Christianity seems more modern and less superstitious. The western version of it is of course non-existant here.

greenzephyr1986 · 7 months

this was a great piece! interesting and thought provoking :) also makes me wanna learn more about buddhism lol

[deleted] · 7 months

I wonder if the realms of desire, although meant to be taken literally, I wonder if they are possibly a good metaphor or not for human psychology. I'm guessing probably not, but then again those guys back then probably had the time for a lot of introspection that all of us are robbed of by living in the modern world.

mulysasderpsylum · 7 months

This is going to sound so stupid... but your post not only eudcated me on Buddhism as a religion, it also brought relevance to the names of the Six Paths Of Pain from Naruto Shippuden.

falcoholic · 7 months

My curiosity has been peaked. I shall go forth and learn more about Buddhism in order to form my own opinions. Thank you good sir for this intriguing cartoon.

soulking · 7 months

I just figured no one bashed buddhism because no one knew what it was about. I understood that there was a cycle of rebirth and that there were good gods and evil gods, but that was about it. Thanks for the lesson OP.

lesbillionare · 7 months

Man, that's just Tibetan Buddhism, the craziest of all Buddhism sects! Now I gotta clear stuff up before this gets even crazier! Bear in mind that I'm an atheist too, so put down the pitchforks and just listen to what I'm saying.

Fun Facts: I had to read the Tibetan book of the dead for one of my classes. In Tibetan Buddhism, your trip through the different stages of Samsara is actually a hallucination brought on by your inner fears and the personal problems you had in life. The cosmology IS metaphorical in that Tibetan Buddhists know that the visions during Samsara are not real. In fact, the book of the dead is essentially a manual where a Buddhist monk reads to the "spirit" of the person as they're tripping balls in the afterlife and is essentially telling them, "Ok bro that demon thing is a hallucination, keep on trucking so you can end your trip." Think of it like that time you got bad acid and your buddy had to keep convincing you that spiders weren't actually pouring out of your mouth.

Tibetan Buddhism is still Buddhism, don't get me wrong. Lumping all sects, even the ones that are closer to the origins of Siddhartha's teachings and morals, in with Tibetan Buddhism, is creating grave misconceptions about all of Buddhism as a whole. Think about it like if you started telling people that potato chips were the exact same food as sweet potatoes.

I know this is /r/atheism and a lot of our post are centered around "HA HA HA THOSE PEOPLE THINK THERE'S GHOSTS AND SHIT, WHAT NERDS" but I feel that it's totally important to have accurate knowledge of a religion before you go out of your way to make an infographic, especially if your intention is to make a post centered around "HA HA HA THOSE PEOPLE THINK THERE'S GHOSTS AND SHIT, WHAT NERDS."

tl;dr sweet potatoes aren't the same as chips but even if you don't like carbs you should know the difference

RapidEyeMovement · 7 months

This is what I took away from this comic

"Hey Guys...Sooo...Buddhism is a religion right? And religion is bad, right? Therefore Buddhism must be bad too!!!!"

Logic rocks right guys"

macwelsh007 · 7 months

I would also add that Buddhism's teachings, just like the teachings of Abrahamic religions, can be manipulated and used for violence and oppression of human rights. This article was very eye opening for me on this subject.

MentalRaid · 7 months

Buddhism in and of itself doesn't seem to be the problem here. It's the cultural offshoots and misinterpretations of Gautama's teachings which are the problem. This comic seems like a knee-jerk response to a very trivialized and cutaneous breakdown of Buddhism.

In other words: You established your intolerance first, then looked for facts to justify your predisposition.

Sorry, but that's pretty lame.

plartoo · 7 months

As claimed in this "infographic": It is factually WRONG to say that Theravada buddhism is dominant in East asia. In fact, it's only left in Burma, Thai, and Cambodia to my best knowledge (maybe Sri Lanka as well, not sure). The east asian sect of Buddhism like zen, and the ones you see in China (not Tibet) are Mahayana. This "comic" has some factually wrong interpretation of at least the Theravada one. I used to be one of its practictioners (although I have become mainly rationalist/atheist).

