Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 79 posts

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#51

Post by klik99 »

Using examples from disparate sects of Buddhism as if there is some kind of monolithic “Buddhism” is like saying Judaism, Islam and Christianity, and all their various sects are the same. For instance on reincarnation, Pure Land Buddhists are closer to the Christian heaven view, and many Zen Buddhists don’t believe in reincarnation at all, and that Karma is not permanent.

The big point that Buddhism has been stripped of the metaphysical religious aspects is true though, but the article lays that on the west misunderstanding Buddhism, but in fact it was intentional - Trungpa Rinpoche said Buddhism will come to the West as psychology, and Suzuki had a similar approach.

And the idea that Buddhism of any kind promotes leaving the material world is just wrong - lay practitioners are part of the original writings. Siddhartha leaving his wife and kid isn’t what brought him enlightenment, the whole point is left one extreme where he partied and lived in luxury, to another extreme, aestheticism, fasting and self denial, only to realize that neither way reduced suffering.

Sounds like the author was just shocked that a lot of religious BS is tied up in many types of Buddhism and threw the whole thing out. But it’s hard to find a good group to practice with that matches your outlook, and I sympathize with that

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#52

Post by abhiyerra »

lacy_tinpot wrote: post #40
whiplash451 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that different from stoicism ? Asking genuinely.

The Greeks and Indians are closer to each other culturally than people are willing to admit. They should be considered cousins in terms of their philosophy, cultural, and religion. That there were Greek states and colonies in Norther India/Gandhara that spoke Greek for generations is not given enough scrutiny imo. The cultural impact of that transmission not always clear outside of something concrete. Like the most o…

True! Buddha and Alexander the Great were really only 100 years apart. Greeks and Hindu deities have many similarities. The trimurthi of Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva correlates pretty closely to Zeus, Poseidon, and Hades. It works the other way as well as I think Greek philosophy also got influenced by Hindu/Buddhist world view like Stocism. Both sides seem to have benefited with the ideas of the other especially along math and science.

A hundred years after Alexander the Great we have Ashoka the Great who sent Buddhist missionaries to the four winds and if you squint Christianity sort of resembles a mesh of Jewish and Buddhist philosophy.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#53

Post by eezurr »

tempaway646464 wrote: post #38

Some of these points are quite good. I've followed Buddhism quite a lot, taking the view that if you ignore the reincarnation bit (which was probably inherited from other religions in the area buddhism sprang from) then buddhism isn't really a religion at all, its more like a philosophy. I've seen people at buddhist retreats suggest some wilds benefits to meditation (magic powers etc). Thats clearly nonsense. But one…

The reincarnation bit interests me. I've had a notion that reincarnation is the process of birthing. A child is going to inherent their parents DNA, genes, environment, and situation. Whatever pain the parents are burdened with will be passed on to their child, and so on and on and on. We are [adaptable] copies of our parents.

Im self aware enough to observe the traits I picked up from my parents. I've thought about all the suffering I've been through. If I dont have children, I can be the end of the thread. I can stop the cycle of suffering.

/armchair

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#54

Post by tempaway646464 »

booleandilemma wrote: post #43
tempaway646464 wrote: post #38

Some of these points are quite good. I've followed Buddhism quite a lot, taking the view that if you ignore the reincarnation bit (which was probably inherited from other religions in the area buddhism sprang from) then buddhism isn't really a religion at all, its more like a philosophy. I've seen people at buddhist retreats suggest some wilds benefits to meditation (magic powers etc). Thats clearly nonsense. But one…

Buddhism is definitely a religion. The founder of the religion himself talked about an order of monks. What happens with Buddhism in particular, especially in the West, is that people pick and choose what they want to believe from it to the point that whatever they're left with is hardly Buddhism at all, and it does end up being a philosophy. For an example, ask the next white person you meet who identities as a Budd…

As I understand it, a common interpretation of The Buddha's teachings is that he wanted people to find their own path and he specifically dissuaded people against dogma and organised religion.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#55

Post by hnax »

"... science tells us that we are incidental, accidental."

