My review of "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor
Stephen Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs" was like trying to take a drink from a fire hose for me. There were SO many concepts that were being given left and right in such eloquent ways I could barely keep up, let alone think of something to write. I wish we had spent more time reading this book so we could examine what we were learning more thoroughly. I'll try my best to explain what I've gleaned though!
The concept of thinking of the 4 Noble Truths as a task list rather than a belief is something that has always come natural to me. I frequently refer to my flowchart that I made, and think about how it applies to my situation. How am I suffering? What am I craving? By simply asking these question I've already declawed the suffering I have. Its not a formless monster; it has boundaries and limitations and it is defined and recognized. By doing this, you start to let go of the problem. It almost certainly wasn't as big of a deal as you believed it to be. We just start seeing things that are happening in the beautiful "now". We naturally start to practice the 8-fold path when this happens, and it helps maintain this level of peace.
That peace is often called "awakening" or "enlightenment". This is a concept that has a lot of pre-conceived notions attached to it. Most people have a caricatured version of what enlightenment is in their mind, which is a false understanding. Enlightenment isn't something that you find by meditating alone on a mountain for decades. This prevents people from truly feeling the peace of enlightenment. Don't get caught up and make it out to be something its not. Batchelor alluded to a belief that I've heard elsewhere called "The Gateless Gate". Essentially, its like you are going somewhere and you anticipate to walk through a gate so you can definitively say "I am here", "this is enlightenment". He views Enlightenment more as a process that is to be worked on and cultivated.
The concept of Buddha being constrained by his time was a fascinating one to me. It shows that he did his best to convey a message despite his time, place, and culture. How he said it wasn't important, it was what he was saying that is important. Matthew 13:31–32 is a great example of this in Christianity. The verses say that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. We now know that to not be true, but as far as Jesus knew for his time, place, and culture, it was true. Despite that, it doesn't negate his message that very small things can grow to be very big.
There are people who get caught up in the letter of the law instead of observing the spirit of the law. When you codify things, you seek to preserve it for future generations. The desire to pass this knowledge on is a noble one, but when you do this, it loses it's savor. This loss of savor is so essential, that the Taoists made sure to say that if you try to codify or define it you've already lost as the first chapter of the Tao Te Ching. When you codify and institutionalize things, we restrict the ability to change and we lose a lot. If we tried to view a whole life based on a single snapshot, there would be so much left out. When you codify and define it opens up the door for hierarchies, which opens the door for authoritarianism, which stifles creativeness, imagination, and a more proper understanding of how things work. Things are always changing, and different cultures and generations should be encouraged to find that peace in their own way instead of conforming to the ideologies of certain sects based from certain times. We should be open and free to change opinions and views, because we are constantly gaining new understandings. Things should be understood practically and experientially, not conceptually in ceremonies. Putting things in boxes prevents you from seeing things as they may really be. Let things happen naturally and free-flowing. Don't force it, don't do regulate it, just let it happen.
I also very much loved the idea that we often seclude ourselves away from the world in bliss just as Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) had done to him by his father. When we hear our phone buzz, ding, or ring, how quick do we check it? How anxious are we to see it? It is almost like an addiction with the little dopamine rush we get. When we hear that we're able to get our next fix we crave it. Some say that this is the millennial version of a cigarette in terms of how often its craved. I would be lying if I said I didn't struggle with it myself. I loved the quote on page 26 where Batchelor almost gives a solution to this when he says "without stamping it out or denying it, craving may be renounced the way a child renounces sandcastles: not by repressing the desire to make them but by turning aside from an endeavor that no longer holds any interest". This can be a hard cycle to break though - the more you dislike something, the more suffering it causes, which makes you want to get rid of it, which causes more suffering. It can be a very self-destructive cycle, which can be ultimately solved by lettings things just be. The practice of letting things just be can be an incredibly difficult one, however. Its not on my reading list for my ministry course, but "Refuge Recovery" tackles breaking free from addictions and cravings like this through a Dharma-based method. I am definitely interested in seeing what that book has to say.
With so many things happening in life that are constantly fighting for our attention, it can be hard to be mindful. As I was reading pages 57-58, I was reminded of this picture. It perfectly sums up the concept of mindfulness.
The concept that likely resonated most with me was the idea that when Agnosticism and Buddhism come together they make each other more pure. He touches a bit on how Buddha had been raised to believe in reincarnation and had no reason not to believe in rebirth at the time, and so he kept the belief. He even went as far as to say that disbelief in it would lead to rampant immorality, almost exactly paralleling what Christians were saying about their beliefs during the Enlightenment period. Today, hundreds of years after both the Buddha and the enlightenment period, we can do a bit more critical thinking based on the musings of the philosophers from the past centuries. We of course see that a disbelief in rebirth, heaven, and hell doesn't lead to immoral behavior, and a belief in them doesn't guarantee moral behavior either. Many believe that there is not sufficient evidence to believe in reincarnation as Buddha did, and so discard of its believe to focus on more important things we more readily know to be true. Many religious Buddhists disapprove of this, but Buddha himself compelled us to not believe things blindly and to rely on our understandings and to strive to have correct ones. However, the simple position of "I don't know" is just as valid. A quote commonly attributed to Roman Emperor/philosopher Marcus Aurelius puts it best:
This was a fantastic book. Besides the one that tells the history of Siddhartha Gautama, this is the only book from my course that I will actively read again. If I had to recommend one book to someone, "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor would be it.
