‘More than other believers, the contemplative ought to be an “expert in atheism.” Does he believe? Perhaps, yet without believing, it seems to him. He
Hatred or disapproval are bourgeois responses and are unsuitable attitudes for Marxist-Leninists to hold with regard to religions and religiously minded individuals. Yes, religions can be dangerous, as can science in the wrong hands, or indeed political ideology. I am not condoning thousands of years of Church oppression, violence or murder in the West, (or any religiously motivated tyranny in the rest of the world), but I am acknowledging the fact that historical (cultural) forces manufacture religions and religious followers – and this is not the fault of the individuals concerned.
The Buddha never argued that the physical world does not exist, even if he acknowledged that all material constructs that come together are changeable and impermanent.
As a consequence, it is obvious that capitalists in their unenlightened form are certainly not ‘Marxists’, and that the destructive socio-economic force of modern capitalism is driven by a predatory greed that is self-sustaining and transforming in equal measure.
Evidence for a type of Buddhism ‘pre-existing’ the birth of the historical Buddha, however, might exist in the Brahmanic teachings of the Upanishads. In the Kathakopanisad, a doctrine is critically described that does not accept the concept of a central and eternal ‘atma’, but which instead advocates a theory of ‘separate elements’ (prthag-dharman pasyati).
If Buddhism is viewed as a ‘religion’ – and the Buddha as a ‘theistic’ being – then Buddhism has nothing to do with modern science,