Acting compassionate is a win-win The one who receives the act win the compassion and the one who does it win a noble heart and the satisfaction of a pure love

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Exactly so felipe, well said! 🙏

Your comments on ethical action, especially to help other people, is well taken. The argument that someone who does not believe in God must be a bad person is often used to disgrace those of us who are not theists.

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks Aron, yes indeed.

@KJAlways

5 жыл бұрын

When I was a Christian, I have met this woman who I thought was the nicest Christian I have ever met. She turned out to be Buddhist. Another girl who one of the sweetest human beings I have met was an Atheist. Both can put most Christians to shame. Based on the truth of my experience, I agree with Buddha that anybody with a healthy functioning brain can make a choice to be good and ethical. The radicals who believes in God is the most dangerous in our world based on the evidence of news and history. I prefer kind Atheists around me than them on any day! I respect all religions of peace who supports the teachings of the Buddha in their actions. If they cause suffering, I won't support them. We all need more compassion in our world and within myself.

@stephenrizzo

2 жыл бұрын

As an atheist who tries hard to live an ethical life out of an innate respect for others and regrets when I fall short of the mark, I find the belief in reward and punishment after death to be a repugnant and naive attempt at mind control. It is the truth behind the saying that religion is regarded by the. Common man as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. I don’t think anatta is congruent with such a belief and that it was grafted on later. Simply counting sutras that support such a belief , but never satisfactorily explain how such justice makes sense with anatta just testifies to the productivity of the faction the triumphed. I think the Buddha was better than this.

The background sound or music is very distracting and drowns what you are saying.

@DougsDharma

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment yakmanok. I’ve stopped putting music in the more recent videos. 🙂

@myname-mz3lo

3 жыл бұрын

you need more practice if you are that easily distracted haha

I discovered recently with your help that I am a Secular Buddhist. I am not an Atheist, but I am Agnostic about my most of beliefs, if not all, in God because God is still a mystery for me. I don't think it is important to know all the answers. I don't force God into tiny religious boxes because my experiences with God is beyond the limitations of religions. Religion requires an interest in their Epistemology and Metaphysical beliefs, which are the questions that Buddha did not want to answer because it is more important how we live our lives. I am more focused on the practicality of Buddhism. My experiences with God does not need to be turned into a religious thing. It does not matter whether we believe or not because anybody with a healthy functioning brain can make ethical choices according to the Buddha. When I was a Christian, I was not motivated by heaven and hell because they were not really real to me. I was motivated by the love. As a Secular Buddhist, I am not motivated by the after life. I am more motivated by the wisdom of the Buddha that wants to end suffering and promote compassion in our world. I am motivated by compassion. I am sure there is an after life, but I am agnostic about it. I am just listening to the experiences of people and see how science evolve over the decades, for now.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for letting us know KJ Always! Be well. 🙏

@KJAlways

5 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma Thank you. I have added your podcast to my phone yesterday as soon as I discovered you, Doug! Does a Secular Buddhist has to be an Atheist? I believe in God. I just don't have an interested in speculating Metaphysics and forming beliefs based on others' Epistemology. Like Buddha, I believe in focus on the more practical matters of life. God is just a personal experience for me, and it is not about being religious. God is too much of a mystery to figure out. I do try to figure God out just for fun! Hahaha! :-P

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Don't worry KJ Always, there is no "secular Buddhism police", so if you think secular Buddhism is right for you then it is! 🙂

@KJAlways

5 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma I just want to make sure I am using the terminology correctly when I speak to people. Accuracy is important to me because I don't believe in wasting people's time with giving them wrong information. What do you call a Buddhist who believes in God but not into Epistemology nor Metaphysics? I seems like most people do not understand how I value facts. Unquestioned assumptions scares me.

