Richard Dawkins on Buddhism 

“All of humanity's problems, stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.” - Blaise Pascal

Love Dawkins but agree with the Buddhists on this point. You can look outwards all you like but if the inner world is disturbed then that affects what we see on the "outside."

"The tranquility that you get when you know how to be alone and go within cannot be compared to anything else." Yeah, this monk knows whats up.

“I find it in music, not by looking inwards.” Music must be experienced inwardly. Two people can listen to the same music and have vastly different experiences.

I`m practicing Vipassana meditation for quite some time now, have sat plenty of retreats... two months ago I had a terrible accident in my profession as a carpenter. I basically cut off all four fingers of my right hand. three of them are reattached, not sure how well they ever gonna move... I lost my job too and my dreams and quite a few more things... yet I am still as happy and optimistic as always. I shed some tears of course but all in all I am full of gratitude and love for my life. I did not had a single minute of pain and the doctors and therapists are in awe as how quick my hand is healing... The message is this: sustainable, reliable happyness does only come from inside and it does come from a consistent training in the insight of impermanence (within the mind and body)... all things that arise must pass. All of us will lose our jobs eventually (maybe through retirement) All of us will lose everyone we love eventually All of us will lose everything we own eventually All our body parts will be nothing but death and decay eventually better prepare for this now, because we'll never now when tragedy is striking

Dawkins cannot escape his own paradigm. Buddhism has primarily to do with alleviating suffering through compassion. And everyone has suffering based on the way they think. This is not a belief, it's a fact of life. And to alleviate suffering has nothing to do with belief; it has to do with coming from the heart.

I learned that "happiness only comes from within" many years ago but this isn't easy and external forces or events in one's life can definitely make this more challenging. Practicing gratitude is one way to find this happiness. Also being aware of all the little miracles that surround us every day is another way.

Dawkins is talking about ordinary happiness which is fleeting, not bliss which is from inside and is not fleeting.

For people who have not mediated extensively, there are interesting experiences that you come across if you do begin meditating regularly. I had an experience at a 10 day silent meditation retreat which I can only describe as being more real than reality (as if the normal waking world was the dream). I don’t meditate much anymore, but there is definitely something to the meditation experience so when this monk says the creative blissful experience one gets in meditation is unmatched, I know exactly what he means. Or at least I do to some extent. You really have to experience it to understand.

He’s such a smart guy that he doesn’t understand the point and direction of this practice. His assumption of “spiritual wisdom,” or “mystical understanding” is his personal bias that he uses to denounce any idea that doesn’t align with his spiritual science mysticism.

Three minutes of Buddhism from 2500 years of teachings and 84,000 dharmas, (truths) and it rang true the same as the whole of the treasury of the Buddhist teachings.

I love Richard Dawkins and agree with most of his views, but this isn't aging very well. Scientific evidence for the psychological benefits of meditation is compounding year after year. Correct me if I'm wrong, but, from what I've heard, anybody can follow the ways of Buddhism including atheists, Christians, and Muslims while still staying true to their religion or lack there of. I really want to give meditation a shot, but I'm just way too goddamned lazy.

This is the problem with approaching Eastern philosophy through a Western lens. It is completely different from the ground up, from its most fundamental perspective. It requires a letting go of all notions and ideas one has to be able to grasp the simplicity and universality of Eastern thought. It is all inclusive and meant for everyone at the core of it. And it is ultimately and necessarily experiential. One can talk about it all they want, but at the end they must walk it for themselves to truly "get it." It's much like asking directions to get to a destination, one can talk all they want and figure out all the ways to get there, but ultimately the path has to be walked on by the seeker themself to get there. All talk merely points towards that liberation, it must ultimately be experienced for oneself to truly understand it. This is why Western thinking that relies so much on objectivity fails to grasp the magnificence and simplicity of Eastern thought which emphasises the subjective experience. And ironically enough this opens it up to a universal approach that excludes no one. It is one of the reason why Eastern "religions" need no conversion, one experiential taste of it and the seeker understands it for themselves which keeps them coming back. You could be considered one of the smartest Western thinkers like Dawkins here, but not able to discriminate between intrinsic lasting inner peace that can be tapped into at all times and extrinisic outer "happiness" that is fleeting. Indian philiosophy categorises happiness as Sukha (fleeting happpiness whose counterpart is dukha or sadness) and Ananda which is our true nature (lasting happiness that has no counterpart and requires nothing extrinisic and material). Funny thing is this experience is also something that a lot of Stoic wisdom talks about. So it is not completely foreign to Western thought either.

