Agnostic Buddhism

[Snoopy]

aka Liberal Buddhism, Sceptical Buddhism, Rational Buddhism, Western Buddhism...

Haven't really got anything specific I want to say at present, just felt the urge to create a thread should there be any others out there who want to raise/discuss/post stuff that fits vaguely under this banner (if only to decry it). (perhaps these terms don't necessarily refer to the same "thing" - hey, I'm learning here...!)

s.

[Nick the Pilot]

Snoopy,

There is a movement in Buddhism called Skeptical Buddhism, which is where people throw out all the talk of Heaven and ghosts and all that, and just concentrate on living by the Precepts. This may be the same thing you are talking about.

[ardenz]

perhaps this is my long lost religion!

[wil]

I got my church to provide an ordination/installation?? of a Tibetan Buddhist.

There were some interesting things during the whole scenario....he used to live around me, but was then living in North Carolina....some issue came up during the time he was supposed to have it happen and the monk that was here and would have done the ceremony headed back overseas...

So they got agreement with the American Buddhist Representative to the UN who was ordained in a number of different traditions including Tibetan...

Anywho our church was halfway and they came up from NC and he came down from NYC and we had a ceremony...

Paraphrasing somewhere in his discussion to the precept?? my friend who was being ordained....it was more like a discussion between the two of them, and we were witnesses to it...anywho it went along the lines that they didn't have time to deal with the essence of the creator, creation, the heavens, afterlife et al....that there was plenty to contemplate and improve on our physical, mental and spiritual nature right now, right here in this life....and went on to say don't believe me, any gurus, any books, the Dharma, or the Buddha...read, research, contemplate, meditate and find out your truth inside for each situation and for this time in your life....as you grow your understanding will grow...

These weren't his words but what I got out of his words....a number of members of our church were present, as well as our preacher amongst all the friends, family and Buddhists in attendance.

It was a wonderful and refreshing ceremony and discussion, and seemed to have apealed to all...

[Francis king]

yes snoopy, u had referred me to this idea of agnostic buddhism, and so I checked out this guy u mentioned, stephen batchelor, and also looked at some of the criticisms that have been attached to his work...

so, my thoughts on doing a preliminary search and investigation are as follows...

he was a teacher at Gaia House, and yes, I've been there, to be honest, this puts me off him- Bodhidhamma was the only decent teacher there, if u want my opinion, and he now has his own set up in Wales, thankfully, the rest of them were a right shower, all desperate to be gurus but only for the money and status it brings, selling their books and banging on about how good they were... remember when christopher titmuss was expelled for getting too friendly with his students (he was a breastman, by all accounts...tits were his thing, ironic really...lol), well, Gaia House and places like that attract such ppl, self important little scammers, and so maybe I have been put off by this association with Gaia House... but no, I can't hold this against him...

apparently there are 3 main books, Alone with Others (1983)
the faith to trust (1990) and Buddhism without beliefs (1997), although he is a prolific author and has written many others... there is no mention of what he does with his profits, and I would hope that he was doing something positive with them, but there is no mention of this in his site, so it seems that apart from doing the big I-am routine with the rest of them and living it up in France even though his centre is in Totnes, he's not doing much...

ye shall know them by their fruits applies to buddhists as much as it does xtians...

so.... this "buddhism without beliefs" or asnostic/skeptical buddhism has been accused of watering down buddhism by intergrating such with a western framework...

I checked out his home page: Stephen Batchelor: Absolutely Not!

I also checked out wikipedia, where he has his own page... search for Stephen Batchelor,

at the bottom of the wiki page there is a link to an external site which gives a criticism of his buddhism, which can be found at:

Buddhism Without Beliefs Critiqued, Punnadhammo

which will give u a critique by a monk called Bhikku Punnadhammo...

I have also read the preface to buddhism without beliefs, courtesy of amazons search inside feature, and yes, I agree with a lot of what he appears to be saying, on the surface... buddhism doesn't need any more gurus, we have enough of them as there is... yes, a lot of what passes itself off as buddhism isn't, and the sutras themselves tell us not to cling to lineage and tradition for the sake of it, and the Brahmana sutra says just the same thing- it is not by birth is one a brahmin, but by deed...

so far so good, then..?

well, no... Batchelor thinks Buddha wasn't a mystic, yet... his name- siddha artha, means... to ask about the siddhas... the mahasiddhas Buddha had, and we know he had the mahasiddhas because the sutras tell us he did... he had knowledge of past and future time, the ability to appear in all places, he knew what was in the minds of others, etc, etc, and he was in possession of these things in much the same way some other yogi's and holy men and women are...

i believe Buddha was in the possession of the mahasiddhas, and I believe this came about via his enlightenment experience...

