The article „Is Buddhism theistic or atheistic? Polemic of B. Alan Wallace with Stephen Batchelor” discuss polemic between two Western buddhologists B. Alan Wallace and Stephen Batchelor concerning question whether nature of Buddhism is „theistic” or „atheistic”. Both are critical towards Buddhism, but if Batchelor is sceptical of value of Buddhist doctrines, including doctrine of rebirth, Wallace try to remove his doubts by looking for paralels between Buddhism and science. Buddhism is middle way between extremities, in this case between theism (...) and atheism. Many buddhists and buddhologists regards it to be nontheistic. In this polemic Buddha Śakyamuni would probably take medium position between „theism” and „atheism”. Both conceptions are creations of a mind, and Buddhism is way of contemplation which aims to find peace of mind beyond mind. (shrink)

The present text “Paul of Tarsus in the eyes of Alain Badiou and Slavoj Žižek” presents opinions of two philosophers, Alain Badiou and Slavoj Žižek, concerning founder of Christianity Paul of Tarsus. For Badiou Paul was theologian of universalism, for Žižek apostle of exclusion. But when their views are analyzed carefully, one can see that both skipped fragments of Paul’s letters which deny assumptions of their own theories. Badiou see in Paul spokesman of one and only truth. He does not (...) want to see that such attitude leads to exclusion of those who reject his truth. At the same time Badiou sees in him precursor of modern society which guarantee laws to minorities, though Paul himself excluded it. Paul’s vision excludes voluntary choose and leads to coercion in religion. Žižek who stigmatize Paul’s intolerance, did not mention his tolerance concerning vegetarians and sexual life of clergy. (shrink)