Page 14 of 28

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 6:55 pm
by tiltbillings
Ñāṇa wrote: "It's okay to be an atheist and a materialist and a Buddhist at the same time." Of course, this claim is a contradiction. If one is a materialist, then insofar as they consider themselves to be a Buddhist, they are a Buddhist who maintains a wrong view.
"an atheist and a materialist" Which is to say, one can be an atheist without being a materialist.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:37 pm
by Nyana
nowheat wrote:But this misses the point that what you are calling atheism is not inconsistent with the practice of the Buddha dharma, or with its morality. Materialism is incompatible with Buddhist rebirth, yes, but it is not incompatible with the morality that is the point of Buddhist rebirth.
Buddhist ethics entail engaging in actions that are more specific than just being a moral person. The actions motivated by Buddhist ethics include the laity acting in a reciprocal relationship with the monastic sangha. This includes generating merit (puñña) by giving monastics material requisites, and even participating in Uposatha days, and so on. This reciprocity between laity and monastics is essential for the continuity of the dhammavinaya.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:06 pm
by nowheat
Ñāṇa wrote: You've read Batchelor. While he tries to be careful with his use of language, it's clear that assumptions of atheistic materialism underlies his Confessions and other related writings.
...
It's usually explicitly stated corresponding to the idea that "It's okay to be an atheist and a materialist and a Buddhist at the same time." Of course, this claim is a contradiction. If one is a materialist, then insofar as they consider themselves to be a Buddhist, they are a Buddhist who maintains a wrong view.
You are not saying, then, that a claim is being made that the Buddha was a materialist.

You are saying that the claim is that one can be a Buddhist and an atheist/materialist at the same time, and this is an unskillful false dhamma. And if we can define your atheist/materialist as not simply a non-believer, but as a disbeliever "only this is true, and all else is wrong", I would then agree that it is an unskillful view, but not as unskillful as believing in rebirth without solid evidence. The disbeliever is not creating evidence to fit a speculative theory, but is simply expecting that there is a lack of evidence because nothing exists to create evidence, and being honest about it. Every atheist I have ever met has agreed that if good evidence turns up, they will no longer be an atheist, which makes them not so much a die-hard non-believer, as someone who has weighed the evidence and found it lacking, and is open-minded enough to change. This means that when the evidence presents itself along the Buddhist path, they will no longer be an atheist, nor will they be a believer, they will be a knower.

I say again, that if you know personally that your understanding of the Buddha's teaching is both what he taught and what is true, then I cannot see why you would object to dedicated practitioners trying the path even if they are (as above) atheists. The truth will reveal itself, and these "atheists", being a generally open-minded lot, will then see it.
Ñāṇa wrote:Buddhist ethics entail engaging in actions that are more specific than just being a moral person. The actions motivated by Buddhist ethics include the laity acting in a reciprocal relationship with the monastic sangha. This includes generating merit (puñña) by giving monastics material requisites, and even participating in Uposatha days, and so on. This reciprocity between laity and monastics is essential for the continuity of the dhammavinaya.
You are concerned about the ability to keep up the monastic sangha. I am too, and I am not the only one. This is a topic under much discussion in the Secular Buddhist community. My understanding is that monastics are supposed to beg alms every day but in modern society this is no longer possible -- I understand it is against the law to do this here in the U.S. (though I haven't personally checked this). The way the sangha is organized needs to change to survive changes in society, that's sure. Our ability to keep passing on the dhammavinaya is a definite concern for all Buddhists, especially here in the West, where the old models aren't an easy fit with the existing culture.

:namaste:

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:06 pm
by Thales
Bhikkhu Pesala wrote: The gravest danger of this "one life only" view is that it encourages the pursuit of selfish pleasures at any cost, and provides no incentive to abstain from unwholesome deeds, nor to cultivate wholesome ones.
This is a fallacy. The incentive to cultivate wholesome deeds is kamma, the fruits of which can be seen in this very life with or without a belief in the next life. When I am heedless I suffer, when I am heedful dukkha falls away. One doesn't need wait until after death to experience the results of one's own actions.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:42 pm
by santa100
Thales wrote:
"One doesn't need wait until after death to experience the results of one's own actions"

Unfortunately, quite often in life, one does have to wait until after death to experience the results of his/her own actions. Look at millions of children in Africa or Asia who were born without eye sight, without arms and legs, shoot and kill people as child soldiers, or work 16 to 18 hours in factories with the most horrible working conditions possible. Then look at Hugh Hefner, a healthy and wealthy 85 year-old man, enjoying every single pleasure possible in life with the world most beautiful women, some whose age is not even close to one fourth his age! Without a next life, it'd be extremely tough to tell Hugh how his heedlessness has made him suffer or to tell those children to simply be heedful to make dukkha disappear..