Punnadhammo says that Batchelor doesn't accept enlightenment, and prefers "awakening" instead, suggesting that this is a commonplace thing and a gradual process, rather than be that intensive numinous experience ppl think it is, and I'd have to contradict him there, as I've had the same experience of the numinous that I think many ppl have, and which also brings u additional powers, the mahasiddhas...

maybe Batchelor doesn't believe in them as he has no direct experience of them? which is a shame, really, as I've met plenty of buddhists in the flesh who do, and Dogen himself also reported having these powers, but yes, they are quite rare... not everyone has them...

Punnadhammo also says that Batchelor thinks the concept of nirvana has suffered, and a complexity has been reduced to uniformity by the emphasis placed on a single, ultimate truth, yet, in truth, the focus of abhidharma is on that Ultimate Truth...

if nirvana is not peace, why is it so important to the four truths and why are they so important to the path?

the division of the two truths is crucial to buddhism- without these two truths there is no buddhism, and buddhism becomes something other than buddhism... it is, of course, the task of the consciousness to determine what Ultimate Truth is, an Budhha never tells u what it is, but he does say in the samyuttara nikaya sutra that "...there is an unchanging, undying, uncreated..." within the universe, and then turned away from teaching about Ultimate Truth...

To remove Buddha from hinduism is like taking jesus away from Judaism...

without understanding where these men went, we cannot hope to understand why they thought what they did and why they said what they did...

that's not conventional buddhist logic, but it will do me...

according to Punnadhammo, when siddhartha found Brahma in the forest, Batchelor says he found wisdom, not the deity, and it is true that Brahma as the personification of wisdom can quite as simply just be that wisdom, yet for him to then find he has the mahasiddhas..?

...it doesn't work like that... I know that, and it's an ultimate truth... not a conventional one, or a worldy truth for the concealers...

Buddha was an enlightened being with the mahasiddhas, or he wasn't... u can't have it both ways...

although I can agree with Batchelor when he says that instead of a literal interpretation of migrations of the kalacakra, these places are states of mind a consciousness can fall to, or attain...

so... to sum... what he says makes a lot of sense, and he's quite intelligent, but if u poke around for a bit u notice that buddhism loses something via his translation- it loses what makes Buddha Buddha...

after all, there is a world of difference between an experience of the numinous and an ordinary philosopher...

gategateparagateparasamgatebodhisvaha...

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Nick the Pilot

Snoopy,

There is a movement in Buddhism called Skeptical Buddhism, which is where people throw out all the talk of Heaven and ghosts and all that, and just concentrate on living by the Precepts. This may be the same thing you are talking about.

Do you have any links or books you can refer to?

Thanks.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by ardenz

perhaps this is my long lost religion!

Careful ardenz, you used the ‘r’ word!

(see below for possible explanation!)

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by wil

it went along the lines that they didn't have time to deal with the essence of the creator, creation, the heavens, afterlife et al....that there was plenty to contemplate and improve on our physical, mental and spiritual nature right now, right here in this life....and went on to say don't believe me, any gurus, any books, the Dharma, or the Buddha...read, research, contemplate, meditate and find out your truth inside for each situation and for this time in your life....as you grow your understanding will grow...
It was a wonderful and refreshing ceremony and discussion, and seemed to have apealed to all...

Exactamundo! A well funky place you got there, wil.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Francis king

there is no mention of what he does with his profits, and I would hope that he was doing something positive with them, but there is no mention of this in his site, so it seems that apart from doing the big I-am routine with the rest of them and living it up in France even though his centre is in Totnes, he's not doing much...

I don’t know what Batchelor does with his time or any money that he makes. As his wife is French I don’t think its surprising that he lives in France.

at the bottom of the wiki page there is a link to an external site which gives a criticism of his buddhism, which can be found at:

Buddhism Without Beliefs Critiqued, Punnadhammo

which will give u a critique by a monk called Bhikku Punnadhammo...