The concept of thinking of the 4 Noble Truths as a task list rather than a belief is something that has always come natural to me. I frequently refer to my flowchart that I made, and think about how it applies to my situation. How am I suffering? What am I craving? By simply asking these question I've already declawed the suffering I have. Its not a formless monster; it has boundaries and limitations and it is defined and recognized. By doing this, you start to let go of the problem. It almost certainly wasn't as big of a deal as you believed it to be. We just start seeing things that are happening in the beautiful "now". We naturally start to practice the 8-fold path when this happens, and it helps maintain this level of peace.
That peace is often called "awakening" or "enlightenment". This is a concept that has a lot of pre-conceived notions attached to it. Most people have a caricatured version of what enlightenment is in their mind, which is a false understanding. Enlightenment isn't something that you find by meditating alone on a mountain for decades. This prevents people from truly feeling the peace of enlightenment. Don't get caught up and make it out to be something its not. Batchelor alluded to a belief that I've heard elsewhere called "The Gateless Gate". Essentially, its like you are going somewhere and you anticipate to walk through a gate so you can definitively say "I am here", "this is enlightenment". He views Enlightenment more as a process that is to be worked on and cultivated.
The concept of Buddha being constrained by his time was a fascinating one to me. It shows that he did his best to convey a message despite his time, place, and culture. How he said it wasn't important, it was what he was saying that is important. Matthew 13:31–32 is a great example of this in Christianity. The verses say that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. We now know that to not be true, but as far as Jesus knew for his time, place, and culture, it was true. Despite that, it doesn't negate his message that very small things can grow to be very big.
There are people who get caught up in the letter of the law instead of observing the spirit of the law. When you codify things, you seek to preserve it for future generations. The desire to pass this knowledge on is a noble one, but when you do this, it loses it's savor. This loss of savor is so essential, that the Taoists made sure to say that if you try to codify or define it you've already lost as the first chapter of the Tao Te Ching. When you codify and institutionalize things, we restrict the ability to change and we lose a lot. If we tried to view a whole life based on a single snapshot, there would be so much left out. When you codify and define it opens up the door for hierarchies, which opens the door for authoritarianism, which stifles creativeness, imagination, and a more proper understanding of how things work. Things are always changing, and different cultures and generations should be encouraged to find that peace in their own way instead of conforming to the ideologies of certain sects based from certain times. We should be open and free to change opinions and views, because we are constantly gaining new understandings. Things should be understood practically and experientially, not conceptually in ceremonies. Putting things in boxes prevents you from seeing things as they may really be. Let things happen naturally and free-flowing. Don't force it, don't do regulate it, just let it happen.
I also very much loved the idea that we often seclude ourselves away from the world in bliss just as Siddhartha Gautama (Buddha) had done to him by his father. When we hear our phone buzz, ding, or ring, how quick do we check it? How anxious are we to see it? It is almost like an addiction with the little dopamine rush we get. When we hear that we're able to get our next fix we crave it. Some say that this is the millennial version of a cigarette in terms of how often its craved. I would be lying if I said I didn't struggle with it myself. I loved the quote on page 26 where Batchelor almost gives a solution to this when he says "without stamping it out or denying it, craving may be renounced the way a child renounces sandcastles: not by repressing the desire to make them but by turning aside from an endeavor that no longer holds any interest". This can be a hard cycle to break though - the more you dislike something, the more suffering it causes, which makes you want to get rid of it, which causes more suffering. It can be a very self-destructive cycle, which can be ultimately solved by lettings things just be. The practice of letting things just be can be an incredibly difficult one, however. Its not on my reading list for my ministry course, but "Refuge Recovery" tackles breaking free from addictions and cravings like this through a Dharma-based method. I am definitely interested in seeing what that book has to say.
With so many things happening in life that are constantly fighting for our attention, it can be hard to be mindful. As I was reading pages 57-58, I was reminded of this picture. It perfectly sums up the concept of mindfulness.
The concept that likely resonated most with me was the idea that when Agnosticism and Buddhism come together they make each other more pure. He touches a bit on how Buddha had been raised to believe in reincarnation and had no reason not to believe in rebirth at the time, and so he kept the belief. He even went as far as to say that disbelief in it would lead to rampant immorality, almost exactly paralleling what Christians were saying about their beliefs during the Enlightenment period. Today, hundreds of years after both the Buddha and the enlightenment period, we can do a bit more critical thinking based on the musings of the philosophers from the past centuries. We of course see that a disbelief in rebirth, heaven, and hell doesn't lead to immoral behavior, and a belief in them doesn't guarantee moral behavior either. Many believe that there is not sufficient evidence to believe in reincarnation as Buddha did, and so discard of its believe to focus on more important things we more readily know to be true. Many religious Buddhists disapprove of this, but Buddha himself compelled us to not believe things blindly and to rely on our understandings and to strive to have correct ones. However, the simple position of "I don't know" is just as valid. A quote commonly attributed to Roman Emperor/philosopher Marcus Aurelius puts it best:
This was a fantastic book. Besides the one that tells the history of Siddhartha Gautama, this is the only book from my course that I will actively read again. If I had to recommend one book to someone, "Buddhism Without Beliefs" by Stephen Batchelor would be it.
Comments
Post a Comment