Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Suffering in Buddhism
Hello! Recently I was talking to a friend of mine about the first of the Four Noble Truths, which is that "Life is Suffering". My friend didn't agree with me that life in its entirety is suffering, and argued the opposite:
"There is a lot of happiness in life, couldn't happiness also be argued that way?"
I then found myself wondering about this. What ABOUT the happiness in life? Is that excluded? I'm not exactly sure I understand, really. I know that suffering is caused by the Ego, and the self, so, I understand it that far. (Or perhaps I have the wrong idea?) And then just a few minutes ago, I came across this video about a man who converted from Buddhism to Islam and his reasons for doing so...
http://www.youtube.com/embed/C-c9d97wtXg
I feel as though he's wrong in this approach...
Thoughts?
"There is a lot of happiness in life, couldn't happiness also be argued that way?"
I then found myself wondering about this. What ABOUT the happiness in life? Is that excluded? I'm not exactly sure I understand, really. I know that suffering is caused by the Ego, and the self, so, I understand it that far. (Or perhaps I have the wrong idea?) And then just a few minutes ago, I came across this video about a man who converted from Buddhism to Islam and his reasons for doing so...
http://www.youtube.com/embed/C-c9d97wtXg
I feel as though he's wrong in this approach...
Thoughts?
0
Comments
Maybe your thinking of the four noble truths ?
With Metta
Negative Form
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from killing living beings.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from taking the not-given.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from sexual misconduct.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from false speech.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from harsh speech.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from frivolous speech.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from slanderous speech.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from covetousness.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from hatred.
I undertake the item of training which consists in
abstention from false views
Positive form
With deeds of loving-kindness
I purify my body.
With open-handed generosity
I purify my body.
With stillness, simplicity, and contentment
I purify my body.
With truthful communication
I purify my speech.
With words kindly and gracious
I purify my speech.
With utterance helpful.
I purify my speech.
With utterance harmonious.
I purify my speech.
Abandoning covetousness for tranquillity
I purify my mind.
Changing hatred into compassion
I purify my mind.
Transforming ignorance into wisdom
I purify my mind.
With Metta
happiness is temporary, and the fact that the happiness ends - is suffering.
we can transcend this suffering by understanding, accepting and realising that things are simply as they are, because they are simply as they are.
Accepting that Life is up and down, knowing that life is up and down, and that if we achieve stability, by following the Eightfold path, we can be like a lighthouse, solid, dependable and illuminated, come rain, storm, calm or shine - then we will have overcome the First Noble Truth.
Simple.
With Metta
Happiness isn't everlasting and that's why it is also unsatisfactory, won't give you peace forever. You can only really see this in the context of no-self. The unique thing about Buddhism is that it teaches that happiness isn't your happiness. It is just happiness, that's all. Nothing to cling to. If it isn't your happiness, how can that be satisfying for all eternity? It can't. Because you can't control it.
The Buddha saw this and saw clinging to even the highest states of happiness was not the end of suffering. So the end of suffering is not happiness, the end of suffering is also not the "annihilation of the self"-as in the video, the end of suffering is the ending of craving, including the craving for happiness.
I think this is a wonderfully solid argumentation. With all respect, the guy in the video sounds like he changed his truth to fit him instead of the other way around. He doesn't like impermanence, so he follows a religion that teaches permanence. Fine with me, but if I look around me I see nothing permanent anywhere.
.
Just a thought :rolleyes:
With Metta
What I often wonder, however, is if Buddha's teaching is not somewhat limited to certain aspects of life. It doesn't seem as if Buddhism answers all of the great questions mankind has always asked.
And so, I tend to look at Buddhism as a means of handling one aspect of life (suffering), with some guidelines to living all of life. But I don't see it as having all the answers.
As for the man in video, he does not understand Buddhism well.
Suffering is the dis-ease your mind experiences.
