Buddhism...

[Durakken]

Why is Buddhism considered atheistic?

Buddhism and Hinduism both have gods... They consider them more what we would consider super beings than what is generally thought of as a god, but that's the case with most polytheistic religions... They just state it as such.


Also, if atheists are right and there is no afterlife... Buddhism is sorta funny because their goal is Nirvana which is cessation of existence... which is what happens. So did they achieve their goal?

 

[Jackcreed]

Why is Buddhism considered atheistic?

Buddhism and Hinduism both have gods... They consider them more what we would consider super beings than what is generally thought of as a god, but that's the case with most polytheistic religions... They just state it as such.

Most sects of Buddhism are not in any way atheistic. However I think when the average westerner thinks of Buddhism they are actually thinking of Zen Buddhism due to its popularity. Zen does have a rather atheistic slant to it. Actually, interestingly enough it was Zen that helped me take the next logical step into atheism. Unlike other sects Zen, at its core, isn't concerned with the dogma so much as the act of meditation in order to attain enlightenment which is a pretty gray area in any sense of the term.


Also, if atheists are right and there is no afterlife... Buddhism is sorta funny because their goal is Nirvana which is cessation of existence... which is what happens. So did they achieve their goal?

:lol: I've often wondered that myself.

 

[Aught3]

Here's a good summary I think

If atheism is the absence of belief in gods, then many Buddhists are, indeed, atheists. Buddhism is not about either believing or not believing in God or gods. Rather, the historical Buddha taught that believing in gods was not useful for those seeking to realize enlightenment. In other words, God is unnecessary in Buddhism. For this reason, Buddhism is more accurately called nontheistic than atheistic.

http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm

It doesn't explicitly require you to acknowledge that no gods exist just that a god did not create the universe and does not sit in judgment over us.

 

[Jackcreed]

Here's a good summary I think

If atheism is the absence of belief in gods, then many Buddhists are, indeed, atheists. Buddhism is not about either believing or not believing in God or gods. Rather, the historical Buddha taught that believing in gods was not useful for those seeking to realize enlightenment. In other words, God is unnecessary in Buddhism. For this reason, Buddhism is more accurately called nontheistic than atheistic.

http://buddhism.about.com/od/basicbuddhistteachings/a/buddhaatheism.htm

It doesn't explicitly require you to acknowledge that no gods exist just that a god did not create the universe and does not sit in judgment over us.

There are plenty of Buddhist theists out there, those that believe in Bodhisattvas for instance. Though deity is indeed unneeded with regards to Buddhist practice that does not mean that the dogmas set up by many Buddhists do not include deity. Then again I suppose that's just human nature. Perhaps I should revise my first statement and change "most" to "several".

 

[digitalbuddha48]

i dont know how many times ive addressed this, but true buddhism (theravada) is not explicitly a religion. It is more a way of life with the goal being nirvana. Also look up paticca samuppada (dependent origination) a.k.a. causation it's the main point of siddhartha gautama (original Buddha) besides that life is suffering.

 

[Durakken]

i dont know how many times ive addressed this, but true buddhism (theravada) is not explicitly a religion. It is more a way of life with the goal being nirvana. Also look up paticca samuppada (dependent origination) a.k.a. causation it's the main point of siddhartha gautama (original Buddha) besides that life is suffering.

I view Theravada Buddhism's to be wrong, though on a historical level it is nice that they might have preserved the original documents.

Theravada Buddhism formed from a schism that happened in Buddhism when one group started holding that the words of Buddha were more important than the understanding or meaning of what Buddha was saying. In other words they are fundamentalists that don't actually understand the teachings of Buddha which is what the Mahayana Buddhists said about them.

Also if you say they've changed then they aren't Theravada any more.



As far as gods... Buddha did not say that there is no gods or that they are "unneeded."
Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva are actually pretty necessary to Buddhist teachings...
Yoga IS intrinsically related to the gods.

What Buddha taught was that there is no point in worshiping a deity because they are the same as us, trapped in samsara. He however did not say or teach anything even close to there is no gods.

 

[xman]

if it doesn't believe in a god or gods as existing and/or says that asking such a question is pointless, BUT still refers to such entities as if they are and also talks about spirituality and rebirth, then I would say that it isn't explicitly atheistic, but more agnostic at best, perhaps even religious in the sense that the Gnostics were religious.

Not saying I know much about it, but expressing my interpretation of it.

 

[Durakken]

if it doesn't believe in a god or gods as existing and/or says that asking such a question is pointless, BUT still refers to such entities as if they are and also talks about spirituality and rebirth, then I would say that it isn't explicitly atheistic, but more agnostic at best, perhaps even religious in the sense that the Gnostics were religious.

Not saying I know much about it, but expressing my interpretation of it.

It doesn't say that there are no god. It in fact states there are gods.

It's more akin to the whole idea that everyone is part of some larger thing. Being that everything is equally part of this larger thing the gods are just super being that have special powers, but there is no point in worshiping them because even though they exist they are more or less the same as you, just with powers.