And nonetheless, every second, when not sleeping, the author is trying hard to make sense (... notice how close to "science") of his actual space and time. Throughout the ages, most prominent scientists have managed to do this, with great success, knowing that the universe, and themselves as a part of it, were the opposite of incidental or accidental: they believed their existence had a Reason.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#56

Post by qwerty456127 »

aphantastic wrote: post #33
qwerty456127 wrote: post #30

Anything can be done terribly wrong and misused while formally correct if approached without reason and measure. Instead of judging Buddhism, just practicing the simplest form of it by just meditating daily and consciously trying to be mindful and kind throughout every day usually does a great job. The same can be considered a simple form of Christianity as well though.

> The same can be considered a simple form of Christianity as well though. To an uninformed external observer perhaps. But to be Christian means to accept Christ as your Lord. There is no Christianity without Christ. Not even a “simple form” of it.

> accept Christ as your Lord

Okay, why not? Then comes all stuff about what does this mean in practice and theory. And there are so many forms of Christianity arguing. The simplest one of them still is just be mindful and kind, for the sake of the Lord who was and is.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#57

Post by xk_id »

This isn’t the place to go into detail, but the author mainly argues against a Western conceptualisation of Buddhism, which is sadly divorced from the original meaning. If you want to study Buddhism, don’t rely on people reinterpreting it for a Western audience; go right to the source and try to understand what the old masters and the sutras are talking about.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#58

Post by aphantastic »

qwerty456127 wrote: post #56
aphantastic wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The same can be considered a simple form of Christianity as well though. To an uninformed external observer perhaps. But to be Christian means to accept Christ as your Lord. There is no Christianity without Christ. Not even a “simple form” of it.

> accept Christ as your Lord Okay, why not? Then comes all stuff about what does this mean in practice and theory. And there are so many forms of Christianity arguing. The simplest one of them still is just be mindful and kind, for the sake of the Lord who was and is.

You are conflating belief systems and behavioral patterns. Christianity is a belief system populated by folks who follow Christ as Lord. Full stop.

This Kumbaya Collective you describe is a behavioral pattern that many folks take part in. Some of them may happen to be Christian, others may not.

But to observe that some Christians are part of the Kumbaya Collective and then go on to imply that being part of the collective is a “simple form” of Christianity is a categorical error.

Behaviour does not imply Faith.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#59

Post by makeitdouble »

jack_pp wrote: post #44
makeitdouble wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could define Christianity as believing in Christ, bust more and more people consider themselves somewhat Christian without any of the Bible setup. > Although many non-practicing Christians say they do not believe in God “as described in the Bible,” they do tend to believe in some other higher power or spiritual force in the universe. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2018/05/29/10-key-fi...

Yeah those people are just confused or simply adhering to their group by calling themselves Christians. Being a Christian and not believing in the bible is oxymoronic

If a critical mass of people call themselves X, whatever previous definition of X gets adapted to that reality. That's how language/society works.

I see your point, but also think we're already past the threshold where the term's ownership has moved away from the Church.

Re: Buddhist Retreat: Why I gave up on finding my religion (2003)

#60

Post by aphantastic »

makeitdouble wrote: post #59
jack_pp wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah those people are just confused or simply adhering to their group by calling themselves Christians. Being a Christian and not believing in the bible is oxymoronic

If a critical mass of people call themselves X, whatever previous definition of X gets adapted to that reality. That's how language/society works. I see your point, but also think we're already past the threshold where the term's ownership has moved away from the Church.

That’s a rather Euro-centric view of things (you’ll find the corresponding articles for the american continents are very different), but even still it’s missing the point. The question is whether this “critical mass” you speak of seeks to be a disciple of Christ (the group of people first ever referred to as “Christians”), not whether they have a particular interpretation of “God as depicted in the bible”.

It is, for instance, rather common to believe Genesis 1 is more of an allegory than an explicit recounting of God’s work, but that does not preclude someone from accepting Christ as their Lord and choosing to live as His disciple.

Post reply on HN