A very sensible approach to Buddhism and the core of what the Buddha taught without all the superstitious and mystical nonsense or reinterpretations of later sects.
Fully agree that practise bears fruit best when grounded in a meaningful ethical life. However, disagree with the thought that further "contextualising" is necessary. There is already far too much intellectualisation going on in the West. What is perhaps needed is dedication to practise. The Buddha instituted monasticism for this reason. There is no getting around this. If someone from the West happens to become established in insight, "contextualisation" for modern times will probably occur as a matter of course as this person guides others in their respective practise. A good presentation overall though. Thank you.
Contextualization in the east emphasizes practice over intellectual investigation. Both can be supported with a religious approach, altho the latter is less likely to accept on faith.
I think it is important to separate conventional reality from absolute reality - I feel these two separate realities are often mixed up in these types of talks. These two realities refer to knowledge and wisdom. Scientific understanding, the arts, creativity, etc., operate in the conventional world. What the Buddha taught is wisdom. Even if the Buddha had been provided with a microscope, and were given lessons on cell biology and neurons, his teachings would not change.
I've never read in the suttas where the Buddha taught two realities. However, I've found it a very common teaching from the later schools of Buddhism based on or heavily influenced from the commentaries of the suttas (the abhidhamma) rather than the suttas themselves. I have found that the two realities doctrine complicates and alters the dhamma in ways that the Buddha so carefully avoided. I would agree with you about the microscope. Science, biology and neurons are just now catching up with the brilliance of the Buddha!
Paul Howell: The two realities are very useful to clearly understand Buddhist teachings. I suggest that you take a look at the following article: Karunamuni, N.D. (2015). The Five-Aggregate Model of the Mind. SAGE Open, 5 (2). (the pdf is available over the internet).
It seems that commenters with Right View are few. I liked Batchelor when i first read it, but now I recognize the truth in what Goenka said to Kornfeld when he declined an invitation to Barre.
As khyentse norbu says " Buddhism without the cultural baggages" but Batchelor "rethinks", speculates and makes way too many assumptions. Using words like " I think, might be, I feel etc" His is not Secular Buddhism but Speculative Buddhism
Modern research on Near Death Experience by Raymond moody, reincarnation memories by Ian Stevenson/Jim trucker and past lives regression by Brian Weiss all independently but coincidentally show that our consciousness survive death, we live many lives and our thoughts and actions matter in the hereafter. So be kind and helpful to others, be virtuous, meditate and cultivate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Cheers.❤
O, venerable, i heard once there was a New York City, people there were so vibrant. Are they hungry? Are they not hungry? Are they full? Are they not full? Are they neither hungry nor full? Are they both hungry and full?
During the Q & A, Batchelor talks about, "emotions coming out of the neurons in the brain." This seems to be a revealing of himself as essentially a materialist at heart. I think he's more Charvaka than Buddhist.
Sigh, yet again someone that leaves out the jhanas and misunderstands what the point of renunciation is. I'm saddened by this from someone who has studied the Pali Canon. Flat out, the ethics is only to make sure that one no longer creates bad kamma /krama. It's only part of the picture. Another part is impermanence. The realization that all things that happen /come about cease. Even emotional states. Another part is to have the realization that finding joy in external things is pointless. Partly due to impermanence. But also because one can learn to generate levels of joy and happiness at will whenever one wants. (jhanas) This is partly where the ethics comes in. It's about learning to find happiness and joy by being a loving and kind person.. Ergo Metta. But, it has nothing to do with what happens externally when you are in that state. It is about the internal state of being that comes from it. Then we go back to impermanence and realize that even these states are temporary. That really, the goal is equanimity to all things that happen internally and externally. That this leads to nibbana, ergo the flame going out. The Pali Canon states all of this very clearly. Granted, it mostly calls the jhanas the absorbsitions. (sp?)
love Batchelor, but as soon as he starts using words like "mystery," and "wonder," in describing existential mindfulness meditations i get a little skittish...
About the time he starts talking about the Greek ideas concerning ethos, I start think that if he wants to redefine something, why doesn't he start with Judaism or Christianity? Better yet, instead of getting rid of the parts of Buddhist thought that he feels uncomfortable with like rebirth, why not just offer up something from whole new cloth? Just call it Batchelorism.
