Buddhism: Religion for Atheists? ~ Andrew Furst

Via on Nov 10, 2011
Photo: Show Biz Superstar

Offering a Silent Smile.

Our Sangha was recently visited by a very enthusiastic and inquisitive group. Among them was a very friendly woman who seemed excited to be there. She looked as though she had a flurry of questions, but she just didn’t know where to start.

To get things going, I asked her and the group the question, What is your religious background? The answer to this question is helpful and interesting to me. A person’s relationship to their root religious tradition can tell me a lot about how to best approach introducing the Dharma. The new woman volunteered that she was an atheist.

This is not an uncommon response. After all, my Sangha is held at the Unitarian Universalist church that my family attends. UU congregations are often made up of people from diverse religious backgrounds including atheists, agnostics, and humanists. Buddhism also seems to attract agnostics and atheists because it is often characterized as a philosophy rather than a religion.

My personal religious background is Christianity. But as early as my teens, I leaned strongly towards atheism. I was bewildered by the portrayal of a God who was apparently imminent in our lives but mysteriously absent from our experience. It was also not very difficult for an idealistic teen to reject a religious tradition that delivered the inquisition and Tammy Faye Baker.

Even today, I continue to believe that atheist thinkers like Jonathon Miller (producer of the Atheism Tapes), Colin McGinn, and even Richard Dawkins offer compelling questions and challenges to religious thinking that need to be considered by those who follow Christian theology (or for that matter, any theology).

Too often skepticism is met with circular arguments or the threat of eternal damnation on behalf of a vengeful Christian God. Much more could be accomplished with an acknowledgement that questions and doubts are a natural part of the journey towards a relationship with God. There are different types of doubt, some are critically important to the path.

The “Question”

So how does one introduce the Dharma to an atheist? The Buddha himself offered very little explanation when it came to the question, Does God Exist? When confronted with the question directly, he was said to have maintained a strict silence. To me, this is an attractive approach. Especially to my youthful self, as I was tilting away from Christianity. It set aside the questions that seemed to lead to absurdity and offered a rational approach to the questions, “Who am I?” and “How do I fit in?”

The Buddha offers a way for each of us to discern our true nature and our relationship with the world. We are tasked with looking deeply at what we call the self. To be fully immersed in the path is to examine every aspect of our being, including our prejudices and preconceptions.

Eventually we understand that the “I” we call “the self” cannot be found in our bodies, our minds, or our emotions. We are forced to grapple with the idea that the self we naturally identify with is something beyond our ability to conceptualize. We are left to contend with the paradox of the unseen seer. It is not trivial to note that the Abrahamic traditions portray an unseen being outside of time and space and identify it as God.

For this reason, I often make it a point to offer parallels to western mystic theology when talking about the Dharma and the experiences we have in meditation. On many levels I find echoes of the same ancient truths reverberating from all these traditions. If an atheist is willing to reject these traditions wholesale, then I want them to explore why and what affect this might have on their path.

Agreeing How to Disagree

While it is nice to recognize similarities, it is also true that Christianity and Buddhism have irreconcilable differences. The biggest difference is the Christian doctrine that Jesus is the only way to salvation. Interpreted literally, this is divisive. It prevents reconciliation between the faiths and has tended to serve as political fodder for conflict. But, perhaps from another perspective this is a good thing. No one way is the right way, since no two people walk the same path.

I share a strong sense of doubt with skeptics when it comes to fundamentalist and literal readings of scripture. But we part ways when there is an inclination to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The Buddhist Sutras are filled with references to gods, demi-gods, and demons. But these deities are portrayed in ways completely different from an omniscient, omnipotent God. These gods are similar to the pagan gods ofGreeceandRome. They are born and can die, they are familiar to the Indian reader, and they experience the same follies as humankind.

These deities are symbols of the mundane and holy aspects of ourselves. They are a mythology passed down—a map of the human psyche—to future generations to aide them in their quest to make sense of this life. When we fail to see this, we get mired in the details and loose our way.

