Is Buddhism atheistic?
“If Buddhism is called atheism on account of its refusal to take poetry for actual fact, its followers would have no objection to the designation.”
D.T. Suzuki on “God” in Outlines of Mahayana
I received this question as a comment on this post, in response to the above quote.
Q. I am right if I think that Buddhism still believes in the supernatural so it is not atheism? I am taught that Atheism relies on scientific evidences unlike religions that believe in spirits. I am a Christian by the way.
Most important perhaps, in my personal opinion, the designation atheism cannot be applied to Dharmic religions in the first place because it is a reaction to the theism expressed in Abrahamic religions.
- Buddhism and Atheism (for additional Shin perspective, see Amida Buddha)
- Buddhism and the God Idea
- God in Buddhism
- Theism, Atheism, Yoga and Fear written expressly for the benefit of Yogis, Mystics, seekers of direct experience (this isn’t about Buddhism per se, but it’s related and resonates for me a lot - highly recommended)
- Posts tagged with “atheism” at the Secular Buddhist site
- Posts tagged with “atheism” and tagged with “god” at it’s all dhamma.
11 Notes/ Hide
-
yama-bato likes this
-
stillcuriosity likes this
-
parkstepp reblogged this from sharanam
-
vividsnow likes this
-
rhymeswithjay likes this
-
aszend likes this
-
ageofreason likes this
-
refertore likes this
-
atomsandspace likes this
-
lockedupforyearsinameasureofmind likes this
-
sharanam posted this
Within Christianity (the tradition I was raised in and will always be a member of, culturally speaking) it is process theology that most resonates for me. Many would consider this a non-theistic interpretation. But, it’s Christianity without a doubt.
Within Buddhism, you will find those who pray to Amidha Buddha within the Pure Land School, for example, which may appear to onlookers as indistinguishable from praying to a creator God. Then, there are Theravadan interpretations (see, e.g., Buddhadasa Bikkhu) of Buddhism that are more panentheist in nature, e.g., God = the true nature of reality, is equal to the teachings of the Buddha (and many other sages too).
I think D.T. Suzuki’s point here is, scripture, like poetry, conveys meaning through metaphor and imagery. It is not to be taken as literal fact. As such, if one believes that reading is heretical in some way, then Suzuki is accepting of the atheist label.