Looking for good books on Buddhism.

[Dominus Paradoxum]

If you know of any, please list them here.

[Hugo Holbling]

If you are interested in Zen then you should look into D.T. Suzuki's many works for the best coverage i know of. This (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/038548349X/qid=1065254197/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/002-3192171-4932859?v=glance&s=books/internetinfidels/) is a nice introduction if you are not prepared to go through all his oeuvre. Another very important text is this one (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0262511096/qid=1065254342/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-3192171-4932859?v=glance&s=books/internetinfidels/), covering the ideas of Zen from the ground up but also going into the neuroscientific research in great depth.

[andy_d]

Suzuki's books are worth checking out even if your interest isn't specifically in zen. Dharma is dharma.

Speaking of Suzukis (Shunryu this time, not D.T.) I found this (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0834800799/qid=1065434279/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-6453022-2096900?v=glance&s=books) book to be excellent.

[Opera Nut]

The Dalai Lama's books are interesting.

Lama Surya Das,

Pema Chodron,

The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying.

Buddhism Explained (not sure who the author is).

[lugotorix]

Two good Buddhist overviews are: The Vision of Buddhism: The Space Under The Tree (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1557782008/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/104-2592241-6772752?v=glance) , by Roger Corless, and The Foundations of Buddhism (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0192892231/qid=1065550967/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-2592241-6772752?v=glance&s=books&n=507846) , by Rupert Gethin.

The first is written by a Buddhist practioner who has a good understanding of Buddhism and can express it well. The second has a more scholarly orientation, but it's also quite insightful. I've read a few books on Buddhist history, but this one stands out as the best.

If you're interested in Zen Buddhism, you can check out Taking The Path of Zen (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0865470804/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/104-2592241-6772752?v=glance) by Robert Aitken-roshi. It was one of the first books I read with practical advice on how to begin Zen practice.

lugotorix

[Vajradhara]

Namaste,

that's a rather tough question to answer, in my opinion. what i may find to be a good book may not be so for you :)

in any event...

i would recommend two books as primers.

The Heart of the Buddhas Teaching by Thich Nhat Hanh

and

Entrance to the Middle Way by Nagarjuna

[sensate]

I forget the author but the title was "Land of No Buddha". I highly recommend it.

[exi]

A couple of interesting books I have read on Buddhism are:
The Zen Eye: A Collection Of Zen Talks by Sokei-An and Buddhism Without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor.

Hope that you find these helpful! :)

[Magic Primate]

I've got this one on order: Hardcore Zen: Punk Rock, Monster Movies, & the Truth about Reality (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/086171380X/ref=sr_aps_books_1_1/026-0686267-8810802)

It looks promising and I've heard that its good.

Check out this guy's website to sample the flavour.SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP! (http://www2.gol.com/users/doubtboy/)

I'm thinking of writing a series of articles addressing various misguided "Buddhist" practices and explaining why they suck ass - and not Lucy Liu's ass, by the way, why they suck big fat unwashed hairy truck driver ass.

[lugotorix]

Originally posted by sensate
I forget the author but the title was "Land of No Buddha". I highly recommend it.

Professor Richard P. Hayes. The full title is Land of No Buddha: Reflections of a Sceptical Buddhist. It's available on Amazon (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1899579125/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/002-7942080-9314456?v=glance) . It's good one.

Daniel

[Ameena]

I found this book "Buddhism in a Nutshell" by Ven. Narada very interesting. However, it may be too technical for a person who has had no exposure to BUddhism (or any other eastern religion
for that matter).

You can find an electronic version here.
http://www.buddhanet.net/nutshell.htm

Regards

[monkey mind]

I just finished reading Hardcore Zen by Brad Warner and found it _very_ worthwhile and also a fun read. Highly recommended.

[homunculus]

The most comprehensive book on Zen I've read is The Complete Book of Zen, by Sifu Wong Kiew Kit. You can buy it here (and read some reviews):

http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0091876559/026-6593859-7632408

Paul.

