Was the Buddha a Philosopher? (Video)

Last updated on: January 29, 2018 at 2:02 pm by Justin Whitaker

Was the Buddha a Philosopher? (Video) 2018-01-29T14:02:19-07:00 Justin Whitaker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Very few people are trained in both (Western) philosophy and Buddhist studies these days. Those trained in philosophy are typically taught that Philosophy is only a Western activity – and by Western they mean Euro-American (plus Canada and Australia, but definitely leaving out non-White sources). Those trained in Buddhist studies are typically taught as philologists, anthropologists, and/or scholars of religion. And, for various reasons, these folks tend also to see philosophy as just a Euro-American undertaking.

Over the years, a growing number of scholars trained in both area have worked to build bridges. However, it is an uphill battle! For every article, op-ed, and book that comes out showing commonalities, intersections of technique, and areas of mutual concern, one or two come out from one of the entrenched camps arguing the opposite. Matthew Kapstein, in his book in Indo-Tibetan philosophy, Reason’s Traces, illustrates the difficulty with a quote from the eminent Western philosopher Anthony Flew:

Philosophy… is concerned first, last and all the time with argument… [B]ecause most of what is labelled Eastern Philosophy is
not so concerned… this book draws no materials from any sources east of Suez. (from hist 1971 An Introduction to Western Philosophy)

Kapstein then adds, “(In this way, with a late imperial flourish Flew would exclude from Philosophy’s sainted halls not only Nāgārjuna and Śaṅkara, but also much of the Aristotelian tradition of medieval Islam!).”

Kapstein is discussed in the paper Doug Smith (below) and I wrote and published in Philosophy East and West in 2016. Also mentioned are about a dozen other recent and contemporary thinkers who explore the intersections of Buddhist and Western thought.

The core of our work in this paper is to show how the Buddha himself can be read as a philosopher on par with his contemporaries in Ancient Greece, asking what Damien Keown rightly notes as the central question of Buddhism, “how ought one to live?” This is fundamentally an ethical question and one out of which the rest of his thought flows.

Doug and I write in the paper:

Insofar as ethics is one of the standard branches of philosophy, the Buddha did indeed attempt to establish a kind of comprehensive philosophy: he attempted to establish a thorough and complete ethical program. Such a comprehensive eudaimonian program is one that purports to provide universally recommended strategies for reaching the ethical summum bonum, as well as to provide reasons and arguments on their behalf. Many of the Buddha’s previously referenced arguments are aimed at establishing these ethical goals and strategies. To take but one example, in the Mahāsāropama Sutta he outlines arguments against taking certain proposed goals, such as attaining “gain, honor, and renown,” as truly eudaimonic.

The centrality of ethics was readily apparent to ancient thinkers, yet it can be lost in our readings of them as stiff intellectual categorizers and arguers. Those of you who follow this blog know that the topic is an ongoing one here, last covered in detail in May 2016.

But, as Amod Lele rightly pointed out at that time, more work needs to be done by those of us interested in Buddhist (and other) philosophy to show exactly how and why it is relevant. That work is ongoing. For some, like the brilliant philosopher Charles Goodman, this work has been done by bringing Buddhist thinkers into debate and dialogue with Western philosophical issues.

For me, it has involved some work like this, but also bringing the question of “how ought I to live?” to bear on my own life again and again and again. This necessarily means fusing the wisdom of the many philosophies I’ve learned with the context of modernity. This context gives rise to thought which can only be described as engaged or progressive, though both labels have elasticity and, for some, very narrow meanings. Perhaps contemporary Buddhist thought must even be ‘radical’ in ways insofar as it critiques, relentlessly (though non-violently, the systems of suffering and oppression it finds itself in.

Listen to Doug and me discussing the paper with Ted Meisner at the Secular Buddhist podcast.

See more videos from Doug Smith here.

Support my coverage of Buddhism/Buddhist philosophy by joining a community of fellow learners/practitioners at Patreon.

‘Like’ American Buddhist Perspectives on facebook.

Previous Post

January 19, 2018

Mindfulness and Career Attachments: An Exercise with Author Maia Duerr

Next Post

January 30, 2018 4 Residential Buddhist Life Opportunities to Apply to Today

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Activism American Buddhism Art Book review Buddhism Buddhism Today Buddhist Ethics Burma/Myanmar China Christianity Commodification Environment Gender Happiness Health Humor India Interfaith Islam Japanese Buddhism Kant Media / News Meditation mindfulness Photography Poetry Politics quicktakes Running Teaching Technology Thailand Theism/Atheism Theravada Tibet Tibetan Buddhism Travels Uncategorized Unitarian Universalism video Western Philosophy Zen

Select a Month June 2021 January 2021 November 2020 August 2020 July 2020 March 2020 January 2020 October 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 November 2004 September 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz