Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
CedarTree
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 9:37 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by CedarTree »

Great question,

Answer yes and no.

I think in some ways it's almost a dialectic between the two. The most important thing we can do though is not water down the Dharma/Dhamma but also allow modernism (depending on how you define it) to help us grow and be more productive and efficient.

Modernism* can grow by learning about Jhana and I think the unconditioned is an excellent subject for metaphysical philosophy :)


Practice, Practice, Practice

User avatar
Nicholas Weeks
Posts: 4210
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:26 pm
Location: USA West Coast

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Nicholas Weeks »

The new book by Bhikkhu Thanissaro has a detailed section on wrong view that starts like this:
Wrong views.
Many of the points that the Buddha discussed under mundane right view were unique to him in his time. There is a widespread misunderstanding that he simply picked up his teachings on kamma and rebirth from ancient Indian culture, but this is simply not true. In fact, the Buddha often used the teachings of mundane right view to counter many of the views widespread among his contemporaries.
Of the many forms of wrong view that he rejected in this way, six stand out, both because he argued against them so frequently and because they correspond to wrong views that are still widely held at present: annihilationism, materialism, fatalism, the denial of causality, eternalism, and racism. The Buddha had to counter these views because they either (1) denied the possibility of any path of skillful action leading to the end of suffering, (2) denied the need for such a path, or (3) undermined the motivation needed to stick with the specific path he had discovered and taught.
See chapter III - http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writ ... n0000.html
Good and evil have no fixed form. It's as easy to turn from doing bad to doing good as it is to flip over the hand from the back to the palm. It's simply up to us to do it. Master Hsuan Hua.
User avatar
DNS
Site Admin
Posts: 17191
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
Contact:

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by DNS »

Will wrote:The new book by Bhikkhu Thanissaro has a detailed section on wrong view that starts like this:
Wrong views.
The Buddha had to counter these views because they either (1) denied the possibility of any path of skillful action leading to the end of suffering, (2) denied the need for such a path, or (3) undermined the motivation needed to stick with the specific path he had discovered and taught.
See chapter III - http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writ ... n0000.html
Good points by the venerable. And that looks like a good book, just published for free access a few days ago. I just downloaded the pdf and see it's 460 pages long! That was quite the accomplishment, mudita to the bhikkhu for his merit.
Warrior_monk1
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 1:11 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Warrior_monk1 »

David N. Snyder wrote:
Will wrote:The new book by Bhikkhu Thanissaro has a detailed section on wrong view that starts like this:
Wrong views.
The Buddha had to counter these views because they either (1) denied the possibility of any path of skillful action leading to the end of suffering, (2) denied the need for such a path, or (3) undermined the motivation needed to stick with the specific path he had discovered and taught.
See chapter III - http://www.dhammatalks.org/Archive/Writ ... n0000.html
Good points by the venerable. And that looks like a good book, just published for free access a few days ago. I just downloaded the pdf and see it's 460 pages long! That was quite the accomplishment, mudita to the bhikkhu for his merit.
It's a free book, right? I do not want to download or anything anymore :P. I rather buy a copy where I can share my love with other people about a book.
User avatar
Nicholas Weeks
Posts: 4210
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 11:26 pm
Location: USA West Coast

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Nicholas Weeks »

Warrior_monk1:
It's a free book, right? I do not want to download or anything anymore :P. I rather buy a copy where I can share my love with other people about a book.
You have to request the printed book by snail mail:
A paperback copy of this book is available free of charge. To request one, write to: Book Request, Metta Forest Monastery, PO Box 1409, Valley Center, CA 92082 USA.
Good and evil have no fixed form. It's as easy to turn from doing bad to doing good as it is to flip over the hand from the back to the palm. It's simply up to us to do it. Master Hsuan Hua.
User avatar
dylanj
Posts: 936
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 1:48 am
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by dylanj »

:goodpost:
binocular wrote:
Ripser wrote:Do you believe there can be some sort of reconciliation between traditional Buddhism and the scientific-evolutionary-rationalistic mindset which doesn’t harm the former?
No.
Will Buddhism “without mythology”, in your view, ever be able to constitute a solid worldview on its own?
No.
Or does it need to be constantly supplemented by the Western modern worldview, losing perhaps too much (if not everything worthwhile) in the process?
Yes.
Born, become, arisen – made, prepared, short-lived
Bonded by decay and death – a nest for sickness, perishable
Produced by seeking nutriment – not fit to take delight in