One of the most anti-dogmatic statement is the Kalam Sutta, or a validation of faith. In the Kalama Sutta the reader is challenged and it questions religious teachings: Mā anussavena: 
Do not believe something just because it has been passed along and retold for many generations. Mā paramparāya: 
Do not believe something merely because it has become a traditional practice. Mā itikirāya: Do not believe something simply because it is well-known everywhere. Mā Pitakasampadanena: Do not believe something just because it is cited in a text. Mā takkahetu: Do not believe something solely on the grounds of logical reasoning. Mā nayahetu: Do not believe something merely because it accords with your philosophy. Mā akaraparivitakkena: Do not believe something because it appeals to "common sense." Mā ditthinijjhanakkhantiya: Do not believe something just because you like the idea. Mā bhabbarupataya: Do not believe something because the speaker seems trustworthy. Mā samano no garu ti: Do not believe something thinking, “This is what our teacher says.”

Buddhism cured me of Catholicism.

Richard is great. But his understanding on Buddhism is of a kid. May be this clip is too short. Where can we find the full video?

Dawkins didn't understand the Bhuddist. He wasn't talking specifically about meditation, he was talking about the temporary state of enlightenment we all have achieved atleast once in our lives when we want for nothing else in the moment but the moment itself. It is just that many get this from meditation, others from getting in that flow state from running, music or the when playing an instrument etc. What Dawkins is saying he wants from life is actually what Bhuddism encourages. The purity of thoughts they preach has a purpose, to ease passage through the second bardo state, which you can visit temporarily if you know what you are doing ;)

In his longer discussions of Buddhism, Dawkins simply commits the same logical errors he rightly calls out creationists for making. He also takes the easiest route by providing a simplistic definition of dhamma. Then he only considers Tibetan (Mahayan) views and makes no mention of Theravada.

Closest i can get to meditation is to go out for a motorbike ride, it frees my mind for a while.

The west needs a lot more wisdom from eastern traditions, especially Daoism and minfulness meditation from Buddhism. It changes your outlook on what life is supposed to mean for you, as a beautiful experience here and now, rather than as a journey or race to be completed. Alan Watts got me to appreciate that more, and I'm thankful I was able to learn about that on RU-vid.

The peace and happiness, the tranquility, that you get when you know how to stay alone and go within cannot be matched by anything else.

Both sides make sense to me, we are all after all alone in this world; we simply can’t get happiness from a pot of gold, a career advancement, marriage, and all the things that we westerners call goals. Instead we gain happiness through satisfaction from living the mundane life - being our own friend and our own Buddha throughout the day. Either through meditation practices and mindfulness or Art, and doing something with ease, passion, and enjoymentt. All of which require commitment and practice daily.

A lot of people get the false idea that buddhism is not a Believe system but a philosophy. But it is both. buddhist do believe in the supernatural and practical philosophical ideas. Most buddhist, no matter the denomination, believe in spiritual beings. I can't spell what the beings are called. But you get the idea. So at the end of the day buddhism is a belief system Like any other religion.

If you seek happiness by looking outward, of course you can find it. What often happens is that people lose their way and the happiness they once found is no longer available to them. The door to that happiness somehow shuts. That door is still available, and by meditating you may find access to that door and the peace and happiness that comes with it.

Prior to delving into the realm of spiritual wisdom, it's crucial to ground yourself in common sense. Additionally, make certain that your moral compass is accurately calibrated.

Come on Dawkins, how will you enjoy music if there is going to be so much noise in your mind from suffering? Meditation if done correctly will help you enjoy music 10x more than if you didn’t.

Meditation is common to many faiths and also secularism. It does not justify or elevate Buddhism. Place Buddhism under the same analysis as other religions and you will find the same practices. The best example is of Buddhism in Bhutan. Although disputed by Buddhist adherents, the findings of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch determined a genocide/ethnic cleansing against southern Nepalese. Or the violence forced on the Rohingya Muslim by Buddhist communities in Myanmar.

Happiness and contentment are states of mind. Philosophies built on surviving, accumulating stuff to represent status, as a buffer from death and because of fear of suffering, are a long way from achieving this and indeed go in the opposite direction. Life is a chance to be creative and is there to be enjoyed. If life really becomes too hard, there is always the self-composting option. Not being prepared to be exploited would make things difficult for the sociopathic leaders, for whom exploitation of others is vital. Perhaps it is the life after death religions which help to ensure continued suffering; on the basis that you just need to hold out in this life, you’ll then get into everlasting paradise / heaven. Hope is one of the main shackles to the cycle of continued abuse and exploitation.

