Why I Am Not a Buddhist

[@ahdumbs1161]

I have always said that in the West (I’m from the States) we don’t have much access to the Buddhist religion, but we have a lot of access to Buddhist thought. That is to say, while westerners adopt meditation, many of them do not seek to do “shamatha” or “vipassana” but rather some relaxation stuff that has nothing to do with the Path. Or I hear westerners call Buddhism more of a sciene/way of life than a belief system. Many “secular Buddhists” do not claim to be secular, and that’s my issue. You must understand the dharma require a level of faith, as many things in it simply are not possibly in our modern day world. But many will say “yeah I’m a Buddhist but don’t believe in reincarnation, just like being a peaceful kind person”. Kindness/compassion is not the ONLY quality you need to grow, and it’s kind of important that if you’re identifying as a Buddhist that you understand most of what we do is supposed by one, wanting to make other happy, but two, to be ensure a better rebirth IF NOT nirvana in this lifetime. Better to say you are just an ethical person inspired by the Buddhas teachings. TLDR, despite what westerners say, Buddhism IS a religion with beliefs and myths and all that. And I love it. NAMO BUDDHAYA ❤

[@goldilocks913]

As a Tibetan Buddhist of a decade or so this was a very interesting and well hosted discussion.

[@noself7889]

Good for you man. I am a Buddhist.

[@elizabethmansfield3609]

Excellent conversation and choice of questions!!

[@airinantony5646]

Thanks for a good talk. Dukkha is not suffering, more like unsatisfactory. Ram Dass doesn't sound like he was 'suffering' from a Buddhist sense, he was totally at peace with his condition. Also, if any of you would like to get a deeper idea, have a look at Teravada Buddhist monks like Yuttadhammo, Bhikku Bodhi, Ajahn Brahm and so on.

[@rossmoore7868]

Why not simply acknowledge that there are aspects of Buddhism that speak to certain aspects of Science? And vice versa? The need to go further risks essentializing both. Likewise the concept of “modernity’ itself - which Evan leaves curiously unexamined.

[@metta1773]

Evan is doing intellectual analyses of the Buddhist teachings, without engaging in meditation/mindfulness and without trying to understand the teachings within himself. I also felt that he is dogmatically clinging to the ‘scientific method.’ There is a HUGE limit to what science can do to understand the mind (subjective experiences) because science is focused on objectivity and measuring of things. In meditation, one can become aware of one’s own experiences in the *present moment,* and see for oneself things like the arising/ceasing (impermanent) nature of each experienced moment, etc. - this leads to experientially understanding the three marks of existence - they are DEFINITELY not blind beliefs! In Buddhism, the mind, etc., is very clearly explained (it is exceptional in that sense), and that is the reason why people of other religions (Jews) learn Buddhism to understand things better. Rebirth also has a LOT of evidence where thousands of cases of children with memories of previous lives have been verified/studied by researchers like Dr. Ian Stevenson, Jim Tucker, etc. For example, the following article lists many references: Stevenson, Ian. "The phenomenon of claimed memories of previous lives: possible interpretations and importance." _Medical Hypotheses_ 54.4 (2000): 652-659.

[@charlesstepp2083]

The argument is based on interpretation: whose light is brighter 🔆 When you're explaining you're losing. Sgt. Rock Buddha's alleged words were recorded 500 years after his death

[@GavinskisTutorials]

Excellent! I feel very glad for you that at the beginning of your journey into Buddhism you managed to have a chat with a person like Evan who can stop you going down so many rabbit holes of delusion which people seeking to free themselves of delusion generally tend to throw themselves down with abandon 😅🔥

[@lewisturner7493]

Abandon?

[@GavinskisTutorials]

@ the phrase ‘with abandon’ just means “enthusiastically”

[@wanderingpoet9999]

I am sympathetic to Thompsons arguments and have personally found them very useful. However I do feel that he overstates his case. There is something about Buddhism IMO that makes it adaptable, not uniquely scientific, but more easily adaptable to the modern world than the other major religions. The reason for this is its emphasis on experiential spiritual psychology, that just draw the arrow out emphasis that Thompson himself mentions, with very sophisticated lists of positive and negative mental states and analytical descriptions of various modes of mental concentration. This language is not mythological but practical. While Islam and Christianity certainly have sophisticated philosophy and ethical systems, I do not believe they have anything like these exhaustive descriptions of the ethical and meditative life. For example Christian mysticism is couched in much more poetic language. Aquinus has much to say about the virtues but he does not analyse mental states in the kind of detail that Buddhism does. So Buddhism is not scientific but it has a pragmatic experiential quality, that has proved very useful in the modern world. But that practicality is not the full story of course , there are many other aspects to Buddhism, of profound soteriological and symbolic import, which in fact are the underlying framework of meaning for all of those lists, and which can easily be lost sight of in the modern world, and there I totally agree with Thompson.

[@metta1773]

Regarding how ‘good & bad’ got sorted in Buddhism - this is explained in the discourse _“Dvedhavitakka Sutta: Two Sorts of Thinking"_ (MN 19) - basically it explains how the Buddha divided his thoughts into two categories, and decided to cultivate just one group of thoughts (that relate to 'letting go' and 'good will') because he noticed that these thoughts lead to beneficial outcomes for not only for oneself, but for others as well, and is also conducive to wisdom. Regarding how ‘sexual misconduct’ is explained in Buddhism, I suggest reading the book titled _‘The Noble Eightfold Path - The Way to the End of Suffering,’_ by Bhikku Bodhi (pdf available for free online).

