Would a believer of karma and reincarnation...

Would a non theist that believes in karma and reincarnation be classified as an atheist?

What are your thoughts?

V

This is another way of asking the question of whether the Buddha was an atheist.

The answer depends on what you mean by atheist, whether you are going by the strict dictionary definition, or using the word with its full set of connotations, which include skepticism not only toward belief in gods but also towards spirituality in any form, and a belief in classical materialism.

In the first case, the answer is yes. In the second, the answer is no.

Navigator is totally correct in saying it varies greatly to not only the individual but also the sect. Some sects believe in many gods while others are believers that gods are privy to the same cycle of samsara or reincarnation, while others even believe that no gods exist. So it is truly dependent of the type and sect of religion.

Thank you for both of your replies. I guess, I mean an average Joe that believes in karma and reincarnation but not in any gods or Gods or who is even a Buddhist. I ran into one such fellow that believes in no gods yet believes in reincarnation and karma. Yet just like there is no proof for God, heaven or hell, he has no proof for karma and reincarnation. So was wondering if he qualifies as a ‘full atheist’ or do full atheists not believe in such things?

BTW, Pure land Buddhist seem to make Buddha a God as they chant the name ‘Amitabha Buddha’ to enter the pure land upon death. But the schools has some disagreement in that some devotees are self powered while other Purelander’s are other powered. The ‘self powered’ chant the name once to enter the pure land and the ‘other powered’ chant incessantly hoping to catch the Buddha at the time of their death to whisk them to nirvana. (oversimplified)

V

The Buddha himself did not believe in gods, but some Buddhists do, although they say that the gods are part of the illusion and at some point need to be transcended in order to reach enlightenment.

As to whether a person who believes in karma and reincarnation can be considered an atheist, again I say it depends on what you mean by that word. There is a strict denotary meaning to “atheist,” which simply refers to someone who doesn’t believe in gods. But there are also connotations that imply a rejection of all mystical or supernatural or spiritual ideas, and a belief in classical materialism. I don’t see how anyone who believes in karma and reincarnation could be an “atheist” in that sense, but they could be one in the strict denotary sense, because there’s no logical requirement that gods exist in order for karma and reincarnation to happen.

I’m pretty sure if you associate God with Brahman, then Buddha did believe in God.

“ I teach the way to the union with Brahman, I know the way to the supreme union with Brahman, and the path and means leading to Brahman, whereby the world of Brahman may be gained.” - Buddha

As far as the polytheistic gods of India go, Buddha believed they existed, but like humans, were trapped in the wheel of Samsara and in need of enlightenment.

Of course, you have to remember that whenever Buddha references God or the gods, he’s talking about the Hindu understanding thereof. It’s impossible to know what he would have thought about the Judeo-Christian God, since he wasn’t aware of the religion.

In any case, it’s important to note that Buddha was very clear in saying that speculation on the nature or existance of God or gods was not productive to finding spiritual enlightment, and therefore a waste of time.

Yes, your post Navigator pretty much addresses the question in my mind.

I also received a reply from another group

“If someone belives in reincarnation, but thinks it is a natural
process not involving the intervention of a god, then that person is
an atheist. However, I’ve never heard of such a theory; every claim
for reincarnation I’ve encountered involves some power guiding the
soul and assigning a new life.”

V

As Buddhism broke from Hinduism with the concept of anatman or no self, does you reply indicate an early reference to Buddha or later as it seems contradictory to classical Buddhist thought. Albeit there are some contradictions in Buddhism.

V

The quote is from the Pali Cannon, so that’s early Buddhism, I guess. I don’t know enough to say, though.

Anyway…

Here’s another quote that gives a pretty good understanding of Buddha’s attitude toward God, as well as something we can directly cross reference with the Judeo-Christian God:

[i]"Some recognize me as Sun, as Moon; some as a reincarnation of the ancient sages; some as one of “ten powers”; some as Rama, some as Indra, and some as Varuna. Still there are others who speak of me as The Un-born, as Emptiness, as “Suchness,” as Truth, as Reality, as Ultimate Principle; still there are others who see me as Dharmakaya, as Nirvana, as the Eternal; some speak of me as sameness, as non-duality, as un-dying, as formless; some think of me as the doctrine of Buddha-causation, or of Emancipation, or of the Noble Path; and some think of me as Divine Mind and Noble Wisdom.

Thus in this world and in other worlds am I known by these uncounted names, but they all see me as the moon is seen in the water. Though they all honor, praise and esteem me, they do not fully understand the meaning and significance of the words they use."[/i]

and from Dueteronomy:

“Hear oh Israel, the Lord thy God, the Eternal, is One.”

So my opinion is that Buddha would have said that Moses (had he ever heard of Moses) was writing about him (the Buddha), but did not really understand what he was writing, because Moses was not spiritually enlightened. That much is clear if you interperet this passage metaphorically…

“On that same day the LORD told Moses, ‘Go up into the Abarim Range to Mount Nebo in Moab…there you will die…because you broke faith with me…because you did not uphold my holiness. Therefore, you will see the land only from a distance’…”

Compare “only from a distance,” with Buddha’s “as the moon is seen in the water.”

Very nice posts Knox.

I really don’t see any way ‘reincarnation’ can exist without some sort of intelligence controlling it.

So my answer would have to be ‘no’

In the same way that dead material bodies become living ones again, through consumption, some persons believe that lifeforce is recycled into new bodies, as all things on earth seem to move in cycles.

Individuality, memories, ego, etc., may or may not be estimated to me transferable. It depends on what kind of ‘reincarnation’ we’re talking about here.

I am refering to the ‘meat and potatos’ kind, where the ‘self’ remains essentially the same ‘self’ as in prior incarnations.
That is what most of 'em believe, right?

I think that the majority of believers in reincarnation do believe in the version where self is immortal and jumps from body to body, loosing some memories, etc.

Ex: “In my passed life, I was a beach-ball. I had a vision, about the ocean, last night, and from that, discovered what I was in my passed life.”
:laughing:

Ya, that is the sort I was refering to. I just can’t see how that could function without a puppetmaster. That is of course unless you eliminate the idea of karmic reward+punishment.