[Invisible Insanity]

Originally posted by Dominus Paradoxum
If you know of any, please list them here.

On Theravedan Buddhism, I recommend,

Food for the Heart: The Collected Teachings of Ajahn Chah (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0861713230/qid=1068335021/sr=ka-1/ref=pd_ka_1/102-2602881-7520949)

Teachings of the Buddha (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1570621241/qid=1068335111/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-2602881-7520949)

The Dhammapada: The Sayings of the Buddha (Sacred Teachings) (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0609608886/qid=1068335236/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/102-2602881-7520949?v=glance&s=books)

On Mahayana Buddhism, I recommend,

Any Book by The Dalai Lama, Lama Surya Das or Shunryu Suzuki

The Iron Flute (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/080483248X/qid=1068335622/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/102-2602881-7520949?v=glance&s=books)

What Would Buddha Do? (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1569752982/qid=1068335677/sr=12-2/102-2602881-7520949?v=glance&s=books)

Hope that helps,
Al

[sensate]

I think What Would Buddha Do? was the worst book on Buddhism I have ever read. The author asks real no-brainer questions like: What would Buddha think of hate crimes? Do you really need to buy a book to find out if Buddha would be against hate crimes? It seems to me that the author asked posed questions like this in order to dance around real issues like what Buddha would say about homosexuality.

I also was disappointed when I realized the whole WWBD concept was already being done by Christians with a What Would Jesus Do or WWJD movement. It seems to me that trying to compete or show up another religion is a something Buddha would not do.

The author's credentials didn't impress me and I don't think he explained the reasoning behind his answers very well.

[premjan]

I think the Buddha would not be an ass, and would exhibit no opinion regarding homosexuality.

[andy_d]

Very likely. He refused to answer a lot of the more irrelvant questions he was asked.

[Eikonoklast]

I highly recommend checking out anything by Alan Watts.
Especially Way of Zen

[Invisible Insanity]

Originally posted by sensate
I think What Would Buddha Do? was the worst book on Buddhism I have ever read. The author asks real no-brainer questions like: What would Buddha think of hate crimes? Do you really need to buy a book to find out if Buddha would be against hate crimes? It seems to me that the author asked posed questions like this in order to dance around real issues like what Buddha would say about homosexuality.

I also was disappointed when I realized the whole WWBD concept was already being done by Christians with a What Would Jesus Do or WWJD movement. It seems to me that trying to compete or show up another religion is a something Buddha would not do.

The author's credentials didn't impress me and I don't think he explained the reasoning behind his answers very well.



Wow, I didn't think it was as bad as you portray it. You are right about the WWJD thing though, but nonetheless I found it to be simple and not dogmatic in any sense which is why I recommend it. The wonderful idea about Buddhism is that it is based on principles and not on commandments or mandates.

[Photon]

I liked "Awakening the Buddha Within" by Lama Surya Das, and "Awakening the Buddhist Heart" also by Lama Surya Das.

They are written in plain English, as the author is native to New York state. The first book talks about the history of Buddhism, and its major tenets, and the second talks about how you incorporate Buddhism into your life.

As an atheist, I found the books to be quite valuable in offering a philosophy that you can adopt and use, that in practice gives very good results, in terms of observing how people really do behave differently towards you when you are nice to them (common sense, I know!).

What I really liked were the topics dealing with personal responsibility, and how you are the key to your own happiness (Om Mani Padme Hung - the Jewel is in the Lotus). I also liked the fact that the Buddha never proclaimed divinity, and asked his followers to test everything, and to not accept things on faith. The Buddha gave a basic method for achieving enlightenment, and if you incorporate it into your own life, then it might work for you too. He was very pragmatic about "right action", and "right thought" (sounds Orwellian, but it's not really!), and had an experimental scientist's approach to achieving happiness (i.e. try things, and see if they work). I have incorporated much of the Buddhist philosophy into my own life, and I think it has been enriched because of it.