@KJAlways

5 жыл бұрын

I don't believe Buddha or Jesus is God. I have no idea what I am dealing with when I say God because I cannot see him, her or them. If I had to speculate, God is a team of one. God contradicts what people have told me about who or what God is. I tried to figure out God and cannot.... no set pattern!!! Unpredictable. I don't worship God because it does seems to be a request for me to do. God is not a religious thing for me. It is a connection of some sort. I cannot explain nor teach anybody about this because it has to be experienced, like the Tao. When I hear about the Tao in Tao Te Ching, it sounds a lot like what I experienced and limited understanding about God. Who knows, maybe God is a group of Girlie Fairies. Hahaha!! I do experience Mother Earth as a part of my understanding of God. The more I experience, the more I do not know what it is. I don't care about speculating and making up Metaphysics or Epistemology about it. Not important. If it was, God would have told me. I just accept it "as is" and live life and grow happy as I grow into more wisdom. I value ethics. Like it is unethical to separate children from their parents and put them in cages, so we should try to alleviate their suffering with our compassionate hearts and reunite them with their families. So what do you call a person who believes in God (whatever that means) who agrees with Buddha that we should focus more on how we live our lives with Compassion and Metta (LovingKindness) by following the 8 Fold path? Sorry I wrote so much. I just wanted to give you some clarity on what God means to me. The Tao.

I really enjoy your videos, but the background music in this one is really strange. It's very distracting. I prefer the videos that just have you speaking.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Sorry Justin, that's an earlier video when I was experimenting noobishly with background music. 😳

I'm glad you mentioned the view that rebirth is an argument that weighs in favor of a permanent self. The Itivuttaka has the Buddha living for eons, including hundreds of lifetimes as a wheel turning monarch and thirty six times as king of the devas. That is a notion of self that is vastly more retroactively durable and long-lasting than any western conception of self. Future eternity is a vague concept but early Buddhist teaching depict selves that have continued for eons, linked substantially infinitely backward by dependant origination, which is a linkage strong enough for the Buddha to refer to the entity in past lives as "I." In that context, the proposition of non-self is even more momentous but it also leaves open the question of to what extent non-self applies experientially to those who remain unawakened.

@DougsDharma

4 жыл бұрын

Great question photistyx, these are all things to ponder upon. Can you point me to where you find the prior lifetimes of the Buddha outlined in the Itivuttaka? It's been awhile since I read it through.

@photistyx

4 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma It's Meritorious Deeds in Itivuttaka, Sutta 22; 14-15 (or page 164 in In the Buddha's Words, which is a fascinating read, by the way, so thank you for recommending it in your Books on early Buddhism video).

@DougsDharma

4 жыл бұрын

Great thanks @@photistyx , it is a fun read. 🙂

To practice Buddhism correctly you have to let go of beliefs. Belief in atheism, rebirth, karma, etc. I would say since the Buddha has spoken so much truth you should hold the views of karma and rebirth highly as theories since his teachings work when applied and has thus far proven himself trustworthy. At the end of the day, reality is about what you experience, not about what you believe so strive and don’t believe until you find the truth for yourself.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

That's right Jordan. It's more about how we react to beliefs than what beliefs we have.

@jewbanqora5159

Жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma I'm Buddhist, if you ask me do you believe in God let's say buddha the answer is No because you have to separate beliefs, respect, and deniail

@civonylord

Жыл бұрын

I thought you mean “to let go of theism”.

I am somewhat new to Buddhism so perhaps I am missing something. One of the many aspects I like about it is that you can be secular and if reincarnation say does exist, you will do so based on your karma regardless your believe in it personally or not; almost as a form of nature of the universe. If you are a good person regardless of belief in traditional aspects, it will happen if it's meant to happen. It isn't like Christianity (no disrespect) where if you don't believe, warship accordingly, you will more than likely be punished. Apologize for rambling, take care!

@DougsDharma

4 жыл бұрын

That's right Revinar, karma doesn't care if you believe in it or not. That is one key difference between say Buddhism and Christianity.

Excelent episode. Thanks Doug.

@DougsDharma

11 күн бұрын

🙏😊

New to your channel. Looking forward to watching your other videos.

@DougsDharma

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks Leo, I hope you find them worthwhile.

Very intellectually honest share. Pretty juicy topic. Thumbs up.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks very much Paul. 🙏

Well done Excellent Teaching

@DougsDharma

6 жыл бұрын

Glad you found it useful. 🙏

Much food for thought. Thank you.

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks for watching, Dan.

Doug, a wonderfully clear and helpful discourse as always. I have just been reading ' The Short Simile of the Elephant"s Footprint" which says that the mendicant will see his//her past lives during samadhi after attaining the fourth absorption. This is consistent with my view that Buddha Dharma is not faith based but can be experienced personally. In other words we don't need to believe because we will see for our selves. Could take a long time in this example of course.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Sure, and in that case such an experience might convince us otherwise. But it's not something I've ever seen or known.

