"When Buddhist modernists say that Buddhism isn’t a religion and try to use science to justify Buddhism, that’s an instance of misunderstanding what religion is and what science is." @evantthompsonhttps://buff.ly/38Xyr2o
Yes, if we just take those ideas out of context. Anatman has both descriptive and normative aspects. Descriptive: anatman is the denial that there is a permanent & unchanging self or soul [1]
-
-
Normative: one should dis-identify with everything making up the body and mind and treat it all as not-self. The normative aspect is ethical/religious/soteriological, not scientific [2]
-
Also, the Buddha insisted on both anatman and karma. Karma isn’t compatible with science. If we drop karma and just have anatman, that’s much closer to materialism than Buddhism [3]
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.