Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
I invite you to test batchelors materialist philosophy, which he calls a kind of buddhism, against this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Dharma_Seals
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
I'm sure Batchelor is an eminent scholar of Buddhism, and has some good contributions to make in that area, but I'm glad the Pali Suttas were handed down, one would presume with a general intent of word-for-word accuracy, over the last few thousand years by Monastics, rather than by laypeople, however learned and scholarly. I'm half-joking, but I feel that if the task of preserving the Teachings had been left up to the Laity, we would have a million versions of Buddhism by now. Not to attempt to ascertain Batchelor's level of attainment here (I've no idea), but in general we laypeople are still highly enmeshed in sense pleasures, which can co-opt how we see, into seeing what we want to see, ie, somehow finding ways in which we can have our cake (the fruits of the practice) and eat it too (while still being able to enjoy sensuality). I'm NOT saying all or even most laypeople do this (nor am I pointing out Batchelor), but I've noticed a few over the years.
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
Agree.m0rl0ck wrote: ↑Wed Dec 13, 2017 3:30 am Batchelors "Buddhism" has seemed to me to be an admixture of mostly materialism and sour grapes. Which is what many of us came to Buddhism seeking to remedy. Rather than seeking a way to see beyond the cage that his culture and education have built for him, he is trying to convince the rest of us of its reality.
I heard an interview with him discussing Buddhism in terms of psychology and brain physiology and thats not buddhism, its materialist dualism and psychology. Of course if he didnt call it buddhism, he would sell any books or get any speaking fees.
If "After Buddhism" means hes done with it, so much better for buddhism and the rest of us.
That is how I feel too.
Some people are not happy with any of the religions.
But they are not intelligent enough to come up with their own theory like Buddha did either.
So they hybrid it.
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
During my reading a book "Broken Buddha" I lost all respect for the author on a certain fragment, namely the following:
"My conversion to Buddhism was quite quick and natural.I did not need to be persuaded by philosophical arguments or religious polemics." Geshe Dargier radiated kindness, which was neither hypocritical nor condescending. He could be harsh in an instant, in order to burst into laughter next. "It seemed as if he was unconditionally taking care of me, a completely unfamiliar person from a distant country, of which he knew nothing."
That is, for the author taking care of him, is much more important than any arguments, and after that he expects that we will seriously take his book as a serious argument ...?
"My conversion to Buddhism was quite quick and natural.I did not need to be persuaded by philosophical arguments or religious polemics." Geshe Dargier radiated kindness, which was neither hypocritical nor condescending. He could be harsh in an instant, in order to burst into laughter next. "It seemed as if he was unconditionally taking care of me, a completely unfamiliar person from a distant country, of which he knew nothing."
That is, for the author taking care of him, is much more important than any arguments, and after that he expects that we will seriously take his book as a serious argument ...?
-
- Posts: 1092
- Joined: Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
Just a note that Batchelor is not and does not claim to be a scholar. He has had formal and intensive training in the Tibetan monastic system, Korean Zen, and Goenka. He is a serious practitioner whether one agrees with him or not.
Re: Stephen Batchelor's “After Buddhism.” Yale University Press, 2015
It seems that now it is very popular to think, that if someone is serious practitioner, so he have some authority, this is very funny idea.Caodemarte wrote: ↑Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:41 am Just a note that Batchelor is not and does not claim to be a scholar. He has had formal and intensive training in the Tibetan monastic system, Korean Zen, and Goenka. He is a serious practitioner whether one agrees with him or not.