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:26 pm
by retrofuturist
Greetings Thales,

I'd agree that "no incentive to abstain from unwholesome deeds, nor to cultivate wholesome ones" is over-reaching somewhat...
Dhammapada wrote:15. The evil-doer grieves here and hereafter; he grieves in both the worlds. He laments and is afflicted, recollecting his own impure deeds.

16. The doer of good rejoices here and hereafter; he rejoices in both the worlds. He rejoices and exults, recollecting his own pure deeds.

17. The evil-doer suffers here and hereafter; he suffers in both the worlds. The thought, "Evil have I done," torments him, and he suffers even more when gone to realms of woe.

18. The doer of good delights here and hereafter; he delights in both the worlds. The thought, "Good have I done," delights him, and he delights even more when gone to realms of bliss.
Metta,
Retro. :)

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:57 pm
by Goofaholix
David N. Snyder wrote:I agree with Ven. Pesala's post above and the quote provided from Venerable Mahāsī Sayādaw. There is a real danger in the nihilistic views.
Trouble is Mahāsī Sayādaw appears to be confusing annhialationism with nihilism, which is common it would seem.
David N. Snyder wrote:I/we take refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, not a God, not gods, not devas.
A very important point.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:02 am
by mikenz66
nowheat wrote: You are saying that the claim is that one can be a Buddhist and an atheist/materialist at the same time, and this is an unskillful false dhamma. And if we can define your atheist/materialist as not simply a non-believer, but as a disbeliever "only this is true, and all else is wrong", I would then agree that it is an unskillful view, but not as unskillful as believing in rebirth without solid evidence. The disbeliever is not creating evidence to fit a speculative theory,
This "speculative" argument is not very useful, in my opinion.

By all means label taking various statements in the suttas at face value as speculative, but you'd then have to agree that the possibility of nibbana, and the end of all dukkha is also speculative.

There is an appeal to authority by all non-ariyan Dhamma practitioners.

:anjali:
Mike

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:02 am
by Goofaholix
Ñāṇa wrote: Therefore, this pesky little word has significant connotations that are contrary to 2500 years of Pāli dhammavinaya and Theravāda Buddhism.
If you find it pesky then don't use, it's a no brainer really, if you want to say materialism then say that, if you want to say annhialationism or nihilism then the same goes, if you are being pesked by a pesky word then it's a peskation of your own creation.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:18 am
by Goofaholix
Ñāṇa wrote:This notion of questioning rebirth, setting aside the teachings on rebirth, or denying that the Buddha taught rebirth is entirely a modern phenomenon occurring due to the influence of materialist views. This entire phenomenon is a dodgy enterprise -- a narcissistic urge to remake the samaṇa Gotama in one's own image.
Is it a modern phenomenon? or a western phenomenon? we'll never know because westerners haven't had the chance to grow up in a society where this world view is assumed.

I've spent a lot of time in SE Asia and have a lot of contact with SE Asian people of all levels of education, mostly Thai being married to one and all.

For the educated Thais the impression I get is that they don't really have any less doubt about what happens after death than we do, but they are happy to work with it as an assumption because it's such a big part of their culture, after all it's what you practise rather than what you believe that's important.

For the uneducated the view seems to be more a mixture of animism and eternalism. For example when my mother in law was dying her sisters wanted to mark her body so that when she was reborn they might be able to identify her by the birth mark, I see no Buddhadhamma in this.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:19 am
by Goofaholix
Ñāṇa wrote:If someone accepts the existence of devas and higher realms then they are not atheistic.
Unless of course you believe the dictionary.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:27 am
by Goofaholix
nowheat wrote:I would support the macro-literal-rebirth view as being a useful teaching tool if I did not find volumes and volumes being written debating whether there could be rebirth or not, rather than focusing on practice. It was undoubtedly a good teaching tool when it was the default belief system. I find that Westerners who do not have rebirth as their native view spend a great deal of time and effort trying to understand and adopt it, time that would be far better spent on understanding what the Buddha is saying at the core about how we create our false sense of self. With dependent origination, the Buddha is saying something very precise about where that "self" originates, how we create it, and why we should be doing something about it, and that is being obscured by efforts to get people to adopt a world-view that is not natural to them. A world view that they will have to let go of to be liberated unless it becomes evident through their practice to be a truth.
It does seem to be a trojan horse that gets us focussing on the problem as defined in several indian religions rather than the solution as ddefined by the Buddha.