However, I definitely have problems with the karmic retribution for past bad actions (seems like a common sense observation blown out of proportion), reincarnation (due to the lack of evidence), karmic rebirth (which implies that something controls your reincarnation into a higher or lower form, even if it's you doing the controlling), and the whole concept of enlightenment (if it is the absence of desire, or a state of contentment, I think I understand, but certainly if it implies a higher level of knowledge or universal understanding, then I can't say that I agree).

All in all, I think it is a good tool for becoming aware of the true reasons behind why a person takes the actions that they do, and I think it contains a lot of wisdom from the perspective that most (if not all) of the world's social problems are caused by desire. Detachment from desire really helps one to focus on what is truly important to you, and Buddhism certainly helps with that. Other philosophies contain a lot of wisdom too, though.

However, there are some desires (like a healthy sex drive) that I am not willing to give up, and even though I know about my desire, and how it clouds my judgement, my unwillingness to examine and minimize this desire is likely to make me a very poor Buddhist! The irony of it all is that my wife could probably stand a little less desire on my part. Hmmm ...

[andy_d]

Originally posted by Photon

However, I definitely have problems with the karmic retribution for past bad actions
<snip>
However, there are some desires (like a healthy sex drive) that I am not willing to give up

I think the problem might be more in your preconceptions about karma. You do seem to be very knowledgable about dharma though, so forgive me if i've misjudged that.

Karma isn't retribution or punishment. It's simply impressions left in the mind by prior deeds and thoughts. These then influence our current state, and lead us to further negative thoughts or ways of perceiving. We inflict the suffering of bad karma upon ourselves. It isn't inflicted on us by an external agency, even a neutral one.

As for Buddhist sexual ethics, are you aware of the Five Precepts that form the (voluntary) code for lay Buddhists? There is no restriction on sexual activity, beyond the obvious Buddhist principles of mindfulness, kindness, honesty, etc. You can be a mad shagger and a "good person". The advice to us lay folk is just to be sensible about sex, not to avoid it.

Might look up those books though, Photon. Cheers!

[Photon]

No, I know that karma is entirely personal from the Buddhist's perspective, and the karmic retribution is self-inflicted. I'm saying that I don't necessarily agree with this, since humans are social beings and sometimes can be the victims of actions of others that have nothing to do with themselves.

I also have trouble with the karmic rebirth that is described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead, which deals with the eventual reinacarnation of the person if they haven't reached enlightenment, and the actual rebirth status is ultimately chosen by the individual based on what aspects of their persona that need to be worked on before enlightenment can be achieved. Or at least that's my reading of it.

I am also aware that many Buddhists have active sex lives. I'm not talking about the act in itself, but the desire for such activity that can lead to unclear perception. I am saying that I am not willing to give up that desire, even if it does cloud my judgement!

[andy_d]

Originally posted by Photon
humans are social beings and sometimes can be the victims of actions of others that have nothing to do with themselves.


Oh absolutely. Not everything that happens is due to karma.

[premjan]

I think individual responsibility for our human condition (e.g. the sins of our past lives) are overstated in both Buddhism and Hinduism. Life is now and has always been, within human control only to a certain extent.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste photon,

thank you for the post.

you say that karma is personal in the Buddhist system. this is correct, but not complete.

karma is also collective from villages, towns, cities, countries and finally, the planet.

the Tibetan Book of the Dead is probably not the best place to start for an explanation of Karma. not least of which is because the book is a Vajrayana book and thus is properly classified as a Third Turning teaching. perhaps that's a bit technical for this point in the discussion.

moreover, it is a text from a particular philosophical school, the Prasangika-Madhyamaka which is important for understanding the text properly.

in any event, i should say that it is my opinion that you have misunderstood the text to some degree.

remember... and this is espeically important for English speakers... desire is not a problem. we need to have desire to progress along the path. the problem arises when we become attached to the object of our desire or become attached to desire itself. the actual word for the issue is called "defilements" and it is these defilements that cause our accumulation of karma.

recall, the Buddha said that our motivations or intentions are what create karma, not the action itself. though, we should say at this point that karma is said to be only fully understood by an enlightened being.

when we get to the "brass tacks" it's a matter of faith, in my opinion.