Scott Campbell He is trying to create a storm in a teacup...by dissecting the interpretation ad infanitum he creates doubt..he needs to live...and create income. I listen to try and find the gem of knowledge...but im still listening. However, this in the end is low level human stuff...where we ignore the core message and create sparks just for the sake of creating sparks...and then say "look eveyone something new...btw please buy my book" many ideas are coterminious and many people have similar thoughts. no doubt Stephen would be silent if he had already attained enlightenment after 9 years being a monk.so it boils down to his own mind having an inability to settle down...sometimes to complete a journey you need to accept stuff as it is...or you will always follow a side street and eventually loose your way again. Too much doubt will just create suffering... and as we know ignorance is bliss...to an extent that's why simple lives are better for us.
i was enthralled by his book title, buddhism without belief. but the more i dig in, the more i feel he has been trying to instill new beliefs into so called buddhism. funny. but i appreciate any academic study attempts. just curious when he will drop off meditation, vipassana from buddhism. kidding. i think i knew the answer from the very beginning. anyhow, i cheer up him doing his work. i love to learn the real story of buddha ..objectively though.
Scott Campbell He has absolutely no interest in Christianity. He comes from an atheist family. But his work is influenced by ‘After Virtue’ by Alasdair Macyntire, ‘After Christianity’ by Gianni Vattimo, ‘After God’ by Don Cuppitt, ‘After Mindfulness’ by Manu Bazzano.
And can you ?, I can read and pronounce pali's sounds closer to what it would have sounded like. My language being Indo-Aryan like Pāli. Would you give a orientalised and "siniticised" pronounciation of Pāli's phonology.
I do wonder how useful that would be - very few scholars of the teachings of Jesus have any real clue about Aramaic, which was His language. Surely it is about the deeper spirit of the teaching. A spiritual path is not an academic discipline, it is path of feeling, practice, engagement and emotion. You could look at Fr Richard Rohr on this very point with regard to the relationship between Christian theologians and the study/knowledge of Greek, Hebrew and Latin... which he thinks might not be as vital as some people seem to feel.
how interesting talk! Stephen Batchelor is an excellent teacher. Thanks for the dana of sharing this presentation on line
These are intellectual types and more heart and spirit into there lives through helping others ...
A very sensible approach to Buddhism and the core of what the Buddha taught without all the superstitious and mystical nonsense or reinterpretations of later sects.
Thank you for this video! It's full of nuggets! Also interesting to hear Stephen recount some of his early formative experiences.
51:00 I take "Elsa" as a handy candle on my path.
Embrace - Let go - See or Stop - Act
gracias por este video, me encanto
Brilliant as usual
Fully agree that practise bears fruit best when grounded in a meaningful ethical life. However, disagree with the thought that further "contextualising" is necessary. There is already far too much intellectualisation going on in the West. What is perhaps needed is dedication to practise. The Buddha instituted monasticism for this reason. There is no getting around this. If someone from the West happens to become established in insight, "contextualisation" for modern times will probably occur as a matter of course as this person guides others in their respective practise.
A good presentation overall though. Thank you.
Contextualization in the east emphasizes practice over intellectual investigation. Both can be supported with a religious approach, altho the latter is less likely to accept on faith.
I think it is important to separate conventional reality from absolute reality - I feel these two separate realities are often mixed up in these types of talks. These two realities refer to knowledge and wisdom. Scientific understanding, the arts, creativity, etc., operate in the conventional world. What the Buddha taught is wisdom. Even if the Buddha had been provided with a microscope, and were given lessons on cell biology and neurons, his teachings would not change.
Completely agree
I've never read in the suttas where the Buddha taught two realities. However, I've found it a very common teaching from the later schools of Buddhism based on or heavily influenced from the commentaries of the suttas (the abhidhamma) rather than the suttas themselves. I have found that the two realities doctrine complicates and alters the dhamma in ways that the Buddha so carefully avoided. I would agree with you about the microscope. Science, biology and neurons are just now catching up with the brilliance of the Buddha!
Paul Howell: The two realities are very useful to clearly understand Buddhist teachings. I suggest that you take a look at the following article:
Karunamuni, N.D. (2015). The Five-Aggregate Model of the Mind. SAGE Open, 5 (2). (the pdf is available over the internet).
There is only one reality (dharma.) The Dalai Lama has said that if science disagrees with Buddhism then Buddhism must change. (paraphrased)
@@thepaulhowell lokuttara vs lokeya. are they in the text then? If so, it might be applicable. imho. thank you.
It seems that commenters with Right View are few. I liked Batchelor when i first read it, but now I recognize the truth in what Goenka said to Kornfeld when he declined an invitation to Barre.
As khyentse norbu says " Buddhism without the cultural baggages"
but Batchelor "rethinks", speculates and makes way too many assumptions. Using words like " I think, might be, I feel etc"
His is not Secular Buddhism but Speculative Buddhism
Starts at 7:45!
Thank you 🙏
Modern research on Near Death Experience by Raymond moody, reincarnation memories by Ian Stevenson/Jim trucker and past lives regression by Brian Weiss all independently but coincidentally show that our consciousness survive death, we live many lives and our thoughts and actions matter in the hereafter.