 

[SOS]

There are many different sects within Buddhism. If you find you're in one with superbeings and/or gods, just quietly slip out and make a lateral transition to one which does not recognize any. Buddhism, in a good sect, is like religion without the bad stuff. It teaches morality, compassion, peace, self-confidence and many other virtues, without invoking fear to motivate them. If you haven't tried it, prepare yourself for a very different experience.

 

[SOS]

What Buddha taught was that there is no point in worshiping a deity because they are the same as us, trapped in samsara. He however did not say or teach anything even close to there is no gods.[/quote]


You need to understand the concept of 'expedient teaching'. In a culture where gods are wholly accepted, it is would be stupid to try and preach their non-existence. What the very brilliant Buddha did was to sidestep the issue, so people being converted didn't have to uproot all their old beliefs, just look at them with a different viewpoint. The new viewpoint rendered the old beliefs impotent, but didn't require anyone to foresake them.

New Athiests might consider Buddha's lesson from 2500 years ago.

 

[Durakken]

I am not a Buddhist nor do I have any inclination to become one.

I don't buy into he was trying to side step the issue as the entire thing is a very natural evolution from Hinduism.

 

[drogoscg1]

The gods in Eastern religions tend to be just masks or figurative doorways to what is truly transcendent. Every god or goddess is a like a pane of stained glass filtering the light of the holy unknown. One could use a bhodisatva as a guide, but regarding such a being as the end in and of itself is an error. All such beings would know that the truth is more than the one. They become a means to an end.

 

[SOS]

This is very insightful. Buddha, in his expedient teaching, created stories about different Buddhas or boddhisatvas, such as "Buddha Never Disparaging", to help his disciples and followers think more clearly about how to live properly. No one needs to be a buddhist to benefit from Buddha's teachings; he/she just needs to be intelligent and open-minded.

 

[nasher168]

I find the 5 precepts a far, far better moral guide than the 10 commandments. When combined with the "Golden rule" from christianity, it makes a fairly good guide on how to live your life.
That said, I don't really have any sort of rigid moral guide. I consider them to be good because I already follow them, not the other way round.

 

[drogoscg1]

I'm an atheist, but I have learned at the foot of Joseph Campbell. I blend all the teachings that I know of to find the greater graces of what humans might acheive to find find my moral and ethical base. It's knind of an Unitarian priciple with the knowledge that science and study calls all trump cards.

I blend the beatitudes of Christ with the Blessings of the Buddha and listen to all other reliigions I know of to come to some higher ethical base. I realy like the poems ascribed to Rumi the Suffi mystic also. Psychologists always apeal to Greek and Roman myths to explain human thinking, so why not blend it all?

All human lore, from whatever tradition, is simply the continuing dialogue of what it is to be human no matter the time or culture. We can learn from all human lore about how to live life better.

 

[SOS]

The idea of looking for commonalities between religious teachings has some appeal, but I worry about the baggage that gets carried along if someone subscribes to the teachings of a religion tied in with repression and war. There have been no wars between Buddhist nations (maybe this is unfair because there are so few in history). How do you maintain a distance between some teachings of a religion and others? Buddhism is enough for me, by itself -- the atheistic version of course.

 

[Durakken]

The idea of looking for commonalities between religious teachings has some appeal, but I worry about the baggage that gets carried along if someone subscribes to the teachings of a religion tied in with repression and war. There have been no wars between Buddhist nations (maybe this is unfair because there are so few in history). How do you maintain a distance between some teachings of a religion and others? Buddhism is enough for me, by itself -- the atheistic version of course.

I find that statement funny because the one responsible for spreading Buddhism was in fact a warlord that conquered a lot of land and then declared that he was pacifist due to conversion to Buddhism which was largely due to him simply being tired of war.

 

[Aught3]

The idea of looking for commonalities between religious teachings has some appeal, but I worry about the baggage that gets carried along if someone subscribes to the teachings of a religion tied in with repression and war.

Zen Buddhism and Japanese militarism in the 1930's and 40's (WWII) and the recent trouble in Sri Lanka of Buddhist monks violently suppressing other religions are two examples that spring to mind.

 

[SOS]

The idea of looking for commonalities between religious teachings has some appeal, but I worry about the baggage that gets carried along if someone subscribes to the teachings of a religion tied in with repression and war. There have been no wars between Buddhist nations (maybe this is unfair because there are so few in history). How do you maintain a distance between some teachings of a religion and others? Buddhism is enough for me, by itself -- the atheistic version of course.

I find that statement funny because the one responsible for spreading Buddhism was in fact a warlord that conquered a lot of land and then declared that he was pacifist due to conversion to Buddhism which was largely due to him simply being tired of war.

 

[SOS]

The idea of looking for commonalities between religious teachings has some appeal, but I worry about the baggage that gets carried along if someone subscribes to the teachings of a religion tied in with repression and war.

Zen Buddhism and Japanese militarism in the 1930's and 40's (WWII) and the recent trouble in Sri Lanka of Buddhist monks violently suppressing other religions are two examples that spring to mind.