[lbo-talk] Ambigious Doug

Christian Gregory christian11 at mindspring.com
Wed Jun 25 12:15:40 PDT 2003



>I believe however, that the Buddha's point is
straightforward: supernatural personages (such as gods, ghosts and other entities that are unbound from the 'laws' of the physical world) and events (visions, etc), even if actual parts of the structure of things and not merely dreams, are not the source of, or the solution to humanity's self-destructive delusions.

I don't know why this question is a litmus test for many leftists, but it is. I suppose it has to do with the "opium of the masses" thing. And also with the rather sour US experience of the Christianization of what was once a relatively secular public realm. But Doug owes us no explanations, and neither does anyone other leftist who isn't "atheist" enough. It's pointless to insist on this one way or the other, since what matters is how beliefs appear in the political realm anyway. There are plenty of reactionary atheists, and political progressive persons of faith.

As I understand the Buddha's comment, the point is not about gods, but about the nature of mind. And, by the way, gods are not the beginning and end of the spiritual in the Buddhist view. Gods do exist, not as personages, but rather as expressions of the awakened state of mind. The point of some kinds of Buddhist training is to "tune in" to this kind of intelligence that is neither mundane nor supernatural in the usual sense. According to a certain view, making oneself fully available to such intelligence allows one a good deal of room not simply to see through ignorance, craving, and agression, but to transmute them, on the spot. Whether you'd want that is another question.

Christian



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list