Was Buddha an atheist?

JP Cusick said:

Of course I am serious about whatever I say - as I am the one person here who is always serious and sincere.

The point was "pre" as in "re-understanding" about gravity because in those older days then going down under would mean being upside down.

Today most people still can not explain why a person on the south pole is not upside down.

Gravity makes so that the earth is not round, as gravity makes the earth to be straight-up-and-down at every point on the globe.

People today just take it for granted because we came after and not "pre".

At first the world being flat was simple and then figuring out that the earth was round (2 dimensional) was a theory that Columbus proved, and I do not know who it was the figured out the earth to be a globe or sphere.

Isaac Newton in 1679 (that is 187 years after Columbus 1492) declared the earth to be a "oblate spheroid" which still meant people on the top side and not down below where a person would be upside down. As such Isaac Newton was on the right track but not quite there yet.

If we add the third dimension to the 2 dimensional "round" then it becomes deep even if it is a million miles deep but it still remains round and not a globe.


I really do not ask anyone to believe me, as I just give the info and the proof and then you or anyone can believe your self and believe the evidence for your selves.

I give my evidence and you give your evidence and we each and all judge for our self.

In my view then belief is like a theory and If I only believed in God then I would say nothing, but having proof and evidence then I feel comfortable to preach and teach the truth of God as I know it to be.

If anyone is just believing the Buddha or Atheism then that is wrong, because you are to find out and judge those things for your selves and either you judge it as true or partly true or as partly wrong or whatever we decide.

Click to expand...

Top side, lol. You have a very odd view of physics. Correcting Newton, priceless. :lamo As for knowing that the Earth is a globe, the ancient Greeks knew that and so did Roger Bacon, but you ignore the evidence. Here is an Australian globe. Perhaps you should inform them that they have it upside-down.

Indeed. Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated the circumference of the globe in 3BC, but the Pythagorean school had been philosophising on the spherical nature of the Earth since 5 or 6 BC. Plato, still a century before Eratosthenes conceived of the cosmos as spheres within spheres, like a russian doll, with the Earth at the centre. Columbus struggled to get funding because everyone knew his maths was off, and China was much farther away than he thought. They were right, though he died believing he had found it.

Manc Skipper said:

Indeed. Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated the circumference of the globe in 3BC, but the Pythagorean school had been philosophising on the spherical nature of the Earth since 5 or 6 BC. Plato, still a century before Eratosthenes conceived of the cosmos as spheres within spheres, like a russian doll, with the Earth at the centre. Columbus struggled to get funding because everyone knew his maths was off, and China was much farther away than he thought. They were right, though he died believing he had found it.

Click to expand...

I do not debate any of that, but we can not use our modern interpretation for the same words in antiquity.

When the ancient people say that the earth is a globe or sphere then they are talking about the sky being the sphere which covers over top of the flat earth.

Here is a picture from 1880 showing the view of a flat earth being inside of a sphere or globe = Flammarion.jpg

The ancient Greeks saw the night time Constellations (Astrology) as the stars were on the edge of the globe which covers the flat earth.

They might have had some ideas about the earth being round or a globe but they did not see anyone standing underneath without them being upside down.

So even if they knew it was a globe they still expected to fall off the side if they traveled too far over.

JP Cusick said:

I do not debate any of that, but we can not use our modern interpretation for the same words in antiquity.

When the ancient people say that the earth is a globe or sphere then they are talking about the sky being the sphere which covers over top of the flat earth.

Here is a picture from 1880 showing the view of a flat earth being inside of a sphere or globe = Flammarion.jpg

The ancient Greeks saw the night time Constellations (Astrology) as the stars were on the edge of the globe which covers the flat earth.

They might have had some ideas about the earth being round or a globe but they did not see anyone standing underneath without them being upside down.

So even if they knew it was a globe they still expected to fall off the side if they traveled too far over.

Click to expand...

You are raising ludicrous assumptions and irrelevance to defend your corner to no avail. The world was known to be a globe for centuries before and after the time of Christ. The idea of falling off the edge of a flat world is a ridiculous modern conceit of the dark ages, before the reason of the enlightenment expanded and rediscovered education. As for falling off the "side" of a globe, it's silly. It never happened.

Manc Skipper said:

You are raising ludicrous assumptions and irrelevance to defend your corner to no avail. The world was known to be a globe for centuries before and after the time of Christ. The idea of falling off the edge of a flat world is a ridiculous modern conceit of the dark ages, before the reason of the enlightenment expanded and rediscovered education. As for falling off the "side" of a globe, it's silly. It never happened.

Click to expand...

All I really say is that Columbus thought the world was round and even that he did not very well prove, and he did not think or prove the earth as a globe.

It is possible that the ancient Greeks could have been much smarter (or better informed) then the pre-18th century Europeans.

Also knowing GRAVITY is the only way to understand why a person at the south pole is not upside down - and the Greeks did not know about that.

