Scan barcode
A review by hellhoundharry
Buddhism Without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor
4.0
I simply have to reread this someday!
I came across this book while searching for books on meditation, and not only did this one provide me with some meditation practices, but also very interesting philosophical questions and topics.
Here and there I get the feeling that Stephen is trying to sell me his version of agnostic buddhism, which wasn't what I expected, but then again: The title is "Buddhism without Beliefs" after all.
Another large problem I have with how he uses some of Buddhas quotes from the dhammapada to bring forward a point, sort of like "This is how Buddha thought about this and that". For example when Stephen talks about rebirth he is referring to it as an psychological experience, rather than a spiritual one. That it doesn't mean you're physically reborn but your personality is altered in such a way that talking about "rebirth" is not a bad way to explain it. So far I am with him on this one! And he claims that the Buddha might have meant the same thing.
The guy in me who was studying comparative religion wants to get up and cry out "Objection!".
Siddharta Gautama had been gone for ages when the Dhammapada was written, most of his teachings that appear in the text was stuff told orally. There is absolutely no way to make the claim "This is what he meant", just as much as I can't say that it wasn't what he meant, unless we have extensive notes.
However, that is only a minor thing I have a problem with, other than that I really enjoyed this book!
I came across this book while searching for books on meditation, and not only did this one provide me with some meditation practices, but also very interesting philosophical questions and topics.
Here and there I get the feeling that Stephen is trying to sell me his version of agnostic buddhism, which wasn't what I expected, but then again: The title is "Buddhism without Beliefs" after all.
Another large problem I have with how he uses some of Buddhas quotes from the dhammapada to bring forward a point, sort of like "This is how Buddha thought about this and that". For example when Stephen talks about rebirth he is referring to it as an psychological experience, rather than a spiritual one. That it doesn't mean you're physically reborn but your personality is altered in such a way that talking about "rebirth" is not a bad way to explain it. So far I am with him on this one! And he claims that the Buddha might have meant the same thing.
The guy in me who was studying comparative religion wants to get up and cry out "Objection!".
Siddharta Gautama had been gone for ages when the Dhammapada was written, most of his teachings that appear in the text was stuff told orally. There is absolutely no way to make the claim "This is what he meant", just as much as I can't say that it wasn't what he meant, unless we have extensive notes.
However, that is only a minor thing I have a problem with, other than that I really enjoyed this book!