Atheist engagement with Buddhism: denying (or redefining) awakening

[rug]

Redressing the Buddha inside the Mahabodhi stupa, Bodhgaya, India (photo by the author, 2014)

October 3, 2016
by Justin Whitaker

I have long believed that positions, religious or otherwise, can be strengthened or (wisely) abandoned when met with careful argumentation. Do your claims to “X” hold up? If not, why not let them go?

So I was pleased to read a post today on the Atheist Channel here at Patheos asking “Was the Buddha enlightened?”

There, Eric Sotnak presents a well-reasoned case against the Buddha’s enlightenment (or awakening) based on the doctrine’s connection to rebirth and the lack of evidence for rebirth. As he lays out: No rebirth, no enlightenment:

1. If the Buddha was enlightened, then he was liberated from karmic rebirth.
2. If anyone is liberated from karmic rebirth, then karmic rebirth is real.
3. Karmic rebirth is not real.
4. Therefore, the Buddha was not enlightened.

The key, Eric rightly points out, is the third premise. Based on modus tollens, if we can deny the consequent of premise two (as is done in premise three) then we can deny the antecedent: that someone (the Buddha) is liberated from karmic rebirth.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/americanbuddhist/2016/10/atheist-engagement-with-buddhism-denying-or-redefining-awakening.html

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/secularoutpost/2016/09/30/was-the-buddha-enlightened-part-1/

[struggle4progress]

1. From Zen's Third Patriarch:

before enlightenment:
chopping wood and carrying water
after enlightenment:
chopping wood and carrying water