Rating: 
Summary: Negative 5 star
Review: Batchelor appears to me as one who's rather confused about what Buddhism is.Many westerners find this book appealing. I could see why: much of what the author says affirms their preconcieved notions--not what the Buddha recommended in the Kalama Sutta. I wish I could rate it "negative 5 star".
Rating: 
Summary: A Wonderful Intro to Dharma
Review: This book is a tremendous introduction to Buddhism. I understand Mr. Bachelor does not write as a "religious" Buddhist. However, this does not lessen the book's impact. The four Ennobling truths have given me great moments of contemplation. I look forward to more Buddhism books similar to this one.
Rating: 
Summary: A special Offering
Review: Amid the sea of recent books that explicate buddhism for the westerner, this one stands on its own. Written by a Scottsman with both Tibetan and Zen training, the author presents the core of buddhist thought directed towards the existentially aware reader - laying out the issues with neither praise nor judgment. When buddhism is involved, it's very difficult to avoid the many cultural influences that shape its practice. It's equally tempting to imitate the cryptic method of the Zen masters. Batchelor captures the essence of buddhist thought in a comfortable, simple style that conveys his deep mastery of the subject.
Rating:
Summary: Peace, my friends.
Review: The argument and counter argument in these reviews illustrates why it is important to read books like Mr. Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs". There are those who vehemently believe in reincarnation and karma, and those who just as vehemently believe in the value of the philosophical search for universal truth. This book entreats you to consider "the middle path", to have compassion for others, and to constantly strive for self-improvement. It is true that Mr. Batchelor is calling for the de-mystification of the modern Buddhist tradition, but I believe that anyone following the Buddhist faith ought to rejoice that this book is opening the eyes of many. Perhaps the enlightenment to be found here isn't the same as the enlightenment to be found in their particular school, but I think that anyone with an open mind and an open heart should rejoice in people seeking enlightenment AT ALL in our American culture of rampant consumerism and egoistic self-absorption. Mr. Batchelor gives those of us who have been raised by the mass media a bridge to contemplation. I say, thank you sir.
Rating:
Summary: Great book
Review: I have to take an other reviewer to task hear. Scott ruplin seems to not understand that objective reality exists. The question this book raises is not whether rebirth is a culturally conditioned idea, but whether it exists outside of your hopes and fears. If there is no rebirth then that is as true for tibeatans, japenese and americans equally. I'm tired of the postmodern subjecivism that is being taught in schools and the way it muddles people's thinking. There really are things that transcend culture, power and point of view.
Rating:
Summary: Good with a few problems
Review: This is a generally good book with a few problems. The author doesn't seem to realize that agnostic and skeptical thought are related to each other. Skeptics don't discount every thing, they just want you to provide evidence for your claims. I liked this book though and am surprised at the vitolic rantings of some fundementalist buddhists at this site. One person was so offened by the book that he reviewed it twiced as though he hope's we'll look at that little star meter and not purchase. I'm more concerned with whether it's true instead of scriptual. Can't he realize that buddhist can make mistakes too? All in all a fine effort with a few problems. You'll like it!
Rating:
Summary: Very disappointed
Review: I was very disappointed with this book, especially after reading the positive reviews.
Rating:
Summary: Does Buddha Have Buddha Nature?
Review: Stephen Batchelor makes a strong case for agnostic Buddhism. According to Batchelor, the Buddha himself probably would not recognize his modern-day acolytes. Batchelor's research turns back the clock to Buddha's own time, and finds a documented case of a man subjecting himself to psycho-analysis. "What are the causes of human suffering, and how can I avoid them?" These kinds of questions bear little resemblance to the mysticism we associate today with Buddhism. Nontheless they are timeless and profound. And Buddha's answers are, as Batchelor suggests, something we can all apply to our own lives, regardless of our various mystical adherences. As this and many of the reviews here suggest, this book is a great read. Now, if only Jesus had kept a diary...
Rating:
Summary: Great book
Review: IT's amazing to me that some of the reviewers don't seem to get the arguement that batchlor is making. Your point of view on rebirth is irrealivent to external existance or non existance of the thing it self. Is it wrong to admit you don't know one way or another? Also how in the world is batchlor advicating "New ageism". Is T.H. Huxley a new ager in your universe? Most new agers don't seem to admit to not knowing anything in my experience. This is a very thoughtful book about how buddhism is more about ending anguish than it is about speculating where you will be reborn as a sheep for being a bad person. I highly recommed it!
Rating: 
Summary: A Mixture Of Confusion And Insight
Review: "Buddhism Without Beliefs" is an important work for a number of reasons; it might also be a helpful book, or a dangerous book, depending on one's point of view. Certainly Batchelor's agnostic stance is problematic for a traditionalist believer; one need only read the virulent comments here (and also at jeweldakini.com) to see that this is so. I do not share Batchelor's views on reincarnation; I admit to being a believer. However, in all honesty, I must also declare myself an agnostic, as does Batchelor, for precisely the reason that I do not know from direct experience whether the Buddha's teaching of past and future births is true, or not. To the extent that few (if any) human beings really *know* whether rebirth is a fact, we must all--in the interest of intellectual honesty--admit to being agnostics, even if we are not ideologically comitted to agnosticism (as Batchelor seems to be). Batchelor's practical advice on the "existential" approach to Buddhism at turns rings both true and hollow. It rings true to the extent that a "metaphysics of hope and fear" is certainly a less viable template for meaningful human experience than an "ethics of empathy" grounded in a nitty-gritty confrontation of the basic facts of existence. Batchelor's discourse rings false to the extent that he has, in effect, elevated agnosticism to the status of a dogma. It is *good* not to know, he seems to say; it is good, because it is an honest assessment of one's condition. Granted, we do not know everything, and to his credit Batchelor is the first to admit it. On the other hand, all schools of Buddhist thought maintain that one *can* know the truth, the ineffable and unchangeable root of samsara and nirvana, and that one should become certain in one's realization of it. Batchelor argues--and not without good reason--that striving for certainty ultimately leads to dissatisfaction, because it reinforces the dichotomy between who we are, and who we wish to become, or who we *think* we are. I think he makes a subtle but significant omission in not affirming more strongly that earnest confrontation with oneself and one's human frailty is the first step toward to achieving certainty -- certainty that none of our self-imposed limitations truly exist. Though Batchelor does speak about emptiness, his discussions of emptiness do not, in my estimation, convey a sense of certainty. This book left me with the impression that, in the final analysis, Batchelor is more inclined to believe that one cannot know the truth with complete certainty, and that he is rather less inclined to believe in the possibility of full enlightenment (which is total certainty; cf. my book, Mipham's Beacon of Certainty). All the same Batchelor speaks coherently of awakening as a *process*, not a goal -- and for the very reason that goals easily become obstacles in the study of the self, this way of speaking is meaningful and appropriate. It is also not without traditional precedent, e.g., in the writings of Chogyam Trungpa and in Dzogchen philosophy. Batchelor is a pragmatist, and thus prefers to dwell on the verifiable certainties of human mortality and doubt, rather than on the abstract and immediately unverifiable ideals of enlightenment and omniscience. This emphasis on the here and now is both instructive and limiting; it draws attention to the most pressing issues of being human, but it also detracts from the immense possibilities which obtain from changing one's conception of what it means to be human. Batchelor's book is important, then, if not as an ideological reformulation of Buddhism for the West (and in that it may yet prove most important), then at least as an eloquent expression of the western psyche at the dawn of a new millenium, and as a record of how western minds are struggling to realize the prospect of freedom to which the Buddha exhorts us.
| 
