Beginning with Seth Zuihō Segall’s article, ‘Why I am not a secular Buddhist,’ Seth and Winton Higgins have engaged in a dialogue on SBN about the meaning and value of secular Buddhism. They have discussed the notion of secularity, religion and religious experience, the role of community, and other key issues.
In his reply to Seth Zuihō Segall’s rejoinder in the debate over secular Buddhism Winton Higgins explores the meaning of secularity, religion, and the everyday sublime. He argues that a secular faith is not opposed to religion but is characterized by a deep engagement, a wholehearted commitment, to living this, our one and only life, meaningfully.
Seth Zuihō Segall continues the dialogue on secular Buddhism by offering a rejoinder to Winton Higgins’ response to his article, ‘Why I Am Not a Secular Buddhist.’ Seth discusses the nature of the religious attitude, the role of community and traditions, and his non-dual perspective.
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.
Winton Higgins asserts that Seth Zuihō Segall mistakenly assumes that all secular Buddhists support a ‘scientistic’ form of secular Buddhism which is hostile to religion. In fact, many secular Buddhists advocate an ‘interpretive’ approach which integrates dharmic insights with modern perspectives to promote human flourishing in this life.
