Jez wrote:

"Del" <jfacts@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:1120966117.764262.85830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Jez wrote:

"Del" <jfacts@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:1119598965.204951.253940 @g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:

Jez wrote:

"Del" <jfacts@earthlink.net> wrote in
news:1119044539.680109.242760 @o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

Jez wrote:

abnermintz@earthlink.net (Abner Mintz) wrote i n
news:1gy7lws.1k1txy1e38ymgN%abnermintz@earthlink.net:

societopia.net <societopia@societopia.net> wrote:

Snippage.....

I thought that atheism was the rejection of religions

altogether.

Nope - it's not believing in any gods. There are
atheistic

religions

- and religious atheists can belong to them, while no
n-religious atheists don't belong to them. For instance,
it's possible to

be

an atheis tic buddhist.

Hmmmm, I've heard that said before, but no, Buddhists are no
t

atheists.

He said it is possi ble to be a n atheistic buddhist
and that is true. In fact "Buddha preached a religion
devoid of the supernatural...For all appeal to the
supernatural and reliance thereon amounted, he felt,
to looking for shortcuts, easy answ e rs, simple
solutions that could only divert attention from
the hard, practical task of self-advance."
-- -- Smith, Huston. The Religions of Man.
New York: Harper & Row, 1958. p. 107-108

Ok, so what.

So you said that Buddhists are not atheists when it is
clear that they very well can be.

I don't think so.

Ah. Well that's the important thing.

Indeed, what you think doesn't matter ***** to my life, what I think
does.

But if you want to think so, fine.

Likewise it is fine if you don't wish your beliefs
to be inhibited by reality.

Buddhism is a religion. Period.

I said Buddhists can be atheist.

Budd hists are not atheists, they worship the system of

religion set forth by the early follower s of some guy who
ended up being called 'Buddha.'.

So what. That doesn't make them not-atheist.

Really ?

To "worship the system of religion set forth by the early
followers of some guy who ended up being called 'Buddha'"
says nothing about a belief in a deity. Theism is that belief.
Atheism is the lack of that belief.

So what is their goal of 'enlightenment', meeting 'God' which they
call 'the Void' or some such crap.

The ones who believe in a "god" don't believe it to be a
personal being who created the universe. They believe
in something called the Godhead or Nirvana. So is that
a god?

Regardless, all I'm saying is that some Buddhist
s are atheists.

Anyway I said that Buddists don't have to be theists/ can be
atheists.

So their Buddha is not a deity to them ?

Not to Theravada Buddhists.

Uh-huh. i don't think so,

Don't take my word for it. See the book I reffered to:

Smith, Huston. The Religions of Man. New York:
Harper & Row, 1958. pgs 90-159 and specifically
p. 138 where he describes the difference between
Theravada and Mahayana Buddhists

from what I've read of Buddhism they have
fucking thousands of 'Deities'.

Isn't that Hinduism?

what of the tales of the night of Buddhas 'enlightenment' where he
meets various demons and deities ? They were lies ?

Beats the hell out of me. However "Buddha preached
a religion devoid of the supernatural. He condemned
all forms of divination, soothsaying and forecasting
as low arts, and refused to allow his monks to play
around with any form of superhuman power..." etc.

Ibid.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn-11-tb0.html

'This discourse explores the role of miracles and conversations with
heavenly beings as a possible basis for faith and belief. The Buddha
does not deny the reality of such experiences, but he points out that
- of all possible mirac les - the only reliable one is the miracle of
instruction in the proper training of the mind. As for heavenly
beings, they are subject to greed, anger, and delusion, and so the
information they give - especially with regard to the miracle of
instruction - is not necessarily trustworthy.'

.........{But he doesn't deny they exist !}

Says the person who authored the web page. Interesting that
you have unqualified faith in what a web pages says but are
skeptical of a book on the subject.

Regardless, an atheist
isn't someone who says there are no gods. An atheist is
someone who doesn't believe in the existence of gods.

' Thus the only valid basis for faith is the instruction that, when
followed, brings about the end of one's own mental defilements. The
tale that concludes the discourse is one of the finest examples of
the early Buddhist sense of humor.'

(The Passing Away & Re-appearance of Beings)

"With his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished,
free from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
imperturbability, he directs and inclines it to knowledge of the
passing away and re-appearance of beings. He sees - by means of the
divine eye, purified and surpassing the human - beings passing away
and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior,
beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with
their kamma: 'These beings - who were endowed with bad conduct of
body, speech, and mind, who reviled the noble ones, held wro ng views
and undertook actions under the influence of wrong views - with the
break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the plane of
deprivation, the bad destination, the lower realms, in hell. But
these beings - who were endowed with good conduct of body, speech,
and mind, who did not revile the noble ones, who held right views and
undertook actions under the influence of right views - with the
break-up of the body, after death, have re-appeared in the good
destinations, in the heavenly world.' Thus - by means of the divine
eye, purified and surpassing the human - he sees beings passing away
and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and superior,
beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance with
their kamma. Just as if there were a tall building in the central
square [of a town], and a man with good eyesight standing on top of
it were to see people entering a house, leaving it, walking along the
street, and sitting in the central square. The thought would occur to
him, 'These people are entering a house, leaving it, walking along
the streets, and sitting in the central square.' In the same way -
with his mind thus concentrated, purified, and bright, unblemished, f
ree from defects, pliant, malleable, steady, and attained to
imperturbability - the monk directs and inclines it to knowledge of
the passing away and re- appearance of beings. He sees - by means of
the divine eye, purified and surpassing the hu man - beings passing
away and re-appearing, and he discerns how they are inferior and
superior, beautiful and ugly, fortunate and unfortunate in accordance
with their kamma...

"This, too, is called the miracle of instruction.

So perhaps you can explain what is meant by,
'He sees - by means of the divine eye, purified and surpassing the
human',
which seems to me an admittance of deity !

Do you even know who wrote this? Regardless, what
I said is that some buddhists are atheist. How does
this conflict with that?

.........from the same text....

[...]

Can you explain why he mentions gods so often in that chapter ?

Better yet, maybe you should familiarise yourself with the shitty
crap they call, 'Theravada Buddhism'.

I'll stick to reliable sources if it is all the same to you.

Most atheists are atheists precisely because they don't 'follow'
anybody but think for themselves. I usually try to give people like
you the benefit of the doubt that they do not realise how patronising
they sound. The fact, however, is that you are being patronising to
all atheists as well as to Richo, to whom you are responding.

Perhaps you would care to apologise to us.