@igrim4777

Жыл бұрын

Christian: Even though I have no proof practice my religion because you'll find out when you're dead that my religion is true. You: Even though I have no proof practice my religion and you'll find out in some indeterminate time that my religion is true. The only difference appears to be that you're claiming the proof comes in a lifetime, not at the end of it. You're still demanding people practice for a long time without evidence in order to gain access to this supposed evidence. In other words, to take it on faith that they'll see proof. Then you're demanding people take a religious experience as fact. Lots of non-Buddhists have religious experiences. Are you claiming these experiences are false even though these people believe they are true? How then is anyone supposed to take a Buddhist religious experience as true except by believing it is true?

You explain tricky concepts so clearly. As far as I can tell, you haven't yet written a book on Buddhism. Please do!

@DougsDharma

3 жыл бұрын

Thanks Robin, I've been working on getting something published for awhile now ... we'll see where it goes!

@colincannon8072

3 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma If you do publish something Doug, it would be to all our benefit if it isn't angry like Stephen Batchelor's writings.

Thank you, Doug!

@DougsDharma

10 ай бұрын

My pleasure!

I enjoy Doug’s videos and the work he puts into educating others very much. He is active on his channel and interacts skillfully with commenters. Thanks Doug - you’re awesome! With respect, I sometimes feel the idea of “secular Buddhism” is particularly susceptible to and often born from the “thicket of views.” Most of us aren’t as thoroughly considered as Doug. An example occurs around 3:50 after the existence of god commentary he discusses re: rebirth. Doug ably discusses scripture and rebirth re: rebirth as belief or disbelief…this is where emergence of the middle way gains traction. The Buddha said this handful of leaves is similar to the knowledge he shares with us to attain awakening while all the leaves in the forest represent all he knows and has seen. That is, rebirth (in this case) is an invaluable *perspective* to maintain as part and parcel of making an effort with hands and feet to reach the far shore. The same can be said of anatta - a perspective to maintain as a skillful mental formation. It’s the “look at it this way” approach which allows me to escape the thicket of views (belief or no usually derived from lengthy consideration) by looking at it as The Buddha illustrates. This works well for me. I often find myself still considering issues of belief but find it a less desperate and consequential exercise. All this would be different if this approach were not fruitful. I also feel this exercise has entrained me to go deeper on other contentious occurrences and issues - that alone has been life changing. Many if not most of the things/contentious concepts I understand as concerns for “secular Buddhism” fit into this basket of skillful perspectives. I mention this not to whack Doug because he’s awesome and I think we mostly see eye to eye. I mention it to provide my brothers and sisters on the path some more room for consideration and relief along the margins. It can be tough out there on the daily while seeking and finding so. In the Kalama Sutta The Buddha implores them to “come and see for yourself.” He was saying to try it on and maintain the perspectives to see that it results in the benefits promised, reliably over a long time. It is not a permission slip to set aside this or that teaching but something closer to a workout plan leading to favorable promised and articulated results.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

My pleasure! Yes, I agree that we can too easily be pulled into the "thicket of views" with discussions and arguments. So ... consider things, then move on to practice. 😄

@AnattaAnattata

2 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma Sadhu! 🙏👍👏👏👏

@RM-tk6gl

2 жыл бұрын

I always feel better after watching Doug's videos, never worse!🙏🙏🙏

@RM-tk6gl

2 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma as usual Doug, very good stuff. 🙏🙏🙏

@TheHorseshoePartyUK

Жыл бұрын

I test any idea, from any philosophy or religion, for if it benefits me, mine, my community, nation and the rest of the world, and I *automatically* defy anyone who tries to cajole, coerce or manipulate me into thinking the exact same way they do. And so we arrive at the very ironic Traditional Buddhist Infighting over the true path to Peace. I am The Joker in the vein of Alan Watts, and you are Sombre Serious Buddhism. "Inside and Outside truly, truly tried their best to understand each other, entirely, 100% understand their totally opposite perspective. Tried to achieve the impossible so hard, it backfired. They ended up each feeling, antagonised, alienated, thinking: "why is the other being so stupid. I'm not doing anything wrong, I never ever do, the silly idiot," They then ended up feeling totally separate from each other, alone, in a cruel dark world and each forgot they are part of the same whole" 😆😆😆😆😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 That is the Joke. Humanity is a Joke. I am The Joker

