Alone with Others: An Existential Approach to Buddhism (Grove Press Eastern Philosophy and Literature)

This is a very enlightening exploration of what contemporary Buddhist thought is, can become and where it began, was born and developed.

Reading philosophy, existential psychoanalysis and buddhist sutras is like listening to music. At one extreme, the listener would like to catch every note in the musical score. At the other extreme, it is what precedes a note and what a note projects, and which notes appear together in a chord which is meaningful. The appreciation of a particular piece of music is heightened by knowing the biography of the composer, the historical and musical period he is in, and from which he attempts to create a new vision. That is why every piece of masterpice in music demands empathy as well as scholarship. "Alone with others" by Stephen Batchelor is itself a piece of music and a music commentary on Mahayana buddhism. It is seldom for a westerner to appreciate Mahayana buddhism without briging in other western philosophies. The philosophies which Stephen Batchelor brings in are those of Heidegger and Erich Fromm. Both scholars spent their careers focusing on the self. For Heidegger, his question is what is self. For Fromm, it is how to be true self in our materialistic society. Using these keys, S Batchelor has written a beautiful symphony of thoughts,to allow Heideggerians and Fromm readers to listen to the Mahayana sutra, Being raised as a Chinese, and reading only the Chinese translators of sutras, this reader also find classical Chinese philosphies such as Lao Tze and Chuang Tze equally important to understand why Mahayana buddhism flourished in China starting in the 5th century.The con for this book is that it would be difficult for readers who are not familiar with Heidgger and Erich Fromm and have not read any Mahayana sutra.

I keep trying Stephen's books one after the other because I like the Secular Buddhist concept, but Stephen has a huge vocabulary of words I've never even heard of and I grow fatigued spending so much time looking them up so I can try to follow. Maybe if you can ace the MAT test, you can love the book. His online interviews are a little simpler to follow...for me.

Stephen Batchelor describes how the essence of Buddhism has become distorted by the various traditions that have stripped out the human connection with Shakymuni and replaced it with institutionalized religion.

So let me address what several of the other reviews have brought up right away: While knowledge of philosophy from Nietzsche to Foucault might not be terribly necessary, without at least a background knowledge of the important ideas they brought to western philosophy, it will be *very* easy to get lost as the author's entire point of the book is to offer Buddhism as an answer to key problems, first identified by Nietzsche and then grappled with by Heideggar and subsequent philosophers labelled as "existentialist."Buddhism is new to me as a spiritual practice, having been grappling with parts of its philosophy off and on since about 2003 when I was first introduced to Buddhism in a World History class in college. As someone who comes from the background of scientific materialism I automatically distrust metaphysics as a whole, and the main reason I took so long to take refuge was because despite the Buddha never taking a position on the existence of God, there are still references to reincarnation via the doctrine of Karma/Kamma which suggests rebirth--but since Buddhism denies anything like an unchanging soul there's some logical black magic that happens here that quite simply has been a complete turnoff. The only way I was able to reconcile it prior to meeting a dharma friend was to just ignore it and write it off as "one of those teachings that don't work for me." Of course, the biggest draw for me always was: if a teaching doesn't work, you don't have to use it.I've also had a hard time because Tibetan Buddhism turns me off do to the act of scrying deities--even if metaphorical it's a flat out turnoff. And my exposure to Soto, Kwan Um, and Theravada have all left me with a hollow cultural feeling: Chanting in ancient Chinese or Pali via a tradition with Japanese, Korean, or Thai left me feeling alien, because *none* of that is culturally relevant or comforting to me, and that's given that Thich Nhat Hanh and other famous Buddhist writers have commented that Buddhism's greatest strengths is how it adapts culturally into whatever environment it is introduced to. This began for me a search starting back in 2017 to find a truly "Western" Buddhism. Where is that path that would at least in some ways speak to me skillfully within the world of scientific materialism and existentialism that has been a foundation for me for so long? And doesn't ask me to accept the absurd concept of the "mind-made man?" (Samaññaphala Sutta)At least as of 2020, this "Western Buddhism" doesn't exist, BUT the author of this book let's those of us who find ourselves on that particular path in familiar and comfortable territory. I've never even taken a SAT test as another reviewer mentioned, but in college I was introduced to Nietzsche (N), which then introduced me to Emerson, the Bible, and via lecture connections from N's writing to Heideggar. In short, the vein of western philosophy that starts to grapple with the question of how to reorganize western thought in the absence of God: After the 1800s God might still be important for particular movements in history, but our societies are no longer pinned to that lofty ideal which then presents a large... hole, and who then, is going to fill in the gap?It was all these reasons why my dharma friend recommended that I read this book. I speak just enough of the language of philosophical existentialists that a description of the basic spiritual problems of living in the west are rapidly understood by me, and the presentation of Buddhism as a solution to those problems restates exactly how much of my life Buddhism can serve as a guide, and in reading this book am finally introduced to what "Western Buddhism" truly is: It hasn't been written yet. Stephen's more or less starting this out entirely on his own.The parts of the book that attack "the self" as always are difficult to a western aspirant who has grown up worshipping the ego as the ultimate expression of humanity.I realize that there are plenty of folks who read all this, who have more experience than me who roll their eyes when I talk about how much trouble I have adopting cultural trappings that aren't mine, and talk about finding a "Buddhism" that speaks to me on my own terms, and rightly so--in some respects this the resistance of my own ego. But at the same time I would ask that reader--what is the way to the cessation of the ego? And shouldn't there be expressions of Buddhism that make it easier for materialists like me to join?And finally, in a question best posed by Stephen Batchelor in his other writings: What does Buddhism actually lose if it were to redefine Karma and its other metaphysical attributes to accommodate Western philosophy and science? The Dalai Llama doesn't speak for all Buddhists, but he has famously asserted that if Science proves a truth held by Buddhism to be false, it is Buddhism that must relent.For any of you fellow atheist or agnostic freethinkers that have contemplated Buddhism, this is a particularly GOOD book for you to read in order to determine whether or not Buddhism has anything relevant to offer you. For me, it helped me grow roots in an expression of the "R" word.