Departure from this is peaceful – beyond reasoning and enduring
Unborn, unarisen – free from sorrow and stain
Ceasing of all factors of suffering – stilling of all preparations is bliss
User avatar
Coëmgenu
Posts: 8151
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 10:55 pm
Location: Whitby, Canada

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Coëmgenu »

binocular wrote:
chownah wrote:
binocular wrote: If Western science would in fact acknowledge anatta in any meaningful way, then Western science's whole reason to live would fall apart. If "someone is there" only provisionally, then the whole competition, the whole evolutionary struggle for survival is merely an absurdist game that even the most cynical couldn't play.
There are a few neurological studies which lean towards showing that our sense of indentity is a by-product of neural associations and not the driver in the wheel.

I guess these must not constitute meaningful acknowledgement.
Then I'd really like to see you provide a justification for continuing the struggle for survival -- when there's really noone there.
Why do scientists work to provide people with a good education, work qualifications, improve their health, quit drugs, and such -- when there's noone really there?
Answer me that.
Because they are people I suppose? Because if they don't feed themselves their stomachs will hurt, they will get a headache, they will die eventually?

Scientists are not a monolith.

Anil K Seth is a Professor of Cognitive and Computational Neuroscience at the University of Sussex. I just copypasted that from wikipedia. He engages in research. He is a "scientist".

He gives this talk, "secular Buddhism" if I have ever heard it, one salient feature is that it is heavy on metaphysics and light on morality:

"Scientists" are not a monolith, nor is "science", so asking "why do scientists do X" and expecting a single answer doesn't make a lot of sense.
Last edited by Coëmgenu on Sat Aug 12, 2017 6:21 pm, edited 3 times in total.
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.
binocular
Posts: 8292
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:13 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by binocular »

Coëmgenu wrote:
binocular wrote:Then I'd really like to see you provide a justification for continuing the struggle for survival -- when there's really noone there.
Why do scientists work to provide people with a good education, work qualifications, improve their health, quit drugs, and such -- when there's noone really there?
Answer me that.
Because they are people I suppose? Because if they don't feed themselves their stomachs will hurt, they will get a headache, they will die eventually?
Ah, yes, they have to spend their time somehow ...
Scientists are not a monolith.
Except when there is a presumed uniform scientific front against religion, irrationality, or whatever.
"Scientists" are not a monolith, nor is "science", so asking "why do scientists do X" and expecting a single answer doesn't make a lot of sense.
Great! Then let's remember this the next time someone speaks favorably about science and scientists.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by cappuccino »

"Really no one there"?

I save bugs, they seem to understand and cooperate.
Last edited by cappuccino on Sat Aug 19, 2017 11:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by cappuccino »

Secularism is weak faith.

Weak faith doesn't help, it hinders your progress.
julian
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:47 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by julian »

Maitri wrote: Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:38 pm "Just practice and study Stoicism and leave Buddhism out of it. Secular Buddhism is just as silly as saying Secular Hinduism or Secular Islam.

If a person is uncomfortable with cultivating faith in certain aspects of a tradition, it is not right of them to change it to suite it their own neurosis or uncertainty. Making Christianity more liberal and secular friendly has absolutely destroyed it as an institution in the West. The mainline churches are collapsing in the West and even the non-denominational churches have leveled off in popularity.

People like Spong did more to gut Christianity from the inside than any outside atheist could even dream. Buddhism will not be able to grow based on a Secular model. Secular Buddhism is a false teaching."
Good argument.

However ...

Secular Buddhism is a little different than stoicism, since it doesn't have a sense of the divine, and . Also, Hindu Atheism and Secular Islam do in fact exist and are not silly at all. Secular Buddhists do not wish to degrade traditional Buddhism or traditional Buddhist culture. Also, treating Buddhism like Christianity is a horrible comparison. Christianity is inherently dependent on dogma and superstitious beliefs, while Buddhism is not. Christianity has rules, Buddhism has ethics. So of course Christianity would collapse.

Buddhism will not collapse, though, if secular Buddhism spreads. Historically, when Buddhism spread to a new land, other types of Buddhism formed. Some of the types are more heterodox. But more orthodox forms of Buddhism often eventually prevail.

