In Poul Anderson's Technic History, such questions remain open but are treated seriously. Two alien monotheisms, Ythrian and Merseian, are incompatible with any Terrestrial tradition whereas two Wodenites, Adzel and Axor, have converted to different Terrestrial religions.
I consider such questions and occasionally publish brief posts on the Religion and Philosophy blog where today I have felt moved to add "God."
19 comments:
Kaor, Paul!
I still find it hard to think of Buddhism as anything but a philosophy. despite the garish religious accretions of Tibetan Buddhism. Buddha, after all, had little interested in questions about God or "gods."
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Terminological. If religion is response to gods or God, then Buddhism is not a religion. If religion is response to transcendence and a way to spiritual liberation/emancipation/salvation, the Buddhism is a religion. You can say either. If a philosophy, then it is a philosophy of practice, not of analysis. (There is analysis but as an aid to practice.) I tell people that, for me, meditation is the equivalent of their prayer and/or communion but they certainly do not have to see it like that. The guy who runs our group described meditation as "oneness with the eternal."
Paul.
then
Well, Buddhism is a religion in the sense that you get reincarnated -- that is, your soul continues after the death of the body. And you get reincarnated according to how you lived your last life.
Although I do not accept the rebirth teaching, I have to acknowledge that it is clearly a supernaturalist or "religious" doctrine.
Kaor, Paul and Mr. Stirling!
Paul: Terminology does matter. And the best "pure" Buddhism seems to offer is to be absorbed into "nirvana." Which does not impress me.
Mr. Stirling: I recall you making similar comments about the reincarnation belief seen in Hinduism/Buddhism. E.g., if a man has a miserable, rotten, terrible life, here and now, it was because he was an evil/vile man in a former life. And might be doomed to be reincarnated as an insect. It could take countless reincarnations before such a man reincarnates as a high caste Brahmin.
Orthodox Christianity rejects reincarnation, as the Letter to the Hebrews teaches.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
But whether "religion" has to be theistic is a terminological question.
I am not trying to promote Buddhism.
Nirvana is here and now. I do not accept what is said about post-death states or rebirth but what does matter is practice here and now.
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
I doubt most convinced Buddhists would agree with your definition of nirvana. What it looks like to me is that you are picking out the bits of Buddhism you like while not accepting the rest.
Ad astra! Sean
the Buddha taught that desire is bad.
Kaor, Mr. Stirling!
I disagree with Buddha about that and in many other ways! One elementary point being that not all desires are bad.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I am not claiming to be a Buddhist, then picking out the bits that I like. I am not claiming to be a Buddhist period.
I agree with the teachings with which I agree and I disagree with the teachings with which I disagree. That is logical.
Most convinced Buddhists would agree that nirvana is here and now but would add something else about a postmortem state. I do not accept the latter.
The teaching is that the Buddha neither survives as an immortal soul nor has been reborn as an later organism. The logical conclusion is that he no longer exists. But he is believed to have been in a state of enlightenment/nirvana before his death.
We all exist at the times and places of which we are conscious or when we are asleep and not at any other places or times. We cannot be conscious of not existing.
I don't think that a mere reference to Buddhism as one of the traditions should generate this kind of argument about it! I could have included a derogatory remark about another tradition but that was not the point.
Paul.
I think that "desire is bad" is a simplification. Attachment causes suffering. I practice zazen and can receive guidance from Zen monks. The teaching guides practice. It is not just a set of propositions.
Kaor, Paul!
Except:
I've never claimed that you are a Buddhist.
I've never thought you to be a Buddhist.
Iow, you are still picking out those bits of Buddhism you agree with and omitting what you disagree with.
No, Stirling's choice of wording was reasonable. You can't desire something without also being attached to it.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
I don't understand "picking out bits of Buddhism that I agree with and OMITTING what I disagree with." I do not accept rebirth so I say so. Is to do that to OMIT something? Is to agree with something to PICK IT OUT??
We can like and enjoy, e.g., sweet food without being attached to it in the sense that is meant here. This wording is reasonable.
But I still fail to see why my merely including Buddhism in a list of traditions should lead to this kind of argumentation about it. I could go back again through all my disagreements with some other traditions but what is the point? This shouldn't happen every time we mention something.
Paul.
Sean,
I have had a good afternoon with Andrea.
I think that you judge other people by your standards. Thus, it would be wrong to practice Catholicism without believing in Catholicism. Is it wrong to practice zazen/just-sitting-meditation without believing in rebirth? No. Why should it be? Zazen is open to all. It is practiced by people with many beliefs even in India. A visitor to the Zen monastery said that she was a Christian. A monk replied, "You will continue to believe that. We will teach you how to meditate." My instructors know what I think and it is up to me whether I take refuge/accept lay ordination. I have not done.
The implication that, to satisfy someone else's idea of consistency, I should either start to believe in rebirth or cease to meditate is an obvious mistake. But I should not even have to say this! (I try to clarify the issues as far as possible but, beyond a certain point, we must each go our own way.)
Paul.
Kaor, Paul!
Incorrect, I never claimed your disbelief in reincarnation meant you should not practice Buddhist methods of meditation. Or even thought of that.
Ad astra! Sean
Sean,
Then what is the point of all this?
Paul.
I think Lewis was writing fantasy, not SF.
Or soft sf?
Post a Comment