Clearly “agnostic” Buddhism will draw criticism from the religious schools of Buddhism, not least of which Theravadan. Stephen Batchelor was an ordained monk, having trained in more than one tradition but has ultimately decided that dharma practice should not be “a religion” if it is to be of most use to the modern world. (A very similar sentiment to one that I have seen expressed in an interview with the Dalai Lama).

he had knowledge of past and future time, the ability to appear in all places, he knew what was in the minds of others, etc, etc,

I suspect that such supernatural claims were probably added after the Buddha’s death. Whether or not they were, if I’m going to be agnostic about rebirth in the literal, traditional sense I’m certainly going to be questioning this sort of assertion.

Punnadhammo also says that Batchelor thinks the concept of nirvana has suffered, and a complexity has been reduced to uniformity by the emphasis placed on a single, ultimate truth, yet, in truth, the focus of abhidharma is on that Ultimate Truth...
if nirvana is not peace, why is it so important to the four truths and why are they so important to the path?

Not sure what you’re saying here? This does make me think that one needs to read the source first hand (i.e. Batchelor) perhaps rather than JUST another’s critical interpretation.

To remove Buddha from hinduism is like taking jesus away from Judaism...

Well yes, he’s trying to shed the stuff that cannot be held on to by an agnostic approach. Whether that throws the baby out with the bathwater or gets rid of the dead wood is a matter of opinion (or maybe only time will tell…). Perhaps a better title for Batchelor’s book Buddhism Without Beliefs would be Dharma (the reality) Without Buddhism (religion). Perhaps he is trying to take the Hinduism (the culture and society of the man’s time and place) out of the dharma.

s.

[Snoopy]

Originally Posted by Francis king

Batchelor thinks Buddha wasn't a mystic, yet... his name- siddha artha, means... to ask about the siddhas... the mahasiddhas Buddha had, and we know he had the mahasiddhas because the sutras tell us he did... he had knowledge of past and future time, the ability to appear in all places, he knew what was in the minds of others, etc, etc, and he was in possession of these things in much the same way some other yogi's and holy men and women are...
i believe Buddha was in the possession of the mahasiddhas, and I believe this came about via his enlightenment experience...
Punnadhammo says that Batchelor doesn't accept enlightenment, and prefers "awakening" instead, suggesting that this is a commonplace thing and a gradual process, rather than be that intensive numinous experience ppl think it is, and I'd have to contradict him there, as I've had the same experience of the numinous that I think many ppl have, and which also brings u additional powers, the mahasiddhas...

...and of course "Buddha" means “one who is awake”. So take your pick. As to the nature of this enlightenment/awakening, one doesn't need Batchelor putting his oar in to "mix" this up, it varies across the religious schools anyway: gradual, sudden, once only, several, “already got it but don’t know it”, one lifetime, several lifetimes…so take your pick again!

s.

[Snoopy]

Agnosticism, as coined by TH Huxley, is meant to be a rigorous application of a principle expressed as “follow your reason as far as it will take you and do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable”. I would say this seems like a good description of the Buddha’s approach to the investigation of dukkha. It is neither atheistic or theistic, founded on the ultimate honesty of “I don’t know.”

When the four noble truths are simply beliefs, this is when (according to Batchelor), the dharma becomes just another creed or religion to distinguish “Buddhists” from believers of other creeds such a Muslims, Hindus or Christians. Batchelor argues that the crucial distinction from other such creeds (and that the dharma was not intended to be a set of religious beliefs) is that the four truths are challenges to be tested and acted upon, not simply notions to be believed or disbelieved.

With so much personal unhappiness and ills in human society the dharma could be a vehicle of great assistance. But “Buddhism” is in danger of becoming an ossified religious relic, irrelevant to the challenges of the modern world. It may also come to mean nothing more than meditation and hence be subsumed into the world of self-help and psychotherapy.

s.

[Snoopy]

According to the blurb in the Buddhism Without Beliefs book, Batchelor lectures world wide, is a contributing editor of Tricycle and is the director of studies at the Sharpham Centre. So it's not all croissants and claret!

s.

[sam1008]

Have you noticed if you say dub dub dub dub over and over again it sounds like Buddha?

[sam1008]

Sorry to but in with my seemingly inane and unconnected comment, I probaly should have started a new thread.

[Francis king]

fire away, i make plenty of inane comments and they tolerate me