Hey Doug, kinda new in my the area. My brain is racing with questions, but I’ll ask this first. Where should I start exactly? I’ve seen the whole playlist for beginners but I’m still lost. Should I get a book first ? Like I want to get in the habit of practicing and want to explore rituals but I feel like that’s the desire part mentioned in a lot of your videos so I haven’t don’t anything cause I don’t want this to be superficial. Sorry this a lot and this video a lil older if you see this.

@DougsDharma

3 жыл бұрын

No worries malcolm. If you're interested in practicing, check out my playlist on beginning Buddhist practice: kzread.info/head/PL0akoU_OszRihO7Z4ynccF5rmGgyfNLQr , and take a look at my other playlists as well to see if something clicks. In general though I wouldn't overthink it. If you want to practice, that's a healthy form of desire by Buddhist reckoning, so it's nothing to worry about. Just dive right in!

@joanice1220

2 жыл бұрын

Try watching one of the you tube Buddhist monks videos.

Thank you Doug 🙏🏻. A question if that is alright. To what extent do you feel that it is necessary to be able to ascribe a given sutta or teaching to a historical Gautama Buddha? Does it really matter who originated a given teaching or element of the Dharma, as long as it appears to help move us to the cessation of suffering and ethical living? Secular Buddhists do often seem to put a lot of weight on the “authenticity” of the teaching, but if one believes that Buddha was only a normal human anyway, then why worry about that? Thank you again 🙏🏻

@DougsDharma

3 ай бұрын

I did a response to that type of question quite awhile back, let me know if it helps: kzread.info/dash/bejne/YmmKzK17o9i6lrw.html

@willmosse3684

3 ай бұрын

@@DougsDharma Okay, thank you Doug. Much appreciated. I will watch that this afternoon. And thank you for this whole channel. I like the whole style of presentation - different to a regular dharma talk, even when on a solidly dharma topic, but very informative. And also some more academic questions approached clearly and simply. Great work.

I'm not gonna lie Buddha's wager is a lot more convincing than Pascal's. Creating a good world weather you get to experience it or not has its own benifits where as Pascal's is almost a deal with the devil, it still comes from fear and selfishness where as the Buddha's comes fits both selfish and altruistic motivations

There are various ways that rebirth CAN be reconciled with nonself. The explanation I find most satisfying is described in great detail by Meher Baba in his books God Speaks and Discourses, namely, that there is a "soul" that reincarnates through innumerable bodies, but, like the bodies themselves, it is temporary, a cocoon for the incubation of consciousness. In this view "nonself" really means no permanent, separate self, which does not preclude temporary, provisional selves that are an intrinsic part of the mechanics of the evolution and involution of consciousness. In such a frame of reference, there is absolutely no contradiction between nonself and the multitude of references to rebirth in Buddhist scriptures and traditions.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Yes I think that's right George, there is no necessary contradiction between Buddhist non-self and Buddhist notions of rebirth.

thats so true when a secular person chooses to be ethical its because they want to be ethical but when a religious person does it can sometimes be for self interest for a future life or heaven or hell . wich is selfish .

@DougsDharma

3 жыл бұрын

Well yes, either one can be ethical or selfish (or more likely a mix of the two), it just depends on the person and the case.

@myname-mz3lo

3 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma that's true. But I allways ask myself if a religious person wasn't religious would they be as ethical. Would they still follow buddhist values etc or would they be nihilist like most of society. You can't wonder that about atheist people that are ethical, it's guaranteed that it comes from the heart. Of course I'm generalising and there are exceptions on both sides.

I find the background music very distracting.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Sorry about that Roger, it was an experiment on several earlier videos but I don't do that anymore. 🙂

What is the evidence of rebirth? all your lecutres are so fascinating! Tvm

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question Hiruy, I’m probably not the right person to ask that question because it seems to me there isn’t much evidence for it at all besides some anecdotes, and of course the Buddha’s own claims. Those one has to take on blind faith though unless one feels there *is* evidence. 🙂

@DougsDharma

3 жыл бұрын

True!