I wish I met Richard Dawkin in dharmsala.. I am sure they have great discussion.

Indeed. Meditation has radically improved the quality of my consciousness, or the quality of my being for the better over many, many years. There is a light and a joy that happens during meditation, I believe, because we connect our individuated consciousness to the source consciousness as a whole. They say we're born alone and we die alone. But during meditation I feel anything but alone. I feel held and connected at the deepest level.

Can anyone post the link to tge complete video

does anyone know what the monks are chanting in the shot where they show them reading their scriptures? what the chanting is called, and where to hear more of it?

I wish this video was longer.

Problem with most athiest, is they criticize before even either reading on it, partaking in it, and practicing it. The dhammapada by Gautama siddartha is very clinical and appeals to the logical mind, but he also wasn’t just some doctor or professor in emotional, devotional and aesthetic practices, in his canonical books like the samayutta Nikaya, he didn’t just consult wise men, other Buddhas, Adiyogis, Brahmins and bodhivistas, he is consulting Gods, deities and other worldly beings, some gave good insights of diligence over negligence like Sakka, others were more rigid in emotional attachments or detachments like Brahma, while the samayutta itself gives accounts of universal Gods like Shiva teaching Buddha the importance of constant movement and experiences, through all this he did a Sadhana, which is a modern way of going to a college university and learning what works and what does not work, the difference between Buddha and many of his disciples which 10 accompanied him on his journey, was he was very fast pace, he could learn very quick, applied what worked, and what didn’t work and mold it in his own rhythms of the dharma chakra, which is now the center fold teachings of Buddhism, also known as the eight fold path, to counter the 4 sukkhas, 4 noble truths of suffering and overcoming it with samsara. It truly is incredible, many of the sutras give insight and practices on how to live simply, not too lazy nor over worry, just have a stream flow of life with its basics. As you go along this path you become wiser, and stronger, and more adept to life’s woes. When reading it, like the Bible, it is as practical as it is mystical, as gurus tell us, dipping into mysticism doesn’t gain or make you super human, but it shows you that being human, is super when you unlock and use your potentials that’s already there. Buddhism as a whole is very good, it takes a snippet of the dharma practiced in Hindusim, but most Hindus would tell you they don’t practice Hindusim, they practice sanatana dharma, they aren’t religious, they are in a spiritual journey. I’m so happy I found the Buddhist books, they always help me when my mind is jumbled up and I can straighten them and instead of being stuck in a corner, I can move with the stream flow. This takes aesthetic practice, along with what most self help books or discipline and motivational of modernity provide, modern ones, which is more tailored to modernity of work, money, priorities, goals, and commune, the only thing most modern books lack are the spiritual sides, for most modernity books make it out as robotic almost emotionless, to the degree one can’t believe that all their is are man made equations and law biding, while our spiritual books from Buddhism, Hindusim, Judaism, Christianity and Islam, go beyond this, to the unknown to be known, and the known to be unknown. After reading the Bible, Quran, some Vedas like the gita, Dhammapada, ect I can unequivocally say that is not only a incredible base to grow from, but to cultivate that connection can elevate you higher to plains not thought possible. Dawkins only wants answers from the possible and shuns anything that appears impossible, yet doesn’t even see in the word itself, impossible, when broken down, says…I’m-possible. So when one says God is impossible, the voice within is saying, through God…I’m-possible. Whether Elohim, Yahweh, Allah, Shiva, Brahma, Vishnu, or gods of their ordnance, you can reach them by following the foot prints and foot steps they left for us to follow. Follow.

I agree with them both. True happiness comes from within, but Buddhism also states that your physical health is crucial to achieving that state and there is a great deal of science in staying healthy.

It does highlight the radical idea of what the Buddha taught - many people either can’t imagine or dismiss as unrealistic that there can be a dimension of experience that is completely satisfying, perfect in every way that it makes any other experience based on the six senses pale in comparison. An experience so profound that even death can’t disturb it.

2:32 i knew there was a "but" coming, but considering that this is Dawkins, it was a fairly respectful "but". He's usually much more condescending.

India is beautiful. Dawkins is great.