To add on to all of this, how does one ultimately know that Secular Buddhism is a false teaching? Buddha himself said, if anything he says goes against your experience, you don't have to believe it. Dalai Lama said that if science and Buddhism conflict, go with science. "If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change" -Dalai Lama. Neuroscience shows that consciousness may be confined to the brain, and that karma may be just a superstition. Just saying.
julian
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:47 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by julian »

Nicholas Weeks wrote: Wed Jul 26, 2017 5:38 pm
Maitri wrote:Just practice and study Stoicism and leave Buddhism out of it. Secular Buddhism is just as silly as saying Secular Hinduism or Secular Islam.

If a person is uncomfortable with cultivating faith in certain aspects of a tradition, it is not right of them to change it to suite it their own neurosis or uncertainty. Making Christianity more liberal and secular friendly has absolutely destroyed it as an institution in the West. The mainline churches are collapsing in the West and even the non-denominational churches have leveled off in popularity.

People like Spong did more to gut Christianity from the inside than any outside atheist could even dream. Buddhism will not be able to grow based on a Secular model. Secular Buddhism is a false teaching.
Well said and so true also. :buddha1:

Secularism or materialism applied to any traditional religion is not a modifier, but purely destructive. Many moderns require above all, comfort, comfort in sensory realms and comfort emotionally & intellectually. Only the visible matters, brain = mind etc. Ancient truths of invisible, intangible realms and beings, complex and thus un-comfortable notions of rebirth and karma are just too bothersome.

Reduce stress and avoid bad vibrations, we only live once anyway - such is secularism - however adorned with any spiritual trappings.

By the by Maitri, I think even Stoicism had God or Divine reason, so even it is not material enough for many moderns.
Good argument.

However ...

Secular Buddhism is a little different than stoicism, since it doesn't have a sense of the divine, and . Also, Hindu Atheism and Secular Islam do in fact exist and are not silly at all. Secular Buddhists do not wish to degrade traditional Buddhism or traditional Buddhist culture. Also, treating Buddhism like Christianity is a horrible comparison. Christianity is inherently dependent on dogma and superstitious beliefs, while Buddhism is not. Christianity has rules, Buddhism has ethics. So of course Christianity would collapse.

Buddhism will not collapse, though, if secular Buddhism spreads. Historically, when Buddhism spread to a new land, other types of Buddhism formed. Some of the types are more heterodox. But more orthodox forms of Buddhism often eventually prevail.

To add on to all of this, how does one ultimately know that Secular Buddhism is a false teaching? Buddha himself said, if anything he says goes against your experience, you don't have to believe it. Dalai Lama said that if science and Buddhism conflict, go with science. "If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change" -Dalai Lama. Neuroscience shows that consciousness may be confined to the brain, and that karma may be just a superstition. Just saying.

Also, the supernatural things you mention cannot by any means be proven. Sure, Ian Stevenson gives great evidence for reincarnation, but karma, pretas, heaven and hell, etc. have no evidence for them. So secularism does modify belief by making it more rational.
User avatar
Ceisiwr
Posts: 22405
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 2:36 am
Location: Wales

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Ceisiwr »

julian wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 11:03 pm
Secular Buddhism is a little different than stoicism, since it doesn't have a sense of the divine
If I’m remembering properly originally the Stoics believed in a deity.
Neuroscience shows that consciousness may be confined to the brain
I’d question that view.
So secularism does modify belief by making it more rational.
Why the need to be more rational?
“Knowing that this body is just like foam,
understanding it has the nature of a mirage,
cutting off Māra’s flower-tipped arrows,
one should go beyond the King of Death’s sight.”
User avatar
cappuccino
Posts: 12879
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 am
Contact:

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by cappuccino »

julian wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 10:59 pm Dalai Lama said that if science and Buddhism conflict, go with science.
Go with Buddhism
Ontheway
Posts: 3062
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2021 3:35 pm

Re: Does Buddhism really "resist" secularism?

Post by Ontheway »

"If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change" -Dalai Lama.
Well,maybe that "Buddhism" in that quote refers to Vajrayana Buddhism.
Hiriottappasampannā,
sukkadhammasamāhitā;
Santo sappurisā loke,
devadhammāti vuccare.

https://suttacentral.net/ja6/en/chalmer ... ight=false
Post Reply