Disussing about rebith, it is a long story. Rebirth was mentioned to 3 life times in the intepretating the budha's dependent origination in Visutthimakka by Buddhakhosajahn, who was brahman before ordrained in buddhist. Birth and rebith, infact, are not the same. Could any one search the buddha's word exactly defined birth and rebirth. The answer might probably be near.

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your thoughts!

This makes me think that perhaps disciples of the Buddha didn't concern themselves much with the idea of a rebirth (future life) since their main priority would be on the present moment practising the dharma and living ethically

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, I agree. Some might have speculated about various things, but that wouldn't really have been the heart of their practice.

Like I want to engage in ethical actions to bring peace to myself and those around me not because I'm scared of an afterlife I cant prove. Other religions are too violent for me I can't understand why people hurt eachother in the name of an afterlife or magic.

To me Secular Buddhism symbolizes an attempt to retain connection to a valuable and ancient wisdom lineage in a way that is compatible with modern culture. Unfortunately many traditional Buddhist teachers are not very open to this idea. As for reincarnation, who is reincarnated but a karmic continuum experiencing itself, not the same person/mind/soul in a new body. If enlightenment exists, it is not personal, it is who we are.

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

That's right, rebirth, if it happens, does not involve literally the same person in a new body anyway.

@englishmanbo

Жыл бұрын

This also reduces the transactional nature of doing virtuous acts.

I especially enjoyed the phrase 'we should believe'. :-)

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks gnostie, not sure where it comes up in the video but I'm glad you enjoyed it nonetheless! 😁

It’s nice to see videos from years ago. In my mind we have to be very careful about what the Buddha said and what he meant. I think he spoke in the terms familiar to those he was attempting to move towards enlightenment… and rebirth and talk of gods may have just been using familiar language to make a point. The point being - the more wants we have, the more responsibilities we take on, the less time we have to allow our minds to reach a calm state where clear minded thinking and acting in accordance with our proclaimed moral principles can be had. In the US today he might use David and Saul, God and Jesus to describe the same things he spoke about a long time ago in India. Increase the positive - decrease the negative - cultivate compassion - and that is about all one needs to know. Knowing a thousand times a thousand verses is not as valuable as one word that brings peace. ✌️

@DougsDharma

3 ай бұрын

🙏😊

Doug I'm enjoying your videos and learning a lot. Couldn't watch this one because I found the background music very distracting. Completely overshadowed your lecture.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Yes lots have commented the same, Bob. Unfortunately KZread doesn't allow us to edit videos that are already uploaded.

@bobloos3456

2 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma thanks and I completely understand.

I know this video is a little older but I still want to add my thoughts. I believe that with or without gods or laws...there will always be bad people doing bad things and good people doing good things.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Absolutely so Delane, very wise thing to keep in mind. Thanks!

Namo budhay

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

🙏😊

This is an interesting topic, on first blush it seemed to me Buddha's argument against not believing in rebirth seemed like a self contradiction, because it's an argument based on benefit, not on probability of truth. In other words, it's a case made for the sake of winning the argument, not for true learning, which, seems to me comes from clinging or attachment to view. With what the Buddha says about views and attachment, this would seem to me both wrong view, intention, and action by his own standards. However, I remember you saying something in a video about how the Buddha treated views like tools or a raft to cross a river. In that case, I guess that would make Buddha a functionalist, and then maybe arguing for a view which he thinks is the most helpful wouldn't be a contradiction after all.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Right, as I understand it, it's supposed to be a helpful view, which indeed it might be for some.

I think when practicing vipassana and calm abiding, it brings a sense of equanimity. By being less attached and averse to to sense experiences (including thoughts and emotions), that naturally goes hand in hand with ethical behaviour. A person becomes less reactive to emotional whims and impulsive behaviour. So you don't need a belief in rebirth to be ethical. That comes with insight from meditation practice. So secular Buddhists behave ethically because of Buddhist practices they engage in within this lifetime. I guess that Buddha would feel that through meditative practices a secular Buddhist would inevitably realise the truth of rebirth anyway.