I can only suggest the meaning of suffering can be found by looking into your heart & mind
kind regards
First, this man in the video, from what I can find on his own facebook site, "followed Buddhism" for a couple of years while going to college in London, without actually formally embracing it. His words seem to indicate he read a couple of books in the college library and misunderstood half of that. So he has no more idea of what Buddhism is about than the Christian preachers who think they're experts on Islam because they've read about it. So forget him. Instant experts are a dime a dozen.
Now as to your problem with the Noble Truths. Would you believe, you got it wrong? That half the websites and books you read get it wrong? The problem is, nowhere does the Buddha say "Life is Suffering". That's the thumbnail translation of a very profound statement the First Noble Truth actually states, and gets it completely wrong. Some nimrod of a translator way back when decided to translate Dukkha as "Suffering" and it stuck. Actually, there is no one English word, because in context it means unsatisfying, the cause of unhappiness, and yes, sometimes pain and suffering. Actually, Dukkha is the simple antonym of "sweet" so we can say "Life is Bitter."
And the biggest, biggest error people make is thinking the First Noble Truth is making some grand cosmic metaphysical statement about life, the universe, and everything. It's not! All of life is not suffering! What a dismal, dreary, nihilistic philosophy that would be. "Life's a bitch and then you die." Of course your friend disagreed. So do you, in the way your friend thought you meant it. The Noble Truth is not an absolute statement of reality, it's an observation of personal experience. It is saying, the problem is not that we have to figure out the correct God to worship, or how to please the God we do worship. The problem is that no matter what we do, what God we worship, how rich and powerful we are, it's not enough. It's Dukkha.
So if we aren't saying that the entirety of existence is one big suffering session, what part of our lives is the problem? "Giving birth is Dukkha, aging is Dukkha, sickness is Dukkha, being separated from what you love is Dukkha, not to get what one wants is Dukkha: in short the five categories affected by clinging are Dukkha.
Dukkha is to be understood. Then we can go on to the Second Noble Truth. The cause of Dukka.
Hope this helps.
Besides from seeing it in relation with non-self, the statement 'life is dukkha' also makes much more sense if you see it in another wider view. That means, if you look at this statement in relation to rebirth. It gives all the four truths a much more profound meaning if you ask me. In relation to one life they just don't make that much sense.
About the first truth - dukkha: The life you have now might be quite nice. Living in a Western country, having what you want, it all doesn't seem like suffering. But imagine life after life after life of this.. eventually it will get quite boring and you can see it is actually dukkha, suffering, unsatisfying. Even a life of almost perfect happiness will be subject to this because it will end one day.
Now of course you don't have to belief rebirth to see some dukkha, but to understand the full meaning of it I think the bigger picture is useful. At the very least it makes the first noble truths more meaningful at a philosophical level.
May all beings be free of suffering,
Sabre
http://luminousemptiness.blogspot.com/2006/05/three-types-of-suffering.html
In brief though, it's taught that there are 3 levels of suffering.
-1) The suffering of suffering: This is the obvious suffering of hunger, injury, mental anguish, etc. that we all know.
-2) The suffering of change: This is the notion that what we call pleasurable experiences are really just a reduction of our previously suffering state. For example if we're working in the hot sun and we dive into a cool lake. This feels to us like happiness but its really just a reduction of our previously suffering state. Its not a true source of happiness because if we stay in too long we'll eventually become cold and need to warm up again in the hot sun.
-3) All pervasive suffering: This is a very subtle level of suffering that occurs simply because we have a body and mind. Its like having a house, eventually something will break and need to be fixed. This type of suffering can only be relieved by liberation.
This is how I understand the Four Noble Truths:
1. ISSUE: Dukkha
2. CAUSE: Craving
3. SOLUTION: Letting go of Craving
4. METHOD: Noble Eightfold Path
Sometimes people misunderstood the teaching and criticize the teaching based on their personal interpretation of it , and not the teaching itself. He is not the first one to give the distortion about self annihilation. It is the cessation of Greed,Hatred, Delusion, not yourself.