For RD and others. Please distinguish between Thervada (Hinayana) and Mahayana branches and approaches. Where to begin to seek what the Buddha originally said, versus severe alteration and reinterpretation by others - mostly well meaning people?

What happens when you run out of art, music, and scientific curiosities? I love how Geshe Lhakor nods, "yes, yes" when Dawkins talks about finding joy in the world. Buddhism isn't about not enjoying life, the "external" world. But it's about seeing how your "internal" world truly shapes your experience of the "outside" world. It's about learning how to settle into each moment as it is. True happiness, beyond happiness.

The scientific mind will always try to understand it, but there's nothing to understand. If you think you know you don't know. If you know you don't know, you know.

Not about "going within" like a prairie dog hiding in its hole, but more like self-knowledge, Mr. Dawkins. Stilling the mind so that you can recognize the Mind As It Is apart from its projections, fluctuations, and conceptual elaborations (thoughts).... Knowing the Mind as it is is in fact an empirical investigation just as rational as any scientific method used to observe physical events. Listening to music with all of your attention can still the mind as well, but if you are not observing the mind then you will not gain any self-knowledge but you will become a conneiseur of good music, which is fine.

The happiness that comes from peace of mind is incomparable.

Meditation for happiness, peace and tranquillity is a mere declaration against nature the way it is. A FIGHT for a fleeting state of mind without closure

Humans have discovered two tools to understand reality beyond what we can “sense” with our sensory organs. One is mathematics. Science is based on top of it. Second is meditation. Both math and meditation can take years of practice and learning. And you may still not get it. Both should be approached with open mind and curiosity.

the more I hear Dawkins speak, the more I hear his fundamentalism. his approach to science and understanding is not just skepticism, but cynicism.

Eastern and Western people all grapple with the line between assertion and acceptance. In a snowstorm, any sensible person changes the environment to be more suitable. (e.g. fire and clothing) But how much will should one assert before becoming aggressive? Why and when to take a strong position -- in either direction? We all draw a line, and it's in different places for different groups. It seems to me that most Buddhism lies toward the accepting end of the spectrum. Is acceptance the same as passivity? Those are pretty nuanced words, to be discussed in a situation more august than RU-vid.

Everyone of our thoughts and actions affects everyone, everything, the whole universe. Nothing happens in isolation.

He doesn't understand that you can't science experiential consciousness.

Life is a story we tell ourselves. Dealing with a faulty story is the key towards a more tranquil life. Not materialism. Then engage with the world as an interdependent and integral part of it. That’s it. But we are lost. Our culture is misguided and misinforming us. We are still animals that just woke up, groggily trying to understand what is all around us as we blink our eyes in fear of the unknown as we first see it. Now life is also forced upon us by circumstance. A disability, a bad parent, a restrictive culture, an accident. But how you relate to that, the story you tell yourself about that circumstance is still of central importance. I certainly don’t believe in any gods I have heard of. God is way beyond our comprehension, basically by definition. That is what gives us freedom. What do we do with it? Currently, we act out our instincts, which are largely based on fear. Especially rhetoric fear of the other. Especially fear of the other tribe. Of course, procreation is the central driver of all life and man, being an Uber-social organism, is fixated on social hierarchy. Status. So we accumulate trinkets to display our status and attract mates. This is a dominant characteristic of the male of the species Homo sapiens. That’s it in a nutshell. Throw out all the mystical and spiritual crap. That is your own projection. But that is a near impossible task, especially at our current state of biological and cultural state of evolution. We need to evolve more, which means mass death and survival of freak populations / tribes. This is such a happenstance process that there is little hope for any form of utopia, especially given how our ignorance continues to lead to despoilation of Earth biodiversity and ecosystems. So enjoy this “mess”. It is life. Death defines life, both personally and collectively, including the species level.

In a way, they are on the same page but ultimately both will not bow that one's belief is better than the other. it's just our 'selfish altruistic gene' i guess. so far, i guess, this is the most productive, positive, and true talk about what dawkins is seeking. i can say, buddhism is not for everybody. geshe lhakdor sees what dawkins is saying but if dawkins will see buddhism, he's atheistic belief will be gone and of course, he doesn't want that to happen. again, the reality of selfish gene. as a practicing buddhist, i am so interested in dawkins intellect. i guess, my belief leads me here.

“I find it in music, not by looking inwards.” But that is just music forcing your mind to jiggle to some patterns and the feeling of happiness is inwards...Music introverts the mind.