[premjan]

Buddha was clearly orietated against the philosophy of Krishna. In fact, consciously or unconsciously, that may have been his primary target. Krishna clearly stated that karma was the principal responsibility of a human being. Buddha turned that on its head by showing how karma was the result of lack of enlightenment. They didn't mean the same thing. Krishna was referring to physical actions, and Buddha was referring to the mental precedent for actions (i.e. intentions, or action precursors). nevertheless, Krishna looked on karma as good and Buddha looked on karma as bad. Hence the lesson we should learn from this is that philosophy is dog poo. Science rules!

[Vajradhara]

Namaste premjan,

the Buddha didn't view "karma" as bad or good, it's a natural process in the Buddhist Abidharma, like the tides.

further... the Buddha clearly teaches that karma is caused by violition or the intention that one has when one commits an act of body, speech or thought.

though... none of this waffle has much to do with books :)

[rmadison]

Originally posted by exi

... and Buddhism Without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor.



I second that motion.

I've only recently become interested in Buddhism. As an atheist, I very much liked Batchelor's skeptical approach to it. At one point he basically says, "Look, perhaps Buddhism needs to take a good look at itself, and figure out just what it means to be a Buddhist. If things like Karma & reincarnation aren't supportable - and they're not really - then maybe those things should be discarded.

This was/is the first book I've read on Buddhism, and I feel fortunate to have read such a skeptical view. Had I read that to be a Buddhist I'd have to accept reincarnation, or something like that, I'd probably have dropped the book in mid-paragraph.

It's a very good read. Pretty short, yet pretty "dense" with information & concepts.

[premjan]

I think meditation techniques are the key item in Buddhism. Other things are more dispensable. Thoughts?

[greyline]

Originally posted by premjan
I think meditation techniques are the key item in Buddhism. Other things are more dispensable. Thoughts?


I tried meditation and I just bored myself silly. But I've been thinking recently about learning more about Buddhism so thanks everyone for the book links.

[kciredor reprah]

Try this book, it is called Buddhism: Plain and Simple by Steve Hagen. This book is short and one of the best books I have ever read on the subject. It has nothing to do with the religious or ritual driven aspect that has become apart buddhism over the centuries.

Peace.

[greyline]

Thanks - I'll make a note of it.

A friend just lent me a book by the Dalai Lama. He's such a cutie, although most of his wisdom is really just common sense. But this book is more about Buddhism itself so I guess it'll give me some background.

[Vajradhara]

Namaste premjan,

yes, meditation is a key tool... in point of fact, meditation and morality are the basis of the Hinyana Vehicle.

you'll find that every school of Buddhism places emphasis on meditation, though it may have a greater or lesser degree of prominence in the day to day praxis of individual schools.

as for things like karma and rebirth being unsupported... well... i shall have to let the Sutras speak for themselves :) it is fine to interepet the teachings in whichever way suites the listener.. Buddhism has no doctrine that must be adhered to by everyone, though some schools may have.

it is a gradual process of learning about oneself.

[monkey mind]

Originally posted by greyline
I tried meditation and I just bored myself silly. But I've been thinking recently about learning more about Buddhism so thanks everyone for the book links.

boredom is what it's all about man. boredom and leg discomfort. oh yeah.

http://www2.gol.com/users/doubtboy/boring.html

[Soundsurfr]

If you're a materialist at heart (like me), you may find this book very interesting and enlightening:

The Monk and the Philosopher (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0805211039/qid=1077731285/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-4966405-7047236?v=glance&s=books)

[Carlos Barbosa]

"If things like Karma & reincarnation aren't supportable - and they're not really - then maybe those things should be discarded.