There is no reason to suspect that the Buddha would know about gravity or about the globe just as the Buddha would not have had any such modern concept as Atheism.

JP Cusick said:

I do not debate any of that, but we can not use our modern interpretation for the same words in antiquity.

When the ancient people say that the earth is a globe or sphere then they are talking about the sky being the sphere which covers over top of the flat earth.

Click to expand...

The ancient people also invented gods. They were not scientifically advanced.

JP Cusick said:

There is no reason to suspect that the Buddha would know about gravity or about the globe just as the Buddha would not have had any such modern concept as Atheism.

Click to expand...

Exactly. We know a lot more nowadays.

OrphanSlug said:

You could argue that Buddha was an atheist, but that would be a bit of a problem as it only applies to one context.

What Buddha rejected was the of worship of a God in the sense of moral obligations and adherence to social control (or "religious authority") here in this life as a benefit for afterlife reward. The only sense then that Buddha can be called an atheist is the rejection of an omnipotent God who as a creator gave us a set of rules to abide by. However, in just about every other sense Buddha was not an atheist. Buddhism as a means of spiritual teachings in a higher moral law is in itself a rejection of materialistic literalism as a doctrine. At its core scientific materialism as a source for answers is incompatible with just the suggestion of a higher means of human interaction. Thus in today's sense of what atheism is, Buddha and Buddhism would hardly qualify.

Click to expand...

1. The Truth of Suffering (Kutai)
The Buddha declared that this world if full of suffering; that actual existence including birth, decrepitude, sickness and death is suffering and sorrow. This is called the Truth of Suffering.

2. The Truth of the Cause of Suffering (Jutai)
The cause of human suffering lies in ignorance and Karma. Ignorance and its resulting Karma have often times been called "desire" or craving. The Buddha declared:
Verily it is this thirst or craving, causing the renewal of existence, accompanied by sensual delight, seeking satisfaction now here, now there - the craving for gratification of the passions, for continual existence in the worlds of sense.

3. The Truth of the Cessation of Suffering (Mettai)
The extinguishing of all human ignorance and Karma results in a state known as Nirvana. This is the Truth of the Cessation of Suffering.

4. The Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering (Dotai)
The Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering is the Noble Eight-fold Path.
The Noble Eight-fold Path

1. Right Views - to keep ourselves free from prejudice, superstition and delusion and to see aright the true nature of life.
2. Right Thoughts - to turn away from the evils of this world and to direct our minds towards righteousness.
3. Right Speech - to refrain from pointless and harmful talk to speak kindly and courteously to all.
4. Right Conduct - to see that our deeds are peaceful, benevolent, compassionate and pure; to live the Teaching of the Buddha daily.
5. Right Livelihood - to earn our living in such a way as to entail no evil consequences.
6. Right Effort - to direct our efforts incessantly to the overcoming of ignorance and selfish desires.
7. Right Mindfulness - to cherish good and pure thoughts for all that we say and do arise from our thoughts.
8. Right Meditation - to concentrate our will on the Buddha, His Life and His Teaching.

Source Link.
===

JP Cusick said:

1. The Truth of Suffering (Kutai)
The Buddha declared that this world if full of suffering; that actual existence including birth, decrepitude, sickness and death is suffering and sorrow. This is called the Truth of Suffering.

2. The Truth of the Cause of Suffering (Jutai)
The cause of human suffering lies in ignorance and Karma. Ignorance and its resulting Karma have often times been called "desire" or craving. The Buddha declared:
Verily it is this thirst or craving, causing the renewal of existence, accompanied by sensual delight, seeking satisfaction now here, now there - the craving for gratification of the passions, for continual existence in the worlds of sense.

3. The Truth of the Cessation of Suffering (Mettai)
The extinguishing of all human ignorance and Karma results in a state known as Nirvana. This is the Truth of the Cessation of Suffering.
And? No metion of any gods there, and the basis of Buddhism is well -known.
4. The Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering (Dotai)
The Truth of the Path to the Cessation of Suffering is the Noble Eight-fold Path.
The Noble Eight-fold Path

1. Right Views - to keep ourselves free from prejudice, superstition and delusion and to see aright the true nature of life.
2. Right Thoughts - to turn away from the evils of this world and to direct our minds towards righteousness.
3. Right Speech - to refrain from pointless and harmful talk to speak kindly and courteously to all.
4. Right Conduct - to see that our deeds are peaceful, benevolent, compassionate and pure; to live the Teaching of the Buddha daily.
5. Right Livelihood - to earn our living in such a way as to entail no evil consequences.
6. Right Effort - to direct our efforts incessantly to the overcoming of ignorance and selfish desires.
7. Right Mindfulness - to cherish good and pure thoughts for all that we say and do arise from our thoughts.
8. Right Meditation - to concentrate our will on the Buddha, His Life and His Teaching.