Also, I don't know why it's claiming that cosmology is part of Buddhism. Buddha always denounced the practice of such things (at least, according to the Theravada scriptures I learned when I was young). This http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalama_Sutta is the best quoted and my favorite teaching of Buddha. It's always taught in Theravada school of Buddhism. Cosmology maybe important in some Buddhists' lives, but it's mainly due to their societal/cultural influences. Nothing to do with Buddhism.

Daax865 · 7 months

Has soldiercrabs had much interaction with modern Buddhists? Cosmology isn't even discussed in my sangha. We practice the Tibetan tradition (loosely), and the lectures we hear deal more with the mind, compassion, and so on. As many on this thread have stated, most sects of Buddhism are dynamic. Buddhism is about reality, and if any traditional folklore or mythology contradicts what science proves to be real, we accept reality.

Sure there are Buddhist in other parts of the world that still believe in things we now know to be false, but this is certainly not the case with "western Buddhism." For us, it has almost nothing to do with the mythology of it all. Even though we recite things involving deities, it's more about the teachings.

Please don't equate us to the majority of Christians, many who believe their texts to be "God-breathed" and therefore infallible. This is not so with us. Every statement is questioned, as we are encouraged to do so.

poopyfinger · 7 months

ITT: Atheists who think they are kind and think they are "open minded" circlejerk themselves to sleep over bashing Buddhism.

rastashark · 7 months

"Buddha never asked his followers to accept what he said just because he said it. He never told anyone there was any kind of reward waiting for them after they died if they believed him or any punishment if they didn't. He just told people what he had learned through his own experience and invited others to try it out for themselves because maybe they'd find it useful." -Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock, Monster Movies and the Truth About Reality

Buddha's last words were, "question authority." Make-believe or not, that's a pretty good rule to live by. However, some report that Buddha was on acid that night, his last words being, "I AM A GOLDEN GOD" before descending 20 feet into a pool. These claims, however, are unsubstantiated.

akhead · 7 months

I praise the original poster for trying to educate but it seems he's just being a pedantic arsehole.

Me: "I'm an Buddist" THAT GUY: "OH SO YOU BELIEVE BLAH BLAH..." Me "Ok, well then, I just subscribe to the teachings of Gautama"

I'm a athiest but Buddhism has enriched my soul (conscious and subconscious mind) and has taught me to explore my inner self, to create new ideas and concepts, and to celebrate knowledge. I don't like how you've compared it to christianty. Christianity is just a cult built on a dogma of fairtytales which has committed awe full atrocities, crimes against humanity, who people shouldn't associate with so freely. Buddhism is peaceful and embraces of new ideas. Christianity is brainwashing and do as we say or we'll hurt you.

philge · 7 months

"Be excellent to each other, and party on dudes!"

thetasigma1355 · 7 months

I wish a seemingly angry yet actually really nice crab would teach me everything.

rooktakesqueen · 7 months

There are any number of metaphorical interpretations of Buddhist cosmology, and the Buddha himself was quite unclear about what is meant to be literal and what is meant to be metaphorical, in the way that he was unclear about most things.

Buddhism, depending on the practitioner and sect, can be anything from a totally areligious way of life to a religion of deepities to a religion of dogma.

TheFinalResistance · 7 months

What a grotesque misrepresentaiton of buddhism.

Good job at spreading misinformation by confusing what the buddha actually taught (the things that can be attributed to him) and what HINDUISM did to his teachings.

You merely described Hinduism, if anything... Rebirth and all that supernatural crap has nothing to do with what the Buddha taught. It's what Buddhism has become after his successors (later "buddhas") modified his teachings. Hinduism, since it is the dominant religion in India, creeped into the teachings and infected it.

We can see how buddhism diverged, by looking how it is practiced in India and compare it to how it is practiced in Japan, for example.

Anyway. You probably already have your opinion without looking at what the Buddha himself taught. Or maybe I am wrong. Who knows. But up to this point, I have found little material that supports the idea, that Siddharta Gautama actually believed in this Hindu-Crap.

BitchesHateMe · 7 months

Curious posting. It does seem a bit misinformed and strangely bitter. How could a 2000+ year old religion, regarded by scientists such as Albert Einstein and Steven Hawking to be a highly accurate description of existence, be that "supernatural". Buddhism has consistently jived with the highest levels of modern science. I'm talking about things that we have just recently proven with observation or physics. Samsara is not truly the root of Buddhism. Buddhism isn't even truly Buddhism. The foundation of Buddha's teachings was "question everything". Sounds like science actually, except science is resistant to questioning itself. Really, though, you don't need to attack Buddhism. We don't start wars, we don't knock on your door Sunday mornings, and care more about your happiness than your opinion.