Dawkins got owned, sorry. The thing is, he's an atheist and thats how he was coming at this monk. But at its heart, buddhism isnt really a religion. The benefits of meditation are proven, and who amongst us couldnt benefit by following some of the buddhist precepts like abstaining from harming yourself or others? Im all for disproving the world's religions, but Dawkins was way off base here.🤷‍♀️

Not sure how he can "half understand" this - but hey that's where he was at - any where everyone is at, is exactly where they are meant to be - May a seed of understanding from the creator be planted inside his heart, which will one day germinate into a beautiful loving peace for him. Amen 🙏

There is a little story that Dawkins should listen to. A monk was climbing a mountain to get to the top in search of enlightenment. On the way he met another monk and asked him about the Buddha. The monk replied 'if on the way to meet the Buddha you see the Buddha then kill the Buddha'. What he was basically saying is that one should not be instructed by someone else without proof. Don't believe blindly but experience things for themselves and then draw conclusions. If meditating brings you happiness then who are you to judge me? And that is more scientific than dismissing someone else's claims without experiencing them.

the meditation that is utilitarian in any sense, is not real meditation. meditation for peace, for happiness for any 'purpose' is not meditation. Meditation in fact is the realization of the nature of purpose itself. The end in itself is what meditation is. after than one can aim for health, he will be healthy, one can aim for wealth he would be wealthy. one can aim to be wise and he would be wise.

If your mind is a mess, jumping everywhere and causing you serious problems it's hard to do anything. I suspect Richard D's mind is already pretty calm so he doesn't appreciate the value of meditating. Once you meditate your mind is much more calm and clear. And it's only with a clear mind that you can really appreciate music and science.

Dawkins is even against looking inwards and meditation 🤦‍♂️

I think what he doesn't grasp is that Buddhism is about being with the Self as no self, when all the other things are put to one side and we just sit with the 'is-ness' of how things are when there's nothing to hold on to, no music, culture, science to amuse and inspire us.

Why do they have so many physical things:, bells, books, traditions

Richard didn’t get it

Dawkins is a legend in his own mind. With his bird's eye view, he's an expert on all things religious from afar.

I feel Dawkins has missed the mark here completely here. He's appraised Buddhism as yet another form of self-focused spirituality, divorced of the rigorous observance of science. To this point, he bizarrely summarizes Buddhism as seeking to remove all attachment (roughly accurate to one of the results, but not to the purpose or method). In reality, at its core, Buddhism is just as scientific as science itself: it uses careful, non-judgemental observation to assess the true nature of the mind, and by extension the reality the mind creates. This form of observation is more foundational than any scientific inquiry we might do using the (often unscrutinized) mind. Richard, maybe try actually practicing meditation, I think you'd really learn a lot!

Got to love Ricardo, savvy thinker!

Why is always the most superstitious form of Buddhism (Vajrayana) always given the limelight? Thervada is the most purest and may I dare say the most rational form of Buddhism.

Served. Happiness is fickle and transitory. Joy is from deep within and not as susceptible external conditions. The difficulty is truly realising that we pour joy from deep within ourselves into whatever the present circumstances are and not the other way round.

They're not saying u can't do fun things its just that u should go within first

Dharamsala is such a magical place. I wish I could go back there.

Buddhism is da master key 2 liberation

The thing that troubles me about Buddhism is that it seems like the ultimate goal is to die before you die. We're here in this world, where there are material things and other people. Yes, we can achieve happiness without them. But dead people don't want anything either. Dead people are perfectly peaceful and still. Imagine being led to a candy store, and you sit on the floor in silence instead of eating anything, because in your view it is wiser to avoid a possible tummyache.

Why does Dawkins get shit on so much by religious people? I don't see him being unkind or disrespectful to people who are spiritual, he's just conversing with them and trying to learn. I have read that Dawkins is a mean spirited person but I have never gotten that impression from him. Richard Dawkins is totally cool.

I get that you religious types hate Dawkins, but at least shitpost about him on the right video, where there's a heated debate. This is just a clip showing both people aren't in complete agreement, but see some merits in each view. It's a very respectful and calm discussion. So... relax, alright? I see so many in the comments here talking about eternal bliss, and then being downright hateful and arrogant for no good reason at all.

I got sober in 2012 then I turned inward...I also was 43 now I continue to use esoteric philosophy to assist with my overall well-being. I learned much from it all...ive no words to say...hard to explain.

