Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by mikenz66 »

SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:11 am My rationality and intuition are not in conflict. :shrug:
That's good to know. :tongue:
But what relevance does it have to what I said?

:heart:
Mike
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by SteRo »

mikenz66 wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:39 am
SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 5:11 am My rationality and intuition are not in conflict. :shrug:
That's good to know. :tongue:
But what relevance does it have to what I said?
Depends on how you are weighting rationality and intuition with reference to the two teachers' words you are imputing these phenomena to. Thus it depends on your attitude towards rebirth.
Saying "My rationality and intuition are not in conflict" means that both reveal that rebirth does not exist.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
Goofaholix
Posts: 4017
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 3:49 am
Location: New Zealand

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by Goofaholix »

I think if the practice they are undergoing has roots in early Buddhist practice and the purpose and goal of their practice is to free themselves of craving and awaken the human mind the I don't really care what they do or don't believe it's not up to me to accept or reject them.

But if they are practicing merely to reduce stress or sharpen the mind then that's not my path and not the Buddhas path. I could say the same of someone trying to buy their way to a better rebirth though I suppose.
Pronouns (no self / not self)
“Peace is within oneself to be found in the same place as agitation and suffering. It is not found in a forest or on a hilltop, nor is it given by a teacher. Where you experience suffering, you can also find freedom from suffering. Trying to run away from suffering is actually to run toward it.”
― Ajahn Chah
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19943
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by mikenz66 »

Goofaholix wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 7:00 am I think if the practice they are undergoing has roots in early Buddhist practice and the purpose and goal of their practice is to free themselves of craving and awaken the human mind the I don't really care what they do or don't believe it's not up to me to accept or reject them.
I agree. For me, it is the "denial of even the possibility of nibbana" that makes finding common ground difficult.
Goofaholix wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 7:00 am But if they are practicing merely to reduce stress or sharpen the mind then that's not my path and not the Buddhas path. I could say the same of someone trying to buy their way to a better rebirth though I suppose.
At least the latter types don't argue with the idea of a liberative path, and will most likely be supportive of people who are pursuing it. It's just not on their agenda at the moment...

:heart:
Mike
User avatar
Dhamma Chameleon
Posts: 584
Joined: Sun Feb 04, 2018 10:55 am

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by Dhamma Chameleon »

If someone strives honestly and diligently to practice the eightfold path and considers the Buddha their teacher, what is the problem? What business is it of mine to accept them or not? Accept them to what?
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings,
Dhamma Chameleon wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 10:34 am If someone strives honestly and diligently to practice the eightfold path and considers the Buddha their teacher, what is the problem? What business is it of mine to accept them or not? Accept them to what?
:anjali:

Well said.

Metta,
Paul. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by SteRo »

mikenz66 wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 8:52 am For me, it is the "denial of even the possibility of nibbana" that makes finding common ground difficult.
Categorical denial of objects of religious belief always is an extremist's attitude. E.g. I would not deny that a christian can attain unification with her/his "god" in case she/he claims that, so the same applies to a buddhist's attaining "nibbana".

The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other. So there is no need to become involved in any system through affirming or denying because of natural selection.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
confusedlayman
Posts: 6231
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:16 am
Location: Human Realm (as of now)

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by confusedlayman »

SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 8:52 am For me, it is the "denial of even the possibility of nibbana" that makes finding common ground difficult.
Categorical denial of objects of religious belief always is an extremist's attitude. E.g. I would not deny that a christian can attain unification with her/his "god" in case she/he claims that, so the same applies to a buddhist's attaining "nibbana".