Neroon · 7 months

First we ask how we got here, then we ask why we are here, and lastly we ask where are we going. This is the root of being human. I think it's essential to defining what separates lower and higher species. Religion has been the answer to those questions for most of human existence.

The supernatural elements of Buddhism were added by people who wanted to answer parts of the question that the philosophy of Buddhism had left blank. They took familiar themes and grafted them on.

Philosophical Buddhism does not require you to accept any of the supernatural elements. It is not hostile to science. Unlike monotheistic faiths, it does not call on you to kill the unbelievers.

If you ever read "Childhood's End" by Arthur C Clarke the solution to religion is the death of all religions within years except for a strictly philosophical form of Zen Buddhism. That got me thinking, and was part of what led me to my stance against organized religion. You need a code to live by, not a set of chains to weigh you down.

PizzaPiedPiper · 7 months

I think this reflects a Western interpretation of the Buddhist teachings.

Religions and other power structures spring up around otherwise dogma-free ideas, but that doesn't mean the original ideas are religious in nature.

zendak · 7 months

Kudos! Very well executed and information a lot of folks here can benefit from.

contextpolice · 7 months

Your post takes the vast majority of the Buddha's teachings completely out of context. Yes, many sects of Buddhism discuss fairly "out there" ideas (I mean they say he was born out of his mother's side and immediately took 7 steps), but one of the main points is that you shouldn't believe things unless you have seen them for yourself, even in the sects that you described that blatantly ignore modern reason. Also the cosmological nonsense is placed completely secondary to the main teachings, namely the four noble truths.

Lastly, and most importantly, comparing "loving your neighbor" to the "good" lessons of Buddhism is ridiculous. The negative, backwards, and detrimental philosophies preached by the Bible that are ignored by modern and forward thinking Christians are nothing compared to the wacky teachings of the Buddha that were more outcomes of his time than anything else.

shitsfuckedupalot · 7 months

No one knows what happens once you die, the buddah didn't, and as much as you'd like to convince yourself you don't either. Being convinced that nothing happens when you die is as much faith as thinking you are reincarnated. This idea that you're attacking is based off of hindu tradition. It seems strange in America, but western and eastern culture are a lot different. This may not seem scientific, but how many scientists will give you the same answer on what happens when you die? Instead of telling people that they're all wrong, what's wrong with just collectively deciding that we have the capacity to not be dicks to each other, so lets just do it. That's essentially what ever religion says anyway. Sometimes when im on r/atheism i think some of you want to start a religious war. How many of you american citizens honestly think you would win this war? This is where logic is useful. Were all on this earth together, and it really doesn't matter what you believe. Just don't be an asshole.


New posts:	New	Rising
Self posts:	New	Relevant
Non-image posts:	New	Relevant


GodlessWomen	YoungAtheists	AtheistParents
BlackAtheism	AtheistGems	DebateAnAtheist
skeptic	agnostic	freethought
antitheism	humanism	Hitchens
a6theism10	tfbd	AdviceAtheists

Events
10/5-6	NAPCON2012 - Boston
08/11	Regional Conference - St. Paul MN

Ex* Groups
ex-Muslim	ex-Catholic	ex-Mormon
ex-JW	ex-Jew	ex-SistersinZion
ex-Bahai	ex-Christian	ex-Adventist

atheism

Help Atheist Organizations!

MODERATORS

1: Theravada is mainly practiced in South and Southeast Asia, while Mahayana is practiced in East Asia. These are mixed up in the post.

5: Let's also not forget that the historical Buddha refused to answer many questions, including these famous 14, on the grounds that they are purely speculative. And the Buddha also explicitly denounced blind faith.

atheism

Help Atheist Organizations!

MODERATORS

1: Theravada is mainly practiced in South and Southeast Asia, while Mahayana is practiced in East Asia. These are mixed up in the post.

5: Let's also not forget that the historical Buddha refused to answer many questions, including these famous 14, on the grounds that they are purely speculative. And the Buddha also explicitly denounced blind faith.

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login