Is anyone here who can define herself as an Atheist and Buddhist at the same time? Do those two terms contradict each other, or not?
Thank you for your answers.
The way I have known it, Buddhism in eastern culture where it originated is still seen as more of a religion, while in the west it is mainly a philosophy or way of life. When Buddhism was first brought over to the west, to make it accessible it was adapted to the western mindset. One of the first to bring it to the west was Chögyam Trungpa: [shambhala.org]
More info on Buddhism in the west: [buddhanet.net]
Ummm, youcould meditate, and treat all living things with respect, etcetc and not label yourself......
Very good question. I too wonder this, being interested in buddhism's principles but being quite sure that there are exactly zero supernatural beings.
I respect aspects of Buddhism, and although I don't identify as Buddhist, one could totally be a Buddhist and an atheist because Buddhism doesn't have a deity on offer. The definition of "atheist" is narrow, so the fact that Buddhism has an imagined cosmology populated by enlightened humans, sort of like Catholic saints, and various afterlife beliefs, is still compatible, particularly if you take those things metaphorically rather than literally.
There are a number of religions that are "atheistic". Taoism is the other one that immediately comes to mind. There are a small sub-sect of atheistic Quakers, too. Such religions may have asserted truths, a priest class, an afterlife, and various other supernatural dogmas, but no deity or really even a deity substitute. Religion is generically a set of beliefs and rituals for the faithful to coalesce around, that usually, but not always, include deities.
I would imagine that believing in karma and rebirth would make you unsientific... Not a theist.
What I found Buddhism incompatible with free inquiry and scepticism was:
Now you can be a Buddhist without the third, but can you really be a Buddhist without the first two? And to Buddha's defence he said, just practice and see. If you don't like something, ditch it. There are no doctrines according to Buddhism. Just practice and experience...
The reason why I bother so much is because whenever I practice Buddhism I see lots of benefits for my wellbeing. But my mind can never seem rest compressing it to only meditation... Because if meditation is so good and led other people to become better beings, then there must be something behind it. And that's how I always enter this conversation with myself.
I think you've misunderstood what karma and rebirth mean. Karma doesnt mean everything is going to be fair. It's simply cause and effect. There are many examples of people doing something mean or stupid and being hoist by their own petard, and thats one type of karma. It's also karma if someone ostensibly gets away with ill behavior; that behavior still has consequences that they will have to cope with long term but even if they dont, whatever consequences they inflicted on others is karma too. Doesn't mean they deserved it or that people always get what they deserve immediately, but every action has consequences and the world is small enough that we all have to sit in the consequences of our own actions. Karma is what connects every event to every other event. The western mistake is assuming theres an intelligence behind it making things fair and doling out retributive justice. That obviously doesnt happen and thats the definition of karma that you find lacking because it is.
The only concept of rebirth I believe in is the conservation of matter and energy, which further plays into the karmic principle that everything is connected in the macro worldview. Matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed that we know of so all our atoms do in fact get recycled and whatever organism or system of matter they wind up in next indeed won't remember when they were incarnated as me. Originally these ideas did sound sort of hokey by todays standards but they were being described relative to hindu cosmology. And the buddha did advocate that no one believe anything that they couldnt prove to themselves or which contradicts science. They are espousing a philosphy of mind hacks that you can reframe however you like and test for yourselves.
To me the idea of escaping the karmic wheel and other planes are a primitive way of speaking about our states of mind, it's psychology. The literal forms of karma and rebirth only extend to cause and effect and conservation of matter though. When hindu cosmology starts speaking of the angel, demon and hungry ghost realms those are metaphorical psychological states of the thought traps we get into. I don't think buddhism necessitates a literal belief in any of it.
Youre right the success of meditation is a huge advantage that makes buddhism worth looking into. Yoga has also changed my life n that of many others. Ancient indian cosmology led to these developments as well as the kama sutra, some ayervedic medicine that was way ahead of its time (netty pot for example) and even martial arts was born in this part of the world at the time. Ill allow a little bit of hokey metaphor from your religion if youre producing results like that.
@Wurlitzer well said!
[balancedachievement.com]
It seems that the Buddha was agnostic when asked about god. There are many branches of Buddhism just as there are many branches of Christianity. Some branches of Buddhism (e.g. Tibetan) kept their religious traditions after the arrival of Buddhism. Yes, you can define your self as Buddhist and Atheist at the same time. It depends which path you follow. You may find the link above useful. Good luck!
Thanks for the very interesting link.
@tsallinia You're welcome.
Buddhism arose in an Hindu culture which has lots of gods, but Buddhism itself does not have a creator god. Buddha is considered a human being with all the associated frailties. Buddhist communities in the West generally accommodate people with varying religious backgrounds, often suggesting it be thought of as a practice rather than a religion. OTOH people with strong religious beliefs will probably not be comfortable in Buddhist communities especially if they're inclined to proselytize.
So in short, Buddhists generally do not believe in god.
I consider myself an atheist, buddhist, and also satanist. I see no contradictions necessary, why would there be? Buddhism has no god or supernatural element to believe in, and satanism (the satatanic temple variety at least) doesnt involve a literal belief in satan either; hes a literary character and an avatar for going against the grain more or less. I also consider myself Taoist, pastafarian, and dudeist. All are non theistic religions meant to either free you from or to assist in trolling the average believer.
If you consider that Buddhism is a religion which believes in some supernatural things like rebirth then yes they are in conflict. In that case Atheist should really mean "Do not believe in the original Christian religion I was raised with" vs. Atheist. Now some philosophies in Buddhism are good to follow (Emotional well being etc), if you believe in everything, you are not A-theist.
Buddhism does not require a literal belief in reincarnation. Those that do believe it literally do so because their cultural view of cosmology is based on hinduism. Even if they do believe in reincarnation however, how does that qualify as Theism? Atheist just means without theism or gods. So reincarnation still isnt really in conflict with it.
i don't know whether they conflict. some say no. i myself am not a buddhist, but i am an atheist and a jew at the same time. i like judaism but do not follow it. i like jewishness and i embrace it. so it's not the same thing, since buddhism would be something you followed. whether or not they conflict may have to do with how you perceive buddhism and you how perceive your relationship to it.
g