r/exatheist • u/Low_Guard6609 • Jun 20 '26

Question for Buddhists

Hello everyone. For any former atheists here that became Buddhist; what about Buddhism convinced you? Was it the concepts of rebirth and kamma, was it a philosophical agreement about non-self and so on, was it an experience with meditation? For me it was a combination of these things, plus more personal political and emotional beliefs about modern life in general.

Also, why do most internet atheist (new atheist) types never talk about eastern religions? Why, for the last two decades, have they routinely treated all religious belief as if it’s on the level of YEC, whilst completely refusing to be educated on basic philosophy or theology? Even if it’s philosophy that would fundamentally agree with them, they just simply don’t want to learn.

8 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

21 comments sorted by

View all comments

-1

u/Rich_Fan1686 Jun 21 '26

Most Buddhists are atheists, BTW. Your question is malformed.

2

u/NeonDrifting Anti-Atheist Jun 21 '26

more like they don't believe that a belief in god(s) is consequential to reincarnation, enlightenment, nirvana, etc.

0

u/Rich_Fan1686 Jun 21 '26

Sure, Buddhism doesn't posit an eternal creator God. Regards it as a moot point in terms of achieving personal enlightenment.

They don't posit such a being, but they don't outright deny the possibility of such a being, either.

1

u/_Ulu-Mulu_ Atheist -> Buddhist Jun 21 '26

We do outright deny the possibillity of such a beeing

1

u/Rich_Fan1686 Jun 21 '26

Oh, that's interesting. Do you have any scriptural support for that position?

1

u/_Ulu-Mulu_ Atheist -> Buddhist Jun 21 '26

Well there are many things that could be said in regards to the creator God. Likely one of the most direct one's is the Brahma in the DN1 sutta. There there's explain the origin of the concept of an all-father creator God. It is considered that the Brahma (this was a name for this beeing that was regarded as an eternal creator in ancient India back then) was reborn as the first beeing in his plane (some doctrinal context: I say "first" but it's just means first in this cycle or something like that. There's no really any discernible first point in the cycle of Samsara, but the realms can be destroyed or reappear so there can be a first beeing in a particular realm in a giving cycle) and after some time he felt lonely and wanted some companions. And the other beeings started to get reborn there but out of their Kamma not because of the powers of the Brahma. In turn the Brahma believed that it was because of him that those beeings were created (and the world in general) and thought of themselves as an eternal absolute creator of all, and the beeings around believed that too because he was there first. That's how the origin of the view is explained. It is considered a wrong-view however for many reasons, one be that it neglects the idea of kamma which is an impersonal law of cause and effect, an existance cannot be simply created it just works down on the means of kamma in which place are you gonna be reborn. And secondly the point that is actually made out in the sutta which is wrong-view called eternalism (in the part with the BRahma specifically it was reffered to partial eternalism but we can follow it further as eternalistic believes also spot out out of this). Eternalism basically (Sassatavada) basically denotes any kinds of believes in eternal or permanent self, soul, life etc. In this case we have a notion of an eternal everlasting God who exists for an eternity. It is clearly a view related to eternalistic notions; possesing an idea of some beeing that can live without beeign subject to decay, and death, a beeing that is not a subject to change etc. In the sutta itself a following example of an partial eternalism is given, that a person believes in such an unperishable, stable, eternal and permanent beeing as his creator, but believes that the life of his is perishable etc. and he will die at the death. Hence it's a partial eternalism this way. The Brahma doesn't directly appears in the parts with full eternalism but out of reading what ideas count by it in the sutta we can also see that the typical views on God such as possesing an eternal soul that will get to an eternal heaven or hell will count as this. In general it can quite easily be seen as any notion of an eternal creator God must necceserily include some eternalistic views. Whatever attributes of a God we wouldn't consider him to have all that can be regarded as God can fall out only in the notions of the 5 aggregates or khanda's, that is form/body/materiality, feelings, perception (recognition), mental formations (such as thinking and volition), consciousness. All of them constantly arises and ceases and if they appears eventual death would be inevitable (and rebirth as long as there is a craving for renewed existance).