The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other. So there is no need to become involved in any system through affirming or denying because of natural selection.
If rebirth dont exist why should i follow morality?
I may be slow learner but im at least learning...
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by SteRo »

confusedlayman wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:37 pm If rebirth dont exist why should i follow morality?
And why shouldn't you? There are many existential questions humans feel urged to find an answer to. Shall I go this way or shall I go that way? Shall I take up this profession or shall I take up that profession? Shall I marry or not? Shall I have childrem or not? Shall I commit suicide or not? Countless existential questions. The system of thought that aligns itself optimally to reality will survive, i.e. find continuity in humans.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
sphairos
Posts: 968
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 4:37 am
Location: Munich, Germany

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by sphairos »

confusedlayman wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:37 pm
SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm
mikenz66 wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 8:52 am For me, it is the "denial of even the possibility of nibbana" that makes finding common ground difficult.
Categorical denial of objects of religious belief always is an extremist's attitude. E.g. I would not deny that a christian can attain unification with her/his "god" in case she/he claims that, so the same applies to a buddhist's attaining "nibbana".

The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other. So there is no need to become involved in any system through affirming or denying because of natural selection.
If rebirth dont exist why should i follow morality?
because u gonna hurt people around u ? And hurting people feels bad, like hurting yourself?
How good and wonderful are your days,
How true are your ways?
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by Sam Vara »

SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm
The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other.
Why should the principle of "survival of the fittest" apply to systems of thought? It applies to biology because of a selection mechanism. But there is no known selection mechanism for systems of thought; there is no evidence that a system of thought which does not align itself closely to reality is at any disadvantage at all, saving of course those that lead to the death of those that subscribe before they can be transmitted. Thoughts that are fit to survive are no more than that; their fitness has nothing to do with veracity.
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by SteRo »

Sam Vara wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 1:46 pm
SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm
The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other.
Why should the principle of "survival of the fittest" apply to systems of thought?
Why shouldn't it apply? :sage:
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
SteRo
Posts: 5950
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 10:27 am
Location: Εὐρώπη Eurṓpē

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by SteRo »

sphairos wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 1:14 pm
confusedlayman wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:37 pm
SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm

Categorical denial of objects of religious belief always is an extremist's attitude. E.g. I would not deny that a christian can attain unification with her/his "god" in case she/he claims that, so the same applies to a buddhist's attaining "nibbana".

The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other. So there is no need to become involved in any system through affirming or denying because of natural selection.
If rebirth dont exist why should i follow morality?
because u gonna hurt people around u ? And hurting people feels bad, like hurting yourself?
Caution. Don't confuse 'not following morality' with intentionally performing immorality. Coursing in signs, morality may appear as if important but not coursing in signs, morality and immorality are irrelevant concepts.

The 'I am' that follows morality is the same 'I am' that appropriates "rebirth". Therefore CL's question is ambiguous: when there is no 'I am' rebirth does not exist but there also isn't 'I am' that may follow morality.
Cleared. αδόξαστος.
User avatar
Sam Vara
Site Admin
Posts: 13482
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Portsmouth, U.K.

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by Sam Vara »

SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 4:27 pm
Sam Vara wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 1:46 pm
SteRo wrote: Mon Mar 22, 2021 12:30 pm
The principle of "survival of the fittest" also is applicable to systems of thought: there will be continuity of this system of thought that optimally aligns itself to reality and in the course of this historical development the degree of closeness to reality determines the prevalence of one system of thought over the other.
Why should the principle of "survival of the fittest" apply to systems of thought?
Why shouldn't it apply? :sage:
Because, unlike the survival of species according to evolutionary theory, there is no mechanism which might explain why certain systems of thought succeed or fail according to their veracity. Someone making a positive claim about the natural selection of ideas ought to be able to explain why that is the case.
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Can we accept secular Buddhism as Buddhism?

Post by Coëmgenu »

Unless we're witnessing "survival of the fittest ideas" before our very eyes and the idea of "survival of the fittest ideas" isn't very fit.

:sage:

"Welcome to the yoga to end all yogas," said the sock puppet.
What is the Uncreated?
Sublime & free, what is that obscured Eternity?
It is the Undying, the Bright, the Isle.
It is an Ocean, a Secret: Reality.
Both life and oblivion, it is Nirvāṇa.
Post Reply