General Siha was recorded asking the Buddha about this, because his teacher from another sect told him not to go see the Buddha and that he teaches annihilation. This is what is in the conversation:
When he was sitting near him, Siha, the general, said to the Blessed One:
" I have heard , Lord, that the samana Gotama denies the result of actions; he teaches the doctrine of non-action, saying that the actions of sentient beings do not receive their reward, for he teaches annihilation and the loathsome of all things; and in this doctrine he trains his disciples. He teaches the doing away of the soul and the burning away of man's being. Please, tell me, Lord, do those who speak thus say the truth, or do they bear false witness against the Blessed One, passing off a spurious dhamma as your dhamma?
The Blessed One said:
There is a way Siha, in which one who says so, is speaking truly of me; on the other hand, Siha, there is a way in which one who says the opposite is speaking truly of me, too. Listen, and I will tell you:
"…..I teach, Sîha, the not-doing of such actions as are unrighteous, either by deed, or by word, or by thought; I teach the not bringing about of the manifold conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good. In this way, Sîha, one speaking truly could say of me: "The Samana Gotama denies action; he teaches the doctrine of non-action; and in this doctrine he trains his disciples?"
"….. I teach the bringing about of the manifold conditions (of heart) which are good and not evil. In this way, Siha, one speaking truly could say of me: "The Samana Gotama maintains action; he teaches the doctrine of action; and in this doctrine he trains his disciples."
"….. I proclaim, Sîha, the annihilation of LUST, of ILL-WILL, of DELUSION; I proclaim the annihilation of the manifold conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good. In this way, Sîha, that one speaking truly could say of me: "The Samana Gotama maintains annihilation; he teaches the doctrine of annihilation; and in this doctrine he trains his disciples."
"…. I deem, Sîha, unrighteous actions contemptible (loathsome) , whether they be performed by deed, or by word, or by thought; I proclaim the doctrine of the contemptibleness of falling into the manifold conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good. In this way, Sîha, that one speaking truly could say of me: "The Samana Gotama proclaims contemptibleness ……"
".. I teach, Sîha, the doing away with lust, with ill-will, with delusion; I teach the doing away with the manifold conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good. …."
" ….I teach, Sîha, that all the conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good, unrighteous actions by deed, by word, and by thought must be burnt away. He who has freed himself, Sîha, from all conditions (of heart) which are evil and not good, which ought to be burnt away, who has rooted them out, and has done away with them as a palm tree is rooted out, so that they are destroyed and cannot grow up again--such a person do I call accomplished in Tapas. …."
" …..He who has freed himself, Sîha, from the necessity of returning in future into a mother's womb , and of being reborn into new existences, who has rooted out (his being subject to) rebirth, and has done away with it as a palm tree is rooted out, so that it is destroyed and cannot grow up again--such a person do I call apagabbha. Now the Tathâgata, Sîha, has freed himself…. "
When the conversation ended General Siha took refuge in the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha.
To me, your post just don't make that much sense. The Four Noble Truths do not teach about rebirth.
The Four Noble Truths teach: "IN SUMMARY, suffering is attachment to the five aggregates".
The Four Noble Truths teach suffering originates where craving leads to new becoming.
For example, when we buy a new computer, the computer becomes "our" computer and we become the owner of a computer. When our computer is stolen we suffer. Why? Because we regard that computer to be "ours". When other person's computer is stolen or breaks down we do not suffer. Why? Because we do not regard that computer to be "ours".
The same as the other stuff we take to be "ours", such as "my birth", "my sickness", "my ageing", "my death", "my computer's death", "my separation", etc.
These things are suffering due to attachment. Birth, aging, illness & death are not instrinsically suffering in themselves.
:sawed:
All off-topic posts deleted.
Could you please stick to topic, guys?
If you want to discuss something all of your own, take it to PMs. Thanks.
We want only the "good" and reject the "bad". There is no problem with this except that the good time never last. That's why we have photos, videos, diaries etc to keep happy moments. Others go for beauty treatments and deny aging. We only want good health and feel that having sickness is abnormal. Some people only remember sad moments and cannot free themselves from pain.
All beings run towards what is pleasant and away from what is unpleasant,the push-pull of conditioned existence. Thats all they ever know.