Buddhism is not exactly a religion, but a philosophy. It has turned into an establish religion, because back in the old days, there were no such thing as academic philosophy, people just worshiped ideas and figures. Unfortunately today, Buddhism has turned into an established religion and it's hard to find the real Buddhist philosophy.

Striving for material possessions and attachment to them will only lead to suffering and, sadly, in the end, attachment to humans results in the same. We all suffer.

good

I have failed to understand why the monk says the west is a materialist. Buddhism is neither idealist nor the west is a materialist. Buddhism is a midway. Buddha negated two extremes: views of eternalism and view of annihilation. Buddha did not believe in the eternal soul and even he denied to say that body and mind are same or different. Buddha did not believe in creator God but accepted the existence of gods which are no more than extraterrestrial lives. Similarly, there was no single Greek-roman philosopher who did not believe in God or gods. After the downlfall of Greeko-Roman civilization, the most theocentric religion Christianity prevailed all over the West. Western society has always been intolerant towards atheism. In contrast, we see there were many radical atheist schools in Buddhist India. When 17th century modern science took place then immediately modern science reached to Asia. In fact, without Asian science, Europe could never achieve scientific revolution. So we need to stop this fake dichotomy.

If Buddhism is a religion, it's the least religious one. Tibetan is more like a religion then zen. But. Buddhism is in agreement with science mostly. No god. Literal reincarnation is not required belief. I know ordained zen priests who don't believe it.

I understand there has been a scientific study of meditation that confirms its benefits.

This was very short and didn't show much of Richard's thoughts on Buddhism. Still ok though.

Has Dawkins ever had a go at Sam harris for his Buddhist beliefs? Funny how a religion that says you have many lives, and the goal is not to go to samsara, but to nowhere called nirvana where there is no sense of self, appeals to Sam, but not Christianity where the goal is life!

People tend to be fans of Dawkins and Hitchens et al until they grow up and realise how hollow and completely unsatisfactory their brand of atheism is as an account of reality as it is experienced by actual human beings.

I don’t know what Dawkins said here that makes everyone take a side. They don’t even disagree? Dawkins is sharing that he gets happiness from music, and that this doesn’t seem like coming “from within”. The Buddhist sees his point, but points out that it actually is!

Meditation does work. You can separate problems in life and focus on goals.

I went up a mountain and came down with mental security.

I think it’s an unfortunate aspect of our psychology that when ever we find a valuable insight or solution to some issues we apply it too broadly. It’s very true that you can vastly increase your sense of well-being by changing that nature of your inner mind and I can totally see how someone figuring that out in a society that seems laser focused on material circumstances would feel like they found the secrets to the universe but I still think it’s very incomplete and dangerous to see it as the only thing you should focus on. There’s a point where it becomes a form of self induced form wire heading that’s destructive in a way I don’t think people realize. Although things like having a lot of expensive possessions or fancy clothes or zero stressors all have diminishing returns on well-being, it’s still just a reality that one’s external reality has a big impact on well being and we should work to try to make that as good for everyone as we can. I don’t want to live in a world where we tell overworked employees to just focus on their breath instead of demanding better hours or people who lack friendship and need help to meet people to just love their solitude etc.

I doubt if monk understands English...RD was contradicting him but monks doesn't get it.

When you go up a mountain you find what you brought up with you. Dawkins seems to concur here.

your are the best sir

Music happens within. Without you it's just noise.

Transformation is a spiritual discovery and reality is spiritual influence.

It seems that if you post a comment here mentioning some of the less admirable events in the history of buddhism, including citing a respected expert on buddhist history (as I did), your comment will be deleted (as mine was). How very dharmic! (NOT).

He flies all the way to Dharamsala to film himself talking to a buddhist monk then saying that he doesn`t feel like he wants to meditate. Like me grandad said: "There`s nowt as funny as folk"

Every office block should have a Multi-faith room on every floor. It should be close to the work areas to save time. In my religion, we pray every ten minutes.

I've got no argument with Buddhism, except for the Buddha part.

Richard Dawkins on TIBETAN branch of Buddhism, it is more spiritual and related to rituals type of Buddhism

In this case Dawkins is just looking for a debate. The monk is speaking on a level deeper than Dawkins . Dawkins simply wants to refute religion. The monk is about relieving the inevitable suffering of living.

Dawkins is a good spokesman for Buddhism

Budhism is interesting

Working on inner peace and enjoying music aren’t mutually exclusive