Luckily on retreats we have noble silence otherwise we'd be wasting our time discussing the mephysical context rather than the eightfold path there too.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:59 am
by nowheat
mikenz66 wrote:This "speculative" argument is not very useful, in my opinion.

By all means label taking various statements in the suttas at face value as speculative, but you'd then have to agree that the possibility of nibbana, and the end of all dukkha is also speculative.
Just as, if I lived long ago in an area where tobacco grew wild, and most of the people I knew smoked, and died young, and coughed a lot, and I noticed that those who didn't smoke didn't die young, and I thought, "If I could give up smoking, maybe I could free myself of this." And I slowly cut down on the amount I was smoking, and my cough lessened, and I felt better. Could I predict with absolute certainty that I would be able to quit smoking, and avoid the evil fate of an early death? Not with certainty, no. Would certainty be necessary to continue? No, simply finding that I get better and better is enough to keep me moving in that direction.

I don't need certainty that nibbana and the end of all dukkha are possible to continue heading in that direction. Faith is not necessary, only the confidence built of experience.
There is an appeal to authority by all non-ariyan Dhamma practitioners.
Is there? And which one is that?

:namaste:

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 4:21 am
by vinasp
Hi everyone,

Of course the puthujjana is correct in that the teachings are meant to be
understood in the way that he claims, by the majority of followers.

His mistake is to assume that this is the only way to make sense of the
teachings. In fact, it is merely the puthujjana's understanding.

The problem is that the puthujjana cannot see that there is another way
to understand the teachings. If he could see this, then he would no longer
be a puthujjana, but an ariya savaka.

"Potthapada, all those wanderers are blind and sightless, you alone
among them are sighted." DN 9.33 Walshe 1987.

Regards, Vincent.

Re: Atheism is an Unskillful False Dhamma

Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2012 5:12 am
by mikenz66
nowheat wrote:
mikenz66 wrote:This "speculative" argument is not very useful, in my opinion.

By all means label taking various statements in the suttas at face value as speculative, but you'd then have to agree that the possibility of nibbana, and the end of all dukkha is also speculative.
Just as, if I lived long ago in an area where tobacco grew wild, and most of the people I knew smoked, and died young, and coughed a lot, and I noticed that those who didn't smoke didn't die young, and I thought, "If I could give up smoking, maybe I could free myself of this." And I slowly cut down on the amount I was smoking, and my cough lessened, and I felt better. Could I predict with absolute certainty that I would be able to quit smoking, and avoid the evil fate of an early death? Not with certainty, no. Would certainty be necessary to continue? No, simply finding that I get better and better is enough to keep me moving in that direction.

I don't need certainty that nibbana and the end of all dukkha are possible to continue heading in that direction. Faith is not necessary, only the confidence built of experience.
Well, sure, meditation and sila make one happier and so on. Any meditation/sila programme will do that, not just Buddhist.

How do you know you're heading in the direction of Nibbana? By all accounts it's a difficult and challenging process, that involves nibbida (variously translated as dispassion, or often something stronger, such as aversion) with the aggregates, to the extent that one can drop them completely:
http://dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=11701" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
nowheat wrote:
There is an appeal to authority by all non-ariyan Dhamma practitioners.
Is there? And which one is that?
That nibbana is possible. Something that I take on faith.

As the Buddha himself states:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"Excellent, Sariputta. Excellent. Those who have not known, seen, penetrated, realized, or attained it by means of discernment would have to take it on conviction in others that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation; whereas those who have known, seen, penetrated, realized, & attained it by means of discernment would have no doubt or uncertainty that the faculty of conviction... persistence... mindfulness... concentration... discernment, when developed & pursued, gains a footing in the Deathless, has the Deathless as its goal & consummation."
:anjali:
Mike