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

Yes, perhaps so. 🙏

I've always wondered why "killing" in any context is bad, especially if rebirth is a possibility, think of a tyrant causing all kinda of suffering and killing (or ordering the killing) of innocents and suffering for their own enjoyment or to protect their earthly power, obviously the best outcome is rehabilitation but if that is not possible and considering they may be reborn into a life that is on the otherside of their actions should you not end their life to save yourself and others if you can? 🤔

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

Well yes, it's a good question. The Buddha was opposed to anger and hatred in all its forms, and seems to have believed that any action to kill had to be based upon anger or hatred. It also becomes a slippery slope. Where does the killing end?

@englishmanbo

Жыл бұрын

I hope you are never in a situation where you feel compelled to kill, even for a just cause. I have been told of a suta in the Jataka tales in which the Buddha saves many people on a boat by killing a would-be murderer, with the understanding that the Buddha himself will bear terrible karma (even with altruistic motivation). I can imagine situations in which I may just take the karma, but I hope it never happens. Also, by practicing non-violence even toward animals including fish and insects I have found a shift in awareness that increases sensitivity and breaks down compartmentalization of living beings. Its a mysterious world.

@smileyp4535

Жыл бұрын

@@englishmanbo I totally agree, I don't want to kill anyone but sometimes it's better to do so to create a world where the next generation won't have to, then hopefully if you are still in samsara you will incarnate into the time that gives you the best ability to exit the cycle

@tulip5677

10 ай бұрын

This makes me think of the trolley problem

@smileyp4535

10 ай бұрын

@@tulip5677 indeed, sometimes one must take a life in order to save another or perhaps many, tho we hope ot is never something we have to do, I think karma (being basically cause and effect with a spiritual component) has room for noble offensive defense, that is why I like the Sikh religion, it has very similar morals to Buddhism but they carry a dagger with them as a religious item to symbolize (and potentially use as a tool or weapon if needed but largely more symbolic) the need to defend the weak and those being inflicted with unjustifiable suffering, they also are some of the biggest groups for feeding the poor and feeding them Healthy but delicious foods thay are mostly vegetarian/vegan Sikhism and Buddhism are my biggest influences

The music is too loud, unlike other videos.

@DougsDharma

6 ай бұрын

Yes, a handful of my earliest videos have music.

สาธุ!🙏

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

🙏😊

Do we really know if the Buddhist scriptures are really the words of the Buddha?

@DougsDharma

4 жыл бұрын

It's a large and complicated question. I did an earlier video that's on a closely related topic: kzread.info/dash/bejne/mH9426Wsqqmdqqg.html

Yes sir Please give me Buddha books Namo Buddya 🙏🏻☸️☸️

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

I have several videos on books that might interest you Malaya: kzread.info/head/PL0akoU_OszRjBKHxKj98qtSmcLpBmDWkL

A real question: why would a secular buddhist care what "The Buddha" would think? Presumably what marks out a buddhist as "secular" is one or other kind of eschewing of faith-based verities. Key among the eschewals would be denying 'faith' in a founder figure as being anything more than just another human. Most humans don't found movements surviving 2 millennia, of course, but in non-religious contexts we usually consider movement-founders' texts as guides to *their* thought, and only *our* thought and action where we subsequently deem it useful or true. Of course a buddhist academic has perfectly good professional reasons to sift through texts for an answer. But what's the value for a non-academic 'secular buddhist'?

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Great question, Crispin, and of course you are right: secular Buddhism isn't based on blind faith in a founder's beliefs. But in fact neither is Buddhism itself. Ironically, we can know this by reading the Buddha. Personally I find it interesting to know what the Buddha believed (at least so far as we can know this through research into the Pāli Canon and other places) because in general he was quite bright and wise. To put it another way, being a 'secular' Buddhist I believe all folks are fallible and the Buddha was just another human, albeit a wise one. But being a secular 'Buddhist' I am particularly interested in what he had to say. This does not of course preclude my interest in what other wise folks said. The research is interesting insofar as it might help us get closer to the original message. Perhaps we then find that that message doesn't resonate for us, but I've found in general the original message resonates more for me than much of the later material. YMMV!

