Siddhartha Gautama--I hope I'm spelling that correctly--was himself an atheist. The religions which he spawned were developed by others, not him.

Should we start a Buddhist group here? Not me--im not a leader, I'm a dirty lurker...

Totally Buddhist here, totally committed to developing my bodhicitta--in my sloppy, lazy, disorganized way. No supernatural woo, just sound psychological science (where I get my fix).

I rather like a fair bit of of the original teachings of Siddartha. But I see the religions as a bastardization of those teachings. I find this is true in other religions; the founder has a basically good idea or intentions, but the later followers ruin it.

It's more philosophy than religion in it's original state, and one I approve of.

I enjoy the philosophy, but honestly found Hindu philosophy piqued my interest a little more.

Can't get behind reincarnation or any of the more religious aspects.

What is ' buddbism' ?

I think it sounds like a very progressive religion.

As long as they are not killing or hurting people, I don't care. 2nd amendment, go your own way.

I like mindfulness and being ok with internal and external silence. I find Buddhist concepts are helpful with that. Plus the Dalai Lama has the best damn smile and laugh.

The Dalai Lama said there would be no point at which his spirituality and his respect for science would come at such odds with each other. "Buddhism is not so much a religion, but a 'science of the mind' or an 'inner science' ... there is much benefit to learning from [scientists'] findings," he explained. - from a discussion with Carl Sagan in about 1991

As I began to question my Christian faith, I came across the audiobook, The Universe in a Single Atom, by the Dalai Lama, read by Richard Gere. It was an eyeopener, and accelerated my departure from faith. Among many laudable principles, the Buddha taught of the Noble Eightfold Path, within each may be found more specific guidance:
1 Right Understanding
2 Right Thought
3 Right Speech
4 Right Action
5 Right Livelihood
6 Right Effort
7 Right Mindfulness
8 Right Concentration
Pity that more of us don't contemplate these virtues!

I do not have the wisdom to make that decision.

I think most Americans, liberals at least, adhere to many of the Buddhist concepts and many practice yoga and meditation.

To me Buddhism is a fine belief system. You are correct, the Faith is free style of the heart and mind. Be yourself in humble way. Adore nature. Help other without expecting pay of no kind but your blessings. God is nature. That's the bottom line. Buddhism is great!

I love Budd. I smoke it all the time. One of the good isms.

I like some parts of Buddhism.

As I've stated elsewhere on this site, I do consider myself to be a Buddhist. I take 5 precepts and the 8 fold path as my starting point (sorry, I'm assuming if you're reading this thread then you know what they are) too long a story for here but i started out following the Theravada tradition but over about 20 years or so have come more to the Insight tradition with a HUGE dollop of secularism thrown in
I think Buddhism has adapted and adopted elements from which ever culture it's landed in and here, in the west it's taken on a more scientific and secular form. Though you can still find plenty of folk chanting what may well be shopping lists for all they know in a variety of exotic languages (we too have our fakers and snake charmers)
My main forms of meditation involve developing loving kindness and insight. I've never found anyone from any other religion object to that. The precepts are essentially to refrain from killing, stealing, sexual misconduct, false and harsh speech, and I ntoxicants. It's pretty hard to argue with that (though it's always the ntoxicants people want to keep )
However there are plenty of forms of Buddhism and some have some, to me, seriously wacky stuff.
I like to think of myself as a Buddhist Fundamentalist, kind of a 'born again' Buddhist I hope y'all can see the enormous tongue in cheek

Not a religion per sey, The Shaolin Monastery (Chinese: 少林寺; pinyin: Shàolín sì, also known as the Shaolin Temple, is a Chan ("Zen" ) Buddhist temple in Dengfeng County, Henan Province, China. Dating back 1,500 years when founded by Fang Lu-Hao, Shaolin Temple is the main temple of the Shaolin school of Buddhism to this day.peace be with you,

I don't consIder It to be a relIgIon because It does not belIeve In an all powerful 'god'. It Is more a phIlosophy about lIvIng a balanced exIstance. Have a bIt of a problem wIth the reIncarnatIon bIt though.

Buddhism has some 3,400+ sects I was taught (though I THOUGHT they taught me 34,000 sects!)...
In any event, this is a number not at all meant to be exact, just an expression that there are virtually LIMITLESS sects of Buddhism.

By “sects” here, I mean established religions, not someone who just interpreted things for themselves, like THE WESTBORO CHURCH etal.

I’ll admit that it can get impossibly hairy, defining a “sect”.

But comparatively, “sects” in Jewww/Xianity/Is-sham are comparatively FEW in number - orthodox, reformed, catholism, Methodist, Sunni, etc.

But these sects, in Buddhism, center around WHO the (correct, current and relevant) Buddha is and the correct interpretation of the written (as remembered) teachings of Sakyamuni, and what the “correct” teachings, practices and goals are.

Whatever, these “sects” represent established belief systems that have endure the ages, not some nut/“holy man” who decides to open his own “church” - though I bet that does happen as well!

My basic point is that there are virtually LIMITLESS “sects” of Buddhism that HAVE been around for ages and have a valid reason (based on a real interpretation of the actual teachings of Sakyamuni) for calling themselves Buddhist.

The Buddha taught until the age of 80, and was written down some many years after his death, so there are MANY teachings and interpretations that can justifiably be ascribed to him.
So people are VERY mistaken in saying their Buddhism is of the “original” teachings of Sakyamuni!

He really had no “original teachings”, other than the earliest things he said. The later and LAST things he taught were very much evolved from these “original teachings” people crow about being “right” because they were his “original teachings”, and their followers maintain that these later/last teachings represented his true intentions and more “valid” revelations!

Complete detachment. I find its goal of immunity to suffering inhuman and inhumane. Anything we may do is ultimately dismissed as illusory and gets in the way of our dissolving into nothingness. Only a laudable goal if you are into that. I prefer existence. You do you boo.

I absolutely agree! Despite the fact I am atheist is the only religion?? philosophy of life that I am friendly with!

Until the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar, I had been neutral, if not positive in my views of Buddhism. To learn that Buddhist monks are central in taking a hardline, nationalist position against their Muslim minority, forces me to rethink my forbearance of this particular brand of religion. And please, let's not fall back on the 'no true Scotsman' defense.

Its the better of the evils