(...) Had I read that to be a Buddhist I'd have to accept reincarnation, or something like that, I'd probably have dropped the book in mid-paragraph."

Well, I don't know if you really need to accept reincarnation to be a Buddhist. But I'm sure Buddhism is not to make Buddhists, but to make happy people; it is useless if it doesn't change mind, even if it changes thought.

By the way, I don't accept reincarnation till now as a fact, but I don't either discard the theory towards this issue as worth studying. Buddha himself said we should not believe his teachings dogmatically: we should "process" them and looking if they are really useful in our lives. From my viewpoint, without that kind of processing, Buddhism is meaningless, because its meaning is in everyone's life and spiritual experience -never in writings or dogma.

[Yeshi]

Premjan, actually work "karma" means action.

How you interpret it, good or bad, is open. Like you ascribe the dual interpretations to Krshna and Buddha. There are not. At different instances, they spoke using the term "action" in different contexts.

Incredible, in my mother tongue Krshan still means "mighty/strong" and Buddha(n) means "awoken".

---

To requote early indice, although i do have some 4 yards of Buddhist books, one of the best (apart from many ascribed to HH Dalai Lama) is

"Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche

over the years, i come back to it and even give it to close friends when their family is faced with the inevitables of death. The author is a Cambridge student and yet a tulku (high and acknowledged reincarnation) of an accomplished tibetan yogi.
So it is well written, nice fluent style on very deep subjects.

Highly recommendable!

[pistonhips]

Originally posted by Eikonoklast
I highly recommend checking out anything by Alan Watts.
Especially Way of Zen

I second the Watts recommendation.

You may also want to try listening to some of the dozens, if not hundreds, of recorded lectures and speeches that he gave during the late 60's and early 70's. The recording quality is very high. The way he succintly gets to the heart of things is at times hypnotic. Put one on, lay down and be mesmerized by his words.

[AlphaandOmega]

I second that motion.

I've only recently become interested in Buddhism. As an atheist, I very much liked Batchelor's skeptical approach to it. At one point he basically says, "Look, perhaps Buddhism needs to take a good look at itself, and figure out just what it means to be a Buddhist. If things like Karma & reincarnation aren't supportable - and they're not really - then maybe those things should be discarded.

This was/is the first book I've read on Buddhism, and I feel fortunate to have read such a skeptical view. Had I read that to be a Buddhist I'd have to accept reincarnation, or something like that, I'd probably have dropped the book in mid-paragraph.

It's a very good read. Pretty short, yet pretty "dense" with information & concepts.

What that man says is nonsense. To be a buddhist to believe in Karma and Rebirth. What he says it like saying Christians should rexamine the idea of God and Heaven if they are not supportable then they should discarde those things. That makes no sense because that is what makes it a Christian, like Karma and Rebirth help define what a buddhist is. Some people call them self a Nontheist buddhist but that makes no sense, because to be a buddhist is to follow the teaching of the buddha and atheism and the idea that rebirth, and karma are not real goes against his teachings. You cannot be a nontheist buddhist. You either are a buddhist or you are not.

[lenrek]

What that man says is nonsense. To be a buddhist to believe in Karma and Rebirth. What he says it like saying Christians should rexamine the idea of God and Heaven if they are not supportable then they should discarde those things. That makes no sense because that is what makes it a Christian, like Karma and Rebirth help define what a buddhist is. Some people call them self a Nontheist buddhist but that makes no sense, because to be a buddhist is to follow the teaching of the buddha and atheism and the idea that rebirth, and karma are not real goes against his teachings. You cannot be a nontheist buddhist. You either are a buddhist or you are not.

Yes... you absolutely right... :notworthy