@nrpeaceaus

7 жыл бұрын

Thanks Doug, that's all pretty reasonable. My question/provocation reflects personal biases to some extent -- my first degree was in (Western) philosophy, and I was always relatively uninterested in historical exegesis, and wanted to dive directly into finding The Truth (I was young and believed this to be possible). There are so many issues one could raise about all this: but underlying them all is I suspect some underlying tension in the notion of being a 'secular' religionist. The two terms seem to have friction between them, in that the former implies cognitive openness, and the latter commitment. Not that I think holding slightly contradictory notions together is illegitimate -- in life as opposed to syllogisms it's often unavoidable, eg. with causality & freewill, individuality vs community etc etc.

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Yes Crispin, my background parallels yours: degrees in Western Philosophy, relatively uninterested in historical exegesis. Claims are true or false, after all, whatever the case may be about their histories. But I see being a secular Buddhist as essentially the same thing as being a contemporary (philosophical) Aristotelian, Kantian, Platonist, or neo-Stoic. That is, one does not believe such claims *religiously*, one does not believe out of faith the entirety of the relevant canon, but one comes to believe that a particular philosopher or school encompasses a significant percentage of what is right and good, and so one allies oneself at least de facto as a member of that group. And in all these cases of philosophical schools, modern defenders pick and choose. None accept everything that (e.g.) Kant said, since it's clear Kant said all sorts of things that by modern standards are factually incorrect, even if one comes to describe oneself as a Kantian. Why should contemporary philosophical or secular Buddhists be any different, or be held to different standards? Probably in part they are held to different standards because there is a religion called "Buddhism". But that is a historical accident. To me Buddhism is as much a philosophy as a religion, and I accept it in that spirit.

@nrpeaceaus

7 жыл бұрын

I have to say I never really found the notion of adhering to a 'school' of philosophy very reasonable in a purely secular academic context. My own view was always that the very fact that the big questions of epistemology, metaphysics and ethics (unlike more operationalised scientific issues) weren't converging on academic consensus made it dubious to commit to a general approach. If I were to pick further I would probably have a crack at your religious vs non-religious modes of allying oneself with a school. Your description of the latter matches how very many educated religious believers have considered their religious allegiance, even in Judeo-Christian highly 'scripture'-based religions (and by no means only in post-Enlightenment times). Anyway this is probably as far as a YT comment thread deserves to go. Thanks for your interesting videos & generous engagement here.

@KJAlways

5 жыл бұрын

I care about the teachings of Buddha because I am interested in his wisdom. I am a lover of wisdom (Philosophy). I follow him as he instructed that I trust in the truth of my own experiences. If his words are not true for me, I leave them for others to embrace and move on to the words that are true of my own experiences or observations. I never known the Buddha teaching "faith-based". I always saw his teachings to encourage me to think for myself above other people's believes, logic or philosophy. I am grateful for this because I really needed Buddha's help at that time! He turned me into an Empirical person. I am grateful Buddha's wisdom has set me free. Jesus said you shall know the truth and it shall set you free, and it did!

How is secular Buddhism different from secular Hinduism or Christianity?

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Basically it’s the same way that Buddhism is different from Hinduism and Christianity: acceptance of the Noble Truths, and practice of the Eightfold Path.

My only issue with Buddhism is how it does not include naturalism and the natural order of things. Perhaps I’m wrong, I’m not sure. If I am wrong please tell me how.

@DougsDharma

6 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the comment, 125. I’m not entirely sure how to answer since people mean different things by the word ‘naturalism’. Early Buddhism does include the natural world of physical objects, and includes the notion of causal connections between things. One understanding of the word ‘dharma’ is ‘the natural order of things’ or ‘natural law’. For more on that I have a video on the word ‘dharma’ that might interest you! kzread.info/dash/bejne/eY1-wc1toKy6o7A.html

@mcgee227

6 жыл бұрын

Please give an example.

@SonofSethoitae

5 жыл бұрын

@@mcgee227 This seems like a ludicrously broad question; what do you mean by "natural order of things?" The Buddha definitely acknowledged that the world is a thing that exists and operates according to laws. It's obvious from a reading of the suttas; For example, in the Asibandhakaputta Sutta, the Buddha rejects the idea that prayer can make a rock float on water after it has been thrown in, which demonstrates a tacit acknowledgement of the laws of nature.

@gabrielleangelica1977

2 жыл бұрын

Let it go with the flow is Zen and ☯️ Tao...

Character Building Material

@DougsDharma

6 жыл бұрын

Yes indeed, thanks Alfred!