Are We On the Same Page?

When atheists and theist clash, they tend to do so on the framework of a fairly literal interpretation of scripture. From a Buddhist perspective, this approach is destined for a stalemate. If we are looking to prove or disprove something outside of our experience, we’re going to be at a loss.

For example, characterizing God as a first cause is seen as contradictory to the notion of a being which must be unmoving and omnipotent. The law of Karma treats all causes as an effect of a prior cause. Our experience overwhelmingly confirms this.

Similarly, characterizing God as a being that intervenes in nature also implies an impermanent quality that is contrary to the notion of an omnipotent and separate God. If he were to intervene, it would imply he changed his mind. If he changed his mind, presumably for the better, then this implies he was not initially perfect.

The argument by design and the problem of evil can also be viewed as missing the point. They all draw conclusions about something outside of our experience.

But the most important element missing from all of these arguments is life. The degree to which they are removed from the questions, “Who am I?” and “How do I fit in?” tells us how off track they are. Did our ancestors need to tell us the creation story? Yes, it is a way to answer those very fundamental questions. Did they offer an accurate timeline and sequence of events or did they tell us a story that offers insight into the human condition? Which approach will help you on the path?

Silent Reverence

There is a powerful wisdom in the silence of the Buddha on the matter of God. It can be attractive to skeptics and those struggling with their relationship to the world and to the divine. As I said earlier, it sets aside many of the problems that arise when, for some, Christian theology just does not compute.

The path of the Buddha offers a hint of the mystery based firmly on our own experience. We are led to see that life is the union of the world of impermanent things and an inconceivable, unchanging base of being. This is, as St. Francis ofAssisiput it, the process of “looking for what is looking.”

In the words of the 12th century theologian Alain of Lille:

“God is an intelligible sphere, whose center is everywhere, and whose circumference is nowhere”.

While I am careful to acknowledge the silence of the Buddha on the mystery, Alain of Lille’s words never fail to bring a smile of recognition to my lips.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Profile:

Andrew Furst is a Meditation Teacher for Buddha Heart USA, a yogi, a backup guitarist for his two teenage boys, a lucky husband, a third dan, and a self employed software consultant. He’s generally forgetful and generally interested. He’s constantly trying to remind himself that he’s in union with the great divine, and willing to send reminders to anyone needing the same.

Click here to visit his website.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

Elephant Spirituality is now on twitter… Click here to follow us!

Elephant Spirituality is an example of Elephant Journal’s commitment to the Mindful Life. We look to provide a fresh and practical perspective on traditional spirituality. If you would like to follow Elephant Spirituality on FaceBook click here and become a fan of Elephant Spirituality by clicking the “Like” tab at the top of the page.

 

 

 

About elephant journal

elephant journal is dedicated to "bringing together those working (and playing) to create enlightened society." We're about anything that helps us to live a good life that's also good for others, and our planet. >>> Founded as a print magazine in 2002, we went national in 2005 and then (because mainstream magazine distribution is wildly inefficient from an eco-responsible point of view) transitioned online in 2009. >>> elephant's been named to 30 top new media lists, and was voted #1 in the US on twitter's Shorty Awards for #green content...two years running. >>> Get involved: > Subscribe to our free Best of the Week e-newsletter. > Follow us on Twitter Fan us on Facebook. > Write: send article or query. > Advertise. > Pay for what you read, help indie journalism survive and thrive—and get your name/business/fave non-profit on every page of elephantjournal.com. Questions? info elephantjournal com

932 views

Appreciate this article? Support indie media!

(We use super-secure PayPal - but don't worry - you don't need an account with PayPal.)