[@e-t-y237]

Buddhism is dealing with human nature and consciousness instead of supernatural gods. That seems a more scientific foundation than much religion. Quantum mechanics is physics: why compare its non-ethical focus to the relative scientism/ethics "quotient" of Buddhism (which would claim to be a science of ethics)? It seems an unfair comparison. "Is there valid science to this religion" is a far different question than "does science, particularly physics, have an ethical purview?"

[@wordscapes5690]

Why does he refer to only the bad things as dukkha? The good things, intermediate things, and the neutral things are also dukkha. And where is the logic in being afraid of losing the “self” when there is no self? Why was this not addressed? don’t think this discussion delved deeply enough in order to address the many errors in the very mistaken preconceptions of the host. The concluding thoughts are problematic - suggesting that Buddhism is a way to escape this mad, bad, deluded old world… to “get off the highway” as he says. Buddhism identifies the highway and exposes the narrow and meandering footpath we are on. If you are in Buddhism to escape the world, you have understood neither what the world is nor what the Buddha Dhamma teaches.

[@onlyoneg-donlyonetorahonly3079]

I was in many, oriental and new age religions,, and many christian denominations,,,and TODAY,,i can say from experience,,,that,,every religion and philosophy contain truth,,,, BUT,,,, ONLY ORTHODOX JUDAISM HAS THE ABSOLUTE PRISTINE TRUTH 👍🏻🕎

[@Tommy321]

Useful information. Shabbat Shalom.

[@toddm6999]

Wow truth....what truth?...

[@onlyoneg-donlyonetorahonly3079]

@@toddm6999 The truth of ONLY ONE ABSOLUTE GD,, THERE IS NOTHING OUTSIDE OF GD,,NO TRINITY ,, NO TRIADS AS IN HINDUISM,, THERE IS NO OTHER,, HE DOES NOT NEED ANY ASSISTANCE,,for example like the watch tower christian cult believes,, they claim that unlike other christians they do not accept the trinity,,, ect.... but at the same time they believe that michael the arch angel is actually jesus,, and that GD needed his help to create..,,,. islam on the other hand believes in only one god,,, but,,, like the christians also believes in a Satan,,, that has free will and is against GD,, judaism also rejects this concept,, bc it is not in tanakh....ect...🕎

[@onlyoneg-donlyonetorahonly3079]

@@Tommy321 kzbin.info/www/bejne/nHPcaGSIgd1rrrM

[@onlyoneg-donlyonetorahonly3079]

@@toddm6999 kzbin.info/www/bejne/pIKoaYyejrioiZY

[@joshuamartinpryce1237]

Christianity is different than Buddhism. Buddhism comes across as a bunch of practices that bring a sense of harmony in the mind. Christianity to me is a religion and faith which requires alot of function, not just the mind and certain personal thoughts, but ability, mentality, emotions, and focus. The entity of body soul and spirit. This makes Christianity true, the fact that a natural mentality and harmonious mind cannot understand the function of a developed Christian mindset. The mindset of a true spiritual man is Holy Spirit led and focused.

[@leatui7]

I don't understand. How is this different from Buddhism, which as a full complex set of faith-based teachings, has all that you list. I don't see the fundamental difference. (Not that I think you're incorrect about Christianity, but it sounds like you've taken a bit from the modern secular Buddhists and McMindfulness and taken it to be the whole)

[@wordscapes5690]

@@leatui7Yes, I felt that too. He basically described Buddhism, except for the things about self and soul.

[@DhammaJo]

Way to reduce Buddhism is an effort to conform to your own preconceived bias😂

[@tahwsisiht]

49:31

[@tahwsisiht]

Not sure if Asian group dynamics are all that better. Different, but not better. There are many stories coming out that humans are humans. Be it the Dalai Lama or Alan Watts. As much as I love animals, including tigers, I am a mother first. That makes me protect my son and his future a priority. My vision of the future of my son includes healthy community, healthy environment (multiple meanings of environmentS), meaningful life and a world with justice and freedom. This will not be achieved by being a peace of meat for any tiger. (It also includes a healthy environment for tigers too, although there I am not a piece of meat.) Human predators are a whole other chapter. They are not even in the same category as tigers.

[@hubrisguy9]

Evan's career has in no small part been founded on the scientizing of Buddhism. He must be aware of this, at the very least as a money stream but also as much more as he knows very well. So I wonder how he now sees his relation to this thing he is now critiquing but of which he is also a part. Does he scour his own thoughts for the traces of this shift or does he maintain coherency through denial, or what? I should finish reading his book I suppose.

[@PiceaSitchensis]

Interesting, do you have some examples of the scientizing?

[@tseringngodup3278]

There are Muslim Buddhist in India 😊

[@groovyme1234]

Karma = You reap what you sow

[@cdo8994]

It’s similar but different. Karma in Buddhism applies to life cycles as reincarnation. For instance, if you treat people badly, you’ll pay for wrongdoings in your next life and next until you pay it off. Your next life doesn’t need to be a human which depends on how you live in this life. After that, your soul can be free of reincarnation.

[@groovyme1234]

@@cdo8994 Its based on the same principle. There are consequences to ones actions. It doesnt necessarily happen in ones 'next life', it can happen anytime.

[@cdo8994]

@ That’s your understanding, but karma isn’t simply as anytime. What you explain is cause and effect. Karma has deeper meaning. Even you do good deeds, the result can be negative. There are 2 types of karma: wholesome and unwholesome. It’s different with cause and effect. For instance, when you treat people kindly, the effect is others will return the favor. Karma’s effect can be the opposite. Then, “you reap what you sow” doesn’t apply to this philosophy of karma.

[@cdo8994]

@groovyme1234 I'm not a Buddhist, so this monk can explain a little better for you. kzbin.infoHEWMRn5lqbw?si=5tx-Ut2JEekFXgUS

[@Marek-qj8fj]

Who cares?