If we can accept all that life has to offer without being pulled or pushed around aka craving, many of life's problems disappear.
House-builder, you're seen!
You will not build a house again.
All your rafters broken,
the ridge pole dismantled,
immersed in dismantling, the mind
has attained to the end of craving.
here here
:clap:
The extinguishment of the fires of lust, hate, and delusion (that arise out of the idea of a separately existing self ) is the end of dukkha. The end of dukkha is the beginning of " the highest happiness" .To put in negative terms, Nibbana is the end of dukkha. To put it in positive terms, Nibbana is " the highest happiness" ( another description the Buddha gives for nibbana in the Dhammapada) .
The Buddha said that he only teaches the way to end dukkha but sometimes misunderstood by others as teaching annihilation:
"So teaching, so proclaiming, O monks, I have been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.' "As I am not as I do not teach, so have I been baselessly, vainly, falsely and wrongly accused by some ascetics and brahmans thus: 'A nihilist is the ascetic Gotama; He teaches the annihilation, the destruction, the non-being of an existing individual.' "What I teach now as before, O monks, is suffering and the cessation of suffering. "If for that (reason) others revile, abuse, scold and insult the Perfect One, on that account, O monks, the Perfect One will not feel annoyance, nor dejection, nor displeasure in his heart. And if for that (reason) others respect, revere, honor and venerate the Perfect One, on that account the Perfect One will not feel delight, nor joy, nor elation in his heart. If for that (reason) others respect, revere, honor and venerate the Perfect One, He will think: 'It is towards this (mind-body aggregate) which was formerly fully comprehended, that they perform such acts. " - Alagaddupama Sutta
After seeing various misconceptions we can more easily understand why the Buddha initially decided not to teach the dhamma. In the Ariyapariyesana Sutta , the Buddha said:
"This Dhamma that I have attained to its profound an hard to see, hard to discover; it is the most peaceful and superior goal of all, not attainable by mere ratiocination, subtle, for the wise to experience. But this generation relies on attachment, relishes attachment, delights in attachment. It is hard for such a generation to see this truth, that is to say, specific conditionality, dependent arising. And it is hard to see this truth, that is to say, stilling of all formations, relinquishing for the essentials of existence, exhaustion of craving, fading of lust, cessation, Nibbana. And if I taught the Dhamma others would not understand me, and that would be wearing and troublesome for me."
As Dazzle said, dukkha is translated as dissatisfaction but I was told that it traditionally refers to a wheel out of balance. ie we can move along and experience but it it not the deep and everlasting peace that can be known througha a practice like Buddhism. Of course how to do that is a different matter altogether and is not always easy IMO.
Best wishes,
Abu
ready for Buddhism.
Just enjoy your wonderful life.
life most people live.
Study, work, romance, cars, house.
Been there, done that.
I study, work, spend time with my girlfriend, etc. I find that I am still able to practice and am patient with my progress. The lay community feeds, clothes, supports, and tends to the monastic community. There is no shame in living the householder's existence as long as such an existence upholds the virtues of wisdom, morality, and focus.
The 1st Noble Truth is simply a list of life's difficulties, just like a medical journal may list various illnesses & diseases
Our problem is we have not clearly read the First Noble Truth. Instead, we are caught up in our own ideas rather than actually reading what the Buddha reportedly spoke.
Our problem is we are imaging the word "life" exists where, in fact, it does not
The Buddha said:
Birth (of a child) is suffering
Sickness is suffering
Aging is suffering
Death is suffering
Sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief & despair are suffering
Separation from the loved is suffering
Association with the unloved is suffering
Wanting something & not getting it is suffering
IN SUMMARY, clinging to, clutching at the five aggregates is suffering
Regards
As my name suggest, I am a hermit.
Perhaps more important to find out what hermitwin means by hermit.
It simply is. Some ways are a bit more middle than others, perhaps.
In the Buddhist scriptures, there are many stories about hermit wanderers that did not understand the Buddha-Dhamma
In Buddhism, the word for monk is "bhikkhu", which means "one who sees the danger"