Buddhism has always denied the existence of a "creator god," so it can be called "atheistic" in that sense. That doesn't preclude individual believers from believing or disbelieving in other gods, but, in any case, a theistic Buddhist has to realize that those gods can do nothing to save him/her because they're subject to the same karmic constraints as he/she is. And it's not just "Western" Buddhists who interpret all those gods, demons, heavens, and hells as being metaphorical. That's been a strain of Buddhist religious interpretation for a very long time.
Buddhism doesn't require you to believe in God. It's all about Karma Law and personal responsibility. What goes around comes around. There is no sacramental washing machine in the confession booth like in the Catholic Churches.
some forms of Buddhism, such as zen Buddhism, are close to atheistic. But not. Pantheistic basically.
Yes for some reason people who hear about zen Buddhism in the west get very distorted pictures of it. I don't know why.
Buddhism is actually not all that historically eastern either...western people, even Hellenic Greeks, were fundamental in the development of Buddhism.
Wow! Someone else here that realized true Buddhism and God are not mutually exclusive! I think some people want to be atheistic and religious in the same sentence, pun intended.
There were many fictions (I mean those ancient fictions, stories, legends, etc) written in China about Buddhism. By fictions, I mean that these were indisputably fictions, like Journey to the West. It was a fictionalized account of monk Xuanzang's story to India to fetch the Buddhist straws. However, the fiction contain many legends and legendary gods, goddesses, etc. In ancient civilizations, there would be many illiterate people who might know a little of the fiction and worshiped some of the deities as gods.
I don't think its just western Buddhists. I think there are different schools of Buddhism and that as Buddhism spread it absorbed many Prue-existing folk beliefs which also morphed and changed over time. The stance of the Buddha was the existence of gods was irrelevant to the practice of Buddhism. The individual was however, free to hold whatever beliefs they felt held truth. The Buddha did not claim to be in any way divine, nor does Buddhism involve the idea of a personal god. The Buddha suggested that it was fear that produced the religious impulse in humanity.
"Gripped by fear men go to the sacred mountains, sacred groves, sacred trees and shrines, but these are not a secure kind of refuge.
The Dhammapada, 188"
"No one saves us but ourselves,
No one can and no one may.
We ourselves must walk the path,
But Buddhas clearly show the way.
The Dhammapada, 165."
And are Buddhists in modern times (say ... after 1900) still worshiping gods ? Do they say that gods exist or do they say we should worship them ? Slight difference. Not saying that either of those is 'atheism' but saying they exist but shouldn't be worshiped is a lot closer to atheism. You say that for centuries it DID have such things. Does it now ? And if you show me that I'm wrong, I'll double check and if you're right, I'll change my tune about Buddhism being atheist. But I won't change my tune about it being a more decent religion than the Abrahamics until I have a reason to believe it's ruining lots of lives.Plus, I am, strictly speaking, agnostic. I just believe it's logically impossible for an omnipotent entity who loves us to exist. It's that whole 'life sucks' thing. That and I believe that the idea that 'Islam means peace' is on par, evidence wise, to Creationism.
I can suggest you several points of view that might help to clarify this matter. Firstly, it is very important to understand the final goal of Buddhism, it is obtaining Nirvana. However many people misunderstand this and also expect Buddhism to answer abstract questions for them. There are at least several stories regarding this and Buddha made it perfectly clear that he was going to minimize his teaching so that it contains only stuff that is essential in assisting people on the path of reaching Nirvana. And even though Buddha claimed that he knew way more, he refused to reveal that since it was irrelevant to the current task at hand.
So in other words you might prefer God, I might prefer science, you might prefer to think of light as of stream of particles, I might prefer to think of light as of wave (in reality it's both), etc. but this will not prevent us from reaching Nirvana and living in perfect piece and harmony. I am not very familiar with other religions but from observing some of the fanatic followers I think that for them Buddhism will in fact contradict with religion (as they understand it). However I guess for most people it should not.
Now that you know it, it will seem more logical that Buddha actually taught different people in different ways. So I think the lore that contains spirits, heavens, etc. is just another version of Buddhism which is created for people who can't grasp complex concepts that are based on logic, reasoning and experience obtained through meditation. That doesn't mean that this version of Buddhism is worse than any other version Buddhism, they are just different faces of the same thing. Just like light is both stream of particles and a wave but in the end it's still light.
Eugene is totally right. The Buddha taught only about suffering and how to become free of suffering.
Subsequent cultural impacts have added on all the typical-religious attitudes, and there is room in Buddhism for those attitudes.
The more poor a population and the more difficult their life, the more they need to believe that there is a supernatural and all-powerful force to which they can appeal. Even among the better-off and better-educated Western populations, there is the restless underlying existential angst that we all suffer from, that benefits from having firm beliefs that assure us that we have "ground under our feet".
Always, always, with humans there is the desire to impose the supernatural into their way of life. It is no surprise that this happened with Buddhism. And Buddhism has room for theists.
Western populations can afford the luxury of being atheistic ... we do not live in war-torn countries, death happens but usually at a ripe old age and infant-mortality is low, we do not starve because of famine and crop failure. And Buddhism has room for atheists.
The important thing, I believe, is to remain open to the possibility that we do NOT know "it all". To, instead, allow experience to guide and mold our attitudes as we move through life. Buddhism presents an excellent paradigm for such activity.
Why for centuries did Buddhist lore contain gods, demons, heavens, hells, etc. if Bud