Hi Doug! We in our secular community would like to invite you to speak about secular spirituality and secular buddhism. How do i come in contact with you? With kind regards, Magnus chairman in Empty Space Temple.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Very kind of you, Magnus. But with the videos and a number of other irons in the fire just now, I'm not sure I'd have the time.

@magnusnilsson2531

2 жыл бұрын

@@DougsDharma Ok! Please let me know when you have time for a short interview and onlinemeeting. Thank you for the high quality teachings and inquiring into somewhat difficult topics and questions on buddhist dharma. I noticed that you have written books too? I have a hard time to wrap my head around the anatta view in buddhism and with that the notion of rebirth. Did the Buddha in any sutta ever say that there is no self, or that we don't exist. Or did he mean that the skandhas and samskaras has no self? In that case it jibes with the vedantic notion on anatman, i.e the self is no object. And if we dońt exist or if no self/person is here, who will accumulate any merit or karma? And who will experience nibbana if there is no one to experience it? Thankful for your answers and keep up your good work. With Metta

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

@@magnusnilsson2531 Great questions, check out my playlist on self and non-self for a bunch of videos on those topics!

So whats the difference between being a Buddhist and being a non-buddhist good person?

@DougsDharma

4 жыл бұрын

Following the Eightfold Path, Four Noble Truths, and the like.

do ethics require belief in next life?? i don't think so

@DougsDharma

3 жыл бұрын

Me neither Rajiv! 😄

I have argued (in my mind) that the lack of rebirth and God is irrelevant to existence of ethics because altruism is coded into us by evolution as co-ordination was critical to our survival. Humans in groups will be ethical irrespective of what we believe in. So in a certain way, the question is rendered moot. Kassapa's Amoralism and Ajita's Materialism are good theoretical positions but at a community, neighborhood level, there is always ethics and morality because evolution coded that into us and neither of the two mentioned way of life can be practiced widely without utter chaos.

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

Right, ethics is pretty much universal.

Secularism, any movement in society directed away from Church and other worldliness to life on earth. The term secular first appeared in 19th century. If secularist keep an open mind regarding rebirth, karma and 31 planes I do not see any problem. Early Buddhadharma was not a religion, was dogma-free and comes from Dharma (Universal nature of Reality or Truth) traditions in India. Mind needs to be unattached to views and directed to universal mind, truth, wisdom, reality.

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Yes it's a new concept, I think at its best based around critical openmindedness.

always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

@DougsDharma

Жыл бұрын

Maybe so!

Howerver, talking about noble persons, buddha's words always mentioned some next 7 lifes, 3 lifes, 1 life or never come back again. It exactly not about the same person or same one. That is extreme fault view. It is dependent origination dhamma.

@DougsDharma

7 жыл бұрын

Yes, it isn't the same person and it isn't a different person. But there is supposed to be some causal link between lives, along the lines of dependent origination.

Please stop with the edits. Keep it real. I suspect Buddha might say something similar 😉

@DougsDharma

2 жыл бұрын

Yes this was one of my earlier videos, it’s a matter of time and experience. 😉

I can only speak for myself. If there were no reincarnation, i would be much more reckless and immoral.

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks Ctw, if you feel belief in rebirth makes you a better person then great! 🙂

@ggstylz

4 жыл бұрын

I guess you can’t stop a belief just because there’s no evidence for it but I’d prefer the challenge of developing faith within myself to rely on being a better person than relying on something external to motivate me. That belief could also be viewed as an attachment. I often see absence of some key aspects of the Buddha’s teachings when perusing articles or watching videos on Buddhism. One of the most important being that the Buddha taught that an individual should not worship him or pray for any external intervention whatsoever in the hope of having their needs fulfilled. He taught that this possibility does not exist and that karma works from a neutral point of view. I guess this would be part and parcel of learning not to crave to mitigate suffering and accepting things that are out of one’s control.

Buddha would say what Mara (The Evil One) would say ...LIFE IS PAIN...TEMPORARY....BUT ENDLESS since REBIRTH Compared to Hinduism Yoga...Buddhism is sadly lacking much

@DougsDharma

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for your thoughts AtlasandLiberty. What do you feel is lacking?

First you need to be a Buddha before you can say what Buddha would say