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.
Can You Have a Meaningful Life Without an Afterlife?
However, I maintain that the salient point is that unless each of us as an individual - Mother Teresa, HHDL, Hitler or whoever, perceives themselves as having led a meaningful life, others interpretations are a moot point.
I agree. Meaningful to one person could be seen as promiscuity to another, it's all the perception of the person. Someone whose had sex with tons of women on a daily basis and is tan and muscular could think they have the best and most well-lived life, yet others scorn him for that lifestyle.
I still stand by my first point that most atheistic meaningfulness is an illusion of satiation of desires. I'm not saying atheists cannot live by my interpretation of meaningful, I'm saying I'm not sure as many feel the moral obligation to serve. Do atheists feel as though they should always forgive, never harm others and serve whenever possible? In my experience, Atheists rank people based on Intelligence. Scientists are on top, and fools are useless. I was an atheist at one point too, and I know that my experience is not the same as everyone else's.
I hope to see an opposing view of my side, because I always like to see a "fuller" picture.
However, I maintain that the salient point is that unless each of us as an individual - Mother Teresa, HHDL, Hitler or whoever, perceives themselves as having led a meaningful life, others interpretations are a moot point.
I agree. Meaningful to one person could be seen as promiscuity to another, it's all the perception of the person. Someone whose had sex with tons of women on a daily basis and is tan and muscular could think they have the best and most well-lived life, yet others scorn him for that lifestyle.
I still stand by my first point that most atheistic meaningfulness is an illusion of satiation of desires. I'm not saying atheists cannot live by my interpretation of meaningful, I'm saying I'm not sure as many feel the moral obligation to serve. Do atheists feel as though they should always forgive, never harm others and serve whenever possible? In my experience, Atheists rank people based on Intelligence. Scientists are on top, and fools are useless. I was an atheist at one point too, and I know that my experience is not the same as everyone else's.
I hope to see an opposing view of my side, because I always like to see a "fuller" picture.
I disagree that ' atheistic meaningfulness ' is necessarily related to satiation of desires anymore than a theistic meaningfulness is ... It is not that simple of a distinction, sorry !!!
Pick someone famous who most would say had a meaningful life. Let's say Mother Theresa. If she was wrong and there is no heaven, does that mean her life was not meaningful?
My point (maybe it wasn't clear) is when you ask the question about a meaningful life you are likely to get different and relative answers based on age and other factors such as health. With regard to Mother Teresa, she was quite depressed as she grew older. Her life was not meaningful.
“Where is my Faith - even deep down right in there is nothing but emptiness & darkness...” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
“In my soul I feel just that terrible pain of loss of God not wanting me - of God not being God - of God not existing.'” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
"I am told God loves me, and yet the reality of the darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. I have no faith. I dare not utter the words and thoughts that crowd in my heart." — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
Pick someone famous who most would say had a meaningful life. Let's say Mother Theresa. If she was wrong and there is no heaven, does that mean her life was not meaningful?
My point (maybe it wasn't clear) is when you ask the question about a meaningful life you are likely to get different and relative answers based on age and other factors such as health. With regard to Mother Teresa, she was quite depressed as she grew older. Her life was not meaningful.
“Where is my Faith - even deep down right in there is nothing but emptiness & darkness...” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
“In my soul I feel just that terrible pain of loss of God not wanting me - of God not being God - of God not existing.'” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
"I am told God loves me, and yet the reality of the darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. I have no faith. I dare not utter the words and thoughts that crowd in my heart." — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
It occurs to me that the problem is that you and I disagree with what have a meaningful life means, and that there are two ways to look at having a meaningful life. In regard to the latter, there is the way the individual looks at his or her own life, but there is also the way a reasonable/average person looks at someone else's life.
It occurs to me that the problem is that you and I disagree with what have a meaningful life means, and that there are two ways to look at having a meaningful life. In regard to the latter, there is the way the individual looks at his or her own life, but there is also the way a reasonable/average person looks at someone else's life.
Yes, a lot hinges on the adjective, "meaningful" which modifies the noun, life. Meaningfulness (the quality of being meaningful) is more about meaning or purpose. Okay, a little exegesis on my part, we derive: a meaningful life is a life with meaning and purpose assuming that when a person drops dead, that's it. No afterlife.
Bottom line: Most people will have a meaningful life at sometime in their life but never all the time, in the example of Mother Teresa.
To me, it would be more meaningful (or perhaps a better word would be precious) with only one life to live.
0
DavidA human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First NationsVeteran
edited July 2012
Apart from this final nirvana, the word nirvana is nowadays also often used for the time between enlightenment and final nirvana. So it has two meanings, sort of mixed up.
Yes, this is a tricky one because in the suttas "nibbana" ( enlightenment ) and "pari-nibbana" ( death of an enlightened one ) are used interchangeably. And I recall that the question of whether an Arahant exists after death was left un-answered.
My understanding is similar. To me, enlightenment literally means to no longer be in the dark or to be awakened to our true nature. To equate enlightenment to pari-nibbana (cessation of an enlightened beings consciousness stream) doesn't quite seem to hit the mark.
However, as there is no absolute destruction, I don't believe in nothingness as it is a word that denotes a quality. If there is qualities or attributes of any kind it is not nothing and so "nothing" impossible to experience which makes "nothingness" an impossible quality. Even Buddhas physical remains are with us today in some form or another...
