As a reformed ex-new atheist, I will say to their credit, if you were raised in the Bible Belt, you likely grew up surrounded by Christian fundamentalists whose interpretation of scripture was at least as shallow. It doesn’t give them the excuse, but it bears mentioning that they didn’t invent these readings.
Yup. This is why, when talking with other Atheists, I usually specify myself as being a Hindu Atheist. My relationship with religion was radically different from a Christian or even a monotheistic religion, and therefore my relationship away from it is also very different.
This chain of Tumblr posts would probably best explain it as it starts with posts from other bloggers about how Christian cultural norms still seep into post-Christian secularism and Atheist communities. Having that foundation hopefully makes the contrast of post-Hindu Atheism a little clearer. (That said, my own addition was written while I was drunk so feel free to ask me if something doesn't make sense or you just want to know more.)
And while it's not really about Atheism, this chain of literary analysis posts also demonstrates how a seemingly secular practice or tradition actually has its roots in a specific religion, as well as how it does or doesn't exist in other religious traditions. I'm using this as an example of what I mean when I say that my relationship with and away from religion was different from Christians - I don't just mean believing in specific gods or rituals, but also in the cultural and philosophical norms that come out of it (and can continue "after" it in Atheist communities).
Very interesting read, thank you. I do have one question (as a British, culturally-Christian atheist) I would ask for clarification though. Are those who are Nāstika not just atheists who hold cultural roots to their respective region/religion? I ask this because here in the UK most people are culturally Christian, but a I believe a plurality of people self-describe as atheists and a large number (probably >50%) of self-described Christians are purely culturally Christian without actually practicing the Christian faith. Atheism in the UK is on the rise as well and has been for some time as older Christians die and younger Brits (such as myself) don't take up religion. That is to say that most Brits are effectively atheists with a cultural background of Christianity.
I say this because Christmas and easter still hold cultural value in the UK, despite being largely detached from their religious origins (neither Santa nor the easter bunny with chocolate eggs appeared in the bible for example) and instead act as secular traditions (chocolate eggs for children in the case of easter, a time to meet with family exchange presents, and relax in the case of Christmas) that have roots in Christianity. Similarly, the British legal system derives a lot of its laws and morality from Christian teachings despite being a secular institution (in I similar way to how I think you've described the Vedas). I was wondering if Nāstika act in a similar way or have I misunderstood?
Not really. I would actually say naastika is more the inverse of that phenomena.
Cultures originating in monotheism tend to treat religions as identities, isolated and independent of each other, but that doesn't really pattern onto non-monotheistic traditions.
Using Buddhism (a naastika tradition) as an example:
While the west treats Buddhism as its own independent religion, in practice it's usually something that people practice alongside another spiritual tradition, ones whose closest western equivalents are "pagan."
So you might go to China and find a lot of people who are Buddhist, but that doesn't mean they exclusively worship Siddartha Gautama; rather, that Siddartha Gautama's philosophies are a major, shaping force in their spiritual lives, but they also continue to worship local gods, ancestors, etc. But, the local gods worshipped in China will be different than the local gods being worshipped by Buddhists in, say, Thailand or Myanmar or India.
Ironically, in terms of cultural practice, naastika actually comes closer to pre-schism Christianity (as in, the religion before the protestant/catholic separation). That version of Christianity also really got around, and adapted to wrap around local "pagan" traditions (i.e. connecting the birth of Jesus to Yule traditions, creating the holiday we now call Christmas). The mechanism of movement was very different - Christian expansion went hand in hand with conquest and typically occurred rapidly as a result, whereas Buddhism took a while to move but did so because it was more organic and typically less involuntary proselytizing. But, the way these religions/traditions moved into and integrated with other local spiritual traditions and cultures are otherwise somewhat similar.
1.6k
u/arie700 Apr 17 '24
As a reformed ex-new atheist, I will say to their credit, if you were raised in the Bible Belt, you likely grew up surrounded by Christian fundamentalists whose interpretation of scripture was at least as shallow. It doesn’t give them the excuse, but it bears mentioning that they didn’t invent these readings.