8 Responses to “Buddhism: Religion for Atheists? ~ Andrew Furst”

  1. yeahnig says:

    nonthiestic

  2. sonyata says:

    I like this article, and agree with you completely. Also being from a Christian background, I found myself transformed and empowered by the teachings of Gautama the Buddha. So often we see Christians who leverage the verse you mentioned, as accepting Jesus as your savior as the only way to heaven and eternal salvation. The rest are condemned. This give congregations a way to filter out those who they don't feel obligated to love, or even tolerate. They can quickly put them out as "unsaved". I have seen and heard of people who were born again many times (accepting Jesus in service), fearing that it didn't take the first time. Numerous baptisms are also common. This due to the fact that no matter what they believe in their heart, they keep getting put out of the church by those who hold position in the congregation. It is nothing but social politics.

    "For a Christian to find salvation, they must be born again. A Hindu is born again, and again, and again until they find salvation."

    Both the Tao and the teachings of Buddha treat the subject of God as that which is beyond our comprehension, accepting that giving God a name is to label Him. And then people fight over the proper name. Christians are notorious for being very uneducated in world history, especially the history of the church. Each of the newer denominations wants to pick up a bible, swear that it is the only true word of God, and then set out to rebuild the Chariot wheel once again.

    I saw a movie recently on Alexander the Great, circa 350 BC. They claimed him to be the Son of Zeus, and the Greeks had this thing about Zeus having a son who was God/Man. It was common in their mythology. Some wonder is Yeshua (perhaps the original name for Jesus) was changed to Jesus – Je Zeus, Son of God, when Christianity was translated into Greek. Without a doubt, the Roman Catholic Church fabricated Christianity so that it overlay all of the underlying Greek and Roman mythology, as a pagan mop to absorb all of the religions of the Roman Empire. The result was brutal censorship and forced, feinted allegiance to the Vatican, and the Dark Ages of Europe resulted. People went back to believing the earth was flat until they discovered (rediscovered) a thousand years later that the sun was actually the center of the solar system. In the mean time, Islam rose in the vacuum created when the Greeks stole the Jesus and turned him into a white man.

    In my studies, I have seen a pattern emerge. Hinduism/Buddhism, Judaism/Christianity, Islam/Bahai. Each of the former was founded by the law, and a system or religion of unity belief. Each of the latter was a reformation of the former to restore the people to the world view, rather than their localized, and racist fossilization of the base religion.

    I believe that Life is the one true religion, and love is the language we all learn to share. I believe that it is a good idea to investigate all of the religions, rather than jumping on board to the closest, or first one we find. We owe it to ourselves to shop them all. Namaste.

  3. Mat Hill says:

    It is only EVER westerners who have this debate. There is NO original eastern Buddhist tradition I’ve ever come across that has ever debated Buddhism being theistic.

    Buddha is a god. There are countless other gods. There are demons. There is hell. These are considered physical entities as well as metaphysical. Furthermore, many objects, especially statues, are considered to be gods: not physical representations of gods, but the gods themselves, in many traditions.

    Make no mistake: Buddhism is theistic, it’s polytheistic, it’s frequently as judgmental as Semitic/Abramitic religions, and it also contains the very definition of idolatrous.

    That’s not to say the western Buddhist debate is irrelevant, unnecessary or unwelcome – far from it, it could be the perfect way to distance believers from the huge money machine that is eastern Buddhism. But when most western Buddhists bring up these questions with eastern Buddhists, mostly all they’re going to get is humoured and invoiced! The eastern believers will not be do lucky; they’re typical of anyone struggling to make sense of the spiritual maze, led by people in judgment in gold bedecked pulpits.

    • Hector V. Barrientos-Bullock Harleigh says:

      Buddha is not a god and you have misinterpreted buddhism with the same errors EVERY westerner misinterprets buddhism.

  4. Mat Hill says:

    Thank you for your opinion Harleigh. Those aren’t my interpretations, they’re pretty much direct quotes from an ex-Buddhist priest I’ve communicated to at length. I’ve also had numerous long discussions with Buddhist priests of various countries and traditions and they’ve pretty much said the same. So it’s not a western misinterpretation. Perhaps you could point us to some specific non-theistic Buddhist traditions?

Leave a Reply