POSTS:
Debate and Dialogue Recommended
Anger, conflict and compassion
Given the anger that many people feel in relation to the tragic events in Ukraine and to violent conflicts in other parts of the world, John Danvers reflects on this powerful emotion and how we might deal with it in a skillful way so that anger is transformed into compassionate action.
The emergence of Navayana Buddhism
Dennis SengTing Oliver argues that despite the wide variety of Buddhisms practised in the west, there are certain common trends within western Buddhism that may be the basis for a new 'yana' or vehicle for practitioners: Navayana Buddhism.
Secular Buddhism as a ‘paradigm shift’
Jonathan Golden uses Kuhn's notion of a 'paradigm shift' to discuss the issue of 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism. He argues that Kuhn's perspective is consistent with Mike Slott's view of truths and tasks; while there are no absolute truths, our beliefs (provisional truth claims) are a necessary precondition for our practice, and practitioners should not be required to make a binary choice between truths and tasks.
Dharma in the shadow of Buddhism: a response to Mike Slott and Winton Higgins
Stephen Batchelor continues the dialogue on 'truths' and 'tasks' in secular Buddhism by framing the discussion from a broader, historical perspective. Stephen argues that the Buddha's radical move was to depart from the truth-based perspective of Brahmanic, Indian culture to teach a fully committed ethical life that is not underwritten by any ultimate truth.
Reexamining ‘truths’ and ‘tasks’ in secular Buddhism
While Stephen Batchelor's emphasis on the pragmatic and ethical meaning of the Buddha’s teachings has been crucial in the development of a secular approach to the dharma, Mike Slott argues that Stephen has not adequately addressed a legitimate concern about the role and meaning of truth in his approach. The secular dharmic path challenges us to assess constantly both our ‘tasks’ and the ‘truths’ on which they are based.
Middle Way Philosophy and Secular Buddhism
Robert M. Ellis explains that his Middle Way Philosophy shares with secular Buddhism a critical approach to the Buddhist tradition, but he argues that ‘secular’ is not a term that provides the criteria we need to skillfully interrogate Buddhism and other traditions.
How do we know if secular Buddhism is the ‘appropriate’ view and path?
While we cannot definitively know that secular Buddhism is the most ‘appropriate’ approach to the dharma in some universal sense, Mike Slott asserts that each individual can determine whether secular Buddhism is an ‘appropriate’ view and path for their own life based on their experiences, interests, and goals.
Why I am not a secular Buddhist
Seth Zuihō Segall considers his 'naturalized' and 'eudaimonic' approach to Buddhism 'close cousins' to secular Buddhism. Yet, he believes that the word 'secular' implies a set of connotations he does not wish to affirm.
EXPLORE BY SECTION
SEARCH THE SITE
RECENT POSTS
