I'm Investigating Secular Buddhism

1. 0

   Chasukposted 11 years ago

   Apart from Stephen Batchelor, who are its major proponents?

   replyreport
   1. 64

      PDPooleposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      One of the leading proponents of "secular Buddhism" would be Toni Packer.
      Ms. Packer is one of the dharma-heirs of the late Roshi  Philip Kapleau (The author of  The Three Pillars of Zen), but gradually dropped away with the cultural baggage and religiosity attached to American buddhism, eventually dropping even the LABEL "buddhism". Check out a book of hers entitled " The Work of This Moment"

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Thank you, PDPoole. You have pointed me, I think, in a useful direction.

         replyreport
   2. 60

      recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I would suggest a female monk I met in a properly working temple in Tienmen City near Wuhan in China, although I suspect that there are many out there easily found.   Most modern practicing Buddhist 'clergy' seem to clearly see the seperate nature of their religion and the thinking, as by the way, do Taoists.
      
      The woman I mention only had a few minutes to give me but was clearly and simply right in a similar fashion to the writings of Gandhi. 
      
      I did consider booking in for a week just for the occasional opportunity to sit on the edges when she was teaching but they did not allow beer up there, nor did they have a fridge and so sense prevailed.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         So, if I'm ever in Tienmen City in China, I'll ask the locals to identify for me the "properly working temple," and talk to the female monks that I find  there (who teach sans beer, refrigerated or otherwise).
         
         Thanks. :-)

         replyreport
         1. 80

            pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            you guys are too funny.

            replyreport
         2. 60

            recommend1posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            In the pursuit of something so important a trip to Tienmen is nothing - and the temple is easy to find it is a damn long climb up the steepest steps I have ever attempted,  the monk is instantly recognised as she is the 'master'. :-)  go for it why don't you

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I'm currently in South Korea, so I'm not that distant. Maybe I'll visit.

               replyreport
      2. 80

         pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         lol

         replyreport
2. 60

   paradigmsearchposted 11 years ago

   "Secular Buddhism"; in other words, philosophy versus religion. A worthy topic.

   replyreport
3. 80

   pennyofheavenposted 11 years ago

   How about Buddha does he qualify as a proponent?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps, but I don't know that he would be happy with what Buddhism has become. That's the nature of my search, actually.

      replyreport
4. 80

   pennyofheavenposted 11 years ago

   I don't know that he wouldn't be happy? He understood the nature of our world hence where I think the four noble truths come from. The basics of his teaching too reveal that he understood a lot about the nature of our world. That being that nothing is lost in the universe, everything changes and there is cause and effect.
   
   I only know this because I was once a long time ago accused of being a Buddhist and so I did research because I knew little about Buddhism.
   
   I would imagine that he, knowing the nature of our world and everything in it, wouldn't be at all surprised or mad by what Buddhism has become.
   
   Oh and what has it become by the way?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I don't known much about Siddhattha Gotama (Buddha). I don't know much about him because nobody does; nothing was written down until about 400 years after his death. However, of the details/ideas that are likely authentically deriving from Buddha, a few of them have some resonance with me. Unfortunately, the further we move away from the gem of his putative ideas, the dirtier this gem gets, the more mired in sediment. I'm not interested in Buddhism + accretion. I'm interested in essential Buddhism, much as I am interested in essential Christianity.
      
      Does that explanation answer your question? I hope so, because it is really the only one that I can provide. :-)

      replyreport
      1. 80

         pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         So are you saying you are not interested in the metaphysics of Buddhism but the practical applications of Buddhism via the ideas?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            No.
            
            The metaphysics are important, but Buddhist metaphysics have become imbued with crap. I'm not interested in the crap.
            
            Peruse a few of these webpages, and you might get a better idea of where I am coming from:
            
            http://speculativenonbuddhism.com/
            http://www.existentialbuddhist.com/
            http://meaningness.wordpress.com/
            http://www.meditationblog.com/
            http://www.thesecularbuddhist.com/

            replyreport
            1. 66

               A Thousand Wordsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Theravada Buddhism is your friend, friend. No buddha nature, very little influence from the surrounding cultures. Slightly strict though. But it's teachings are mainly based on what's known to be Buddha teachings. They recognize less boddhisattvas, and are less "religious" then those in other "sects," etc. I'll find some things out for you.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Apparently so.

                  replyreport
            2. 80

               pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Yes it appears so. Gosh good luck to you. If you can figure out the depth of the four noble truths I would imagine you would be on track.
               
               The trouble with too much conflicting information one can throw the baby out with the bath water.

               replyreport
   2. 64

      PDPooleposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Hello Penny!
        The changing you speak of is actually found in the Mahaparanibbana Sutra, where  the buddhas final teachings were put to paper so to speak. The one you refer to is "sabbe sankhara annica ti" which means " All compounted/conditioned things are impermanent." This teaching reminds us of the futility of clinging/grasping to "things" as they will change...things will rise..exist for a time...then they will vanish. So i must agree with you...the Lion of the Sakyas would NOT be surprised to see the wide range of varied teachings/commentaries/analysis...as he exhorted  his followers.."Be a lamp unto yourselves, and work diligently for your own liberation."

      replyreport
      1. 80

         pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         He was very wise in my opinion.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Buddha never would have wanted people to venerate his knuckle bones in a temple, or nonsense such as this:
         
         http://www.thegeripackers.com/2012/01/v … ic-of.html

         replyreport
         1. 80

            pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Haha that was too funny. Buddha said if you meet him kill him. So maybe he wouldn't be too worried that they are making money off his supposed tooth. It would be viewed as causing their own suffering.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Except that Buddha said no such thing. That particular koan was formulated by Línjì Yìxuán, who lived approximately 1300 years after Buddha.

               replyreport
               1. 80

                  pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  I don't think he said it in those exact words no. From memory which is rusty at best, what he was intending to point at was not to worship him.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Chasukposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     I understand what the koan meant. :-)
                     
                     However, Buddha didn't say it, Línjì Yìxuán did. It is something that Buddha probably would have said, though, so I do appreciate its sentiment.
                     
                     Thanks for reminding me of it.

                     replyreport
                     1. 80

                        pennyofheavenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Thanks for reading it.

                        replyreport
5. 61

   Druid Dudeposted 11 years ago

   Interesting forum. Nothing to add, but wish you all luck on your journeys!

   replyreport