So be kind and helpful to others, be virtuous, meditate and cultivate ourselves to higher spiritual levels. Cheers.❤
Why complicate Buddhism
You should get Shoryu Bradley of Gyobutsuji Zen Monastery in America on :)
O, venerable, i heard once there was a New York City, people there were so vibrant.
Are they hungry?
Are they not hungry?
Are they full?
Are they not full?
Are they neither hungry nor full?
Are they both hungry and full?
During the Q & A, Batchelor talks about, "emotions coming out of the neurons in the brain." This seems to be a revealing of himself as essentially a materialist at heart. I think he's more Charvaka than Buddhist.
So you think, a Man of his stature, background and experience didnt realise that but you did. Sounds bit delusional, doesnt it
@@gyurmethlodroe1774 Obviously not to my ears, and your "stature" argument reeks of the same idiocy of guys worried about the size of their penis.
Sigh, yet again someone that leaves out the jhanas and misunderstands what the point of renunciation is.
I'm saddened by this from someone who has studied the Pali Canon.
Flat out, the ethics is only to make sure that one no longer creates bad kamma /krama. It's only part of the picture.
Another part is impermanence. The realization that all things that happen /come about cease. Even emotional states.
Another part is to have the realization that finding joy in external things is pointless. Partly due to impermanence. But also because one can learn to generate levels of joy and happiness at will whenever one wants. (jhanas)
This is partly where the ethics comes in. It's about learning to find happiness and joy by being a loving and kind person.. Ergo Metta. But, it has nothing to do with what happens externally when you are in that state. It is about the internal state of being that comes from it.
Then we go back to impermanence and realize that even these states are temporary. That really, the goal is equanimity to all things that happen internally and externally.
That this leads to nibbana, ergo the flame going out.
The Pali Canon states all of this very clearly.
Granted, it mostly calls the jhanas the absorbsitions. (sp?)
Buddha (1)☝️🙏🙏🙏💚❤️💚
love Batchelor, but as soon as he starts using words like "mystery," and "wonder," in describing existential mindfulness meditations i get a little skittish...
Excellent example of how "Secular" becomes a religion. Along with Atheism. And also "Batchelorism".
I proudly, if jokingly, described myself as a Batchelorist just the other day!
About the time he starts talking about the Greek ideas concerning ethos, I start think that if he wants to redefine something, why doesn't he start with Judaism or Christianity? Better yet, instead of getting rid of the parts of Buddhist thought that he feels uncomfortable with like rebirth, why not just offer up something from whole new cloth? Just call it Batchelorism.
Scott Campbell He is trying to create a storm in a teacup...by dissecting the interpretation ad infanitum he creates doubt..he needs to live...and create income. I listen to try and find the gem of knowledge...but im still listening. However, this in the end is low level human stuff...where we ignore the core message and create sparks just for the sake of creating sparks...and then say "look eveyone something new...btw please buy my book" many ideas are coterminious and many people have similar thoughts. no doubt Stephen would be silent if he had already attained enlightenment after 9 years being a monk.so it boils down to his own mind having an inability to settle down...sometimes to complete a journey you need to accept stuff as it is...or you will always follow a side street and eventually loose your way again. Too much doubt will just create suffering...
and as we know ignorance is bliss...to an extent that's why simple lives are better for us.
His background is Buddhism so why would he start with the other 2?
i was enthralled by his book title, buddhism without belief. but the more i dig in, the more i feel he has been trying to instill new beliefs into so called buddhism. funny. but i appreciate any academic study attempts. just curious when he will drop off meditation, vipassana from buddhism. kidding. i think i knew the answer from the very beginning. anyhow, i cheer up him doing his work. i love to learn the real story of buddha ..objectively though.
Scott Campbell He has absolutely no interest in Christianity. He comes from an atheist family. But his work is influenced by ‘After Virtue’ by Alasdair Macyntire, ‘After Christianity’ by Gianni Vattimo, ‘After God’ by Don Cuppitt, ‘After Mindfulness’ by Manu Bazzano.
Mr. Batchelor speaks as if he were an expert in Pāli canon.
But he can not even read Pāli texts.
really?
And can you ?, I can read and pronounce pali's sounds closer to what it would have sounded like. My language being Indo-Aryan like Pāli. Would you give a orientalised and "siniticised" pronounciation of Pāli's phonology.
^^^^^^ OH SHIT!!!! how about that SJWs!!!!!
Hmm then how did he write this book? rebelsaintdharma.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/4.-batchelor-pali-canon.pdf
I do wonder how useful that would be - very few scholars of the teachings of Jesus have any real clue about Aramaic, which was His language. Surely it is about the deeper spirit of the teaching. A spiritual path is not an academic discipline, it is path of feeling, practice, engagement and emotion. You could look at Fr Richard Rohr on this very point with regard to the relationship between Christian theologians and the study/knowledge of Greek, Hebrew and Latin... which he thinks might not be as vital as some people seem to feel.