Source Link.
===

Click to expand...

The Buhdda's teachings are well-known. "to keep ourselves free from prejudice, superstition and delusion"- That would include gods, in my opnion.

zyzygy said:

The Buhdda's teachings are well-known. "to keep ourselves free from prejudice, superstition and delusion"- That would include gods, in my opnion.

Click to expand...

That just means that your opinion is wrong.

To throw out Churches and throw out religions and maybe even throw out the Bible is an understandable mistake, but trying to throw out God is a foolish thing to do.

Going to Heaven or Hell after death is a ridiculous thing yes, but God is not.

Whether Buddha was an atheist or not is not important. That is a question the Buddha himself would not answer or give no answer. That question falls into the 4th category of questions. What is important is the Buddha's teachings, the 4 noble truths and the 8 fold path.

JP Cusick said:

Going to Heaven or Hell after death is a ridiculous thing yes, but God is not.

Click to expand...

Why is a belief in imaginary beings not ridiculous?

zyzygy said:

Why is a belief in imaginary beings not ridiculous?

Click to expand...

Of course it is ridiculous to believe in imaginary beings, and I would never say otherwise.

Most people really do have an imaginary view of God and so I would not join in with them.

My own point is that there is a real God that is active and living and that real God is the one to know.

Perotista said:

Whether Buddha was an atheist or not is not important.

Click to expand...

It's important to this thread topic, and to people who want to subscribe to his philosophy while maintaining an atheistic outlook. Is it possible to be a Buddhist and an atheist? I would say almost certainly yes.

Amadeus said:

It's important to this thread topic, and to people who want to subscribe to his philosophy while maintaining an atheistic outlook. Is it possible to be a Buddhist and an atheist? I would say almost certainly yes.

Click to expand...

I agree. There is a godly realm in which one can be reborn into. But whether on believes in a god, gods or none is unimportant and irrelevant. What is important are the four noble truths and the eight fold path.

Well telling what Buddha did and did not believe is a little tricky given that an awful lot of stuff has been added afterwards, given there is no dogmaticism in Buddhism there was absolute freedom to continue the syncretic practices that are the norm over in Asia and have been for millennia.

But with a little digging and little education in the core principles of Buddhism having a belief in any kind of God or even dare I suggest reincarnation and the notion of a permanent self are so antithetical to core principles and ideas within Buddhism there is no clear way to maintain these beliefs and not have severe internal conflicts and cognitive dissonance.

But this is the thing with Buddhism. Dare I say I find reasons to be critical of this mind. That Buddhism can be anything you want it to be. I can argue, successfully I feel that Buddhism at its core is atheistic agnostic (different debate but every atheist should be open to evidence, every agnostic is an atheist to me and vice versa), but if you read the right texts Buddhism can be all things to all people. For instance there is no way a samurai tribe could seriously call themselves Buddhist and execute people, that a Tibetan theocracy could institute slavery and eye gouging for punishments. But they do, and you can have gods and god realms and reincarnation et all.

As an example here I give you the Lalitavistara Sūtra, which is like part superman and part god and is so vastly exaggerated and beyond belief that yeah sure take it if you like. I always enjoyed comic books. But it doesn't remotely parse with the buddhist messages. On the one hand, he claims he is just a man; a very ordinary man. Living the simple middle path life, one of a personal mission of achieving nibanna and spreading a message or rather knowledge. The message was one of personal endeavour and critical thinking in reflection with the community on that knowledge.

Then you have this sutra, where he is surrounded by disciples and a suite of 500 monks, a further 12000 monks at points and 32000 bodhisattvas, “all still in the trammels of only one re-birth, all born with the perfections of a Bodhisattva, all enjoying the knowledge of a Bodhisattva, all in the possession of an insight in magical charms” and he flies across rivers and debates with gods etc etc.

Then of course there was my time in Thailand where I experienced both the noble and intelligent Thai Monastic groups, the grasping unintelligent self serving side of that same institution and the general thai buddhism which was largely hinduism/luck/ancestor worship. Down to worshipping four armed goddesses with lotus flowers.

There are various simple exhortations to rational thought but none more so than the refusal to give an answer to whether there was a self before, or if there will be a self after the experience of life. If there was a beginning or an end to the universe or if there is a god. Because these are largely for now unanswerable questions they are truly a distraction from life and the experience of it, which is really what Buddhism should always be about. Of what help could the elaborate Mahayana style beliefs to this moment, these unprovable and unhelpful beliefs. Similarly with reincarnation, unknowable and unsolvable dilemmas that only can increase the unhealthy attachment to self and the continuation of the ego.

The truth of matters, well you can have that unknowable truth and claim it for your own, I'll not say you are false for I don't know, nor do I care as it should be. And happier I am for it. That being said, I'll prove that false as sometimes I just enjoy a good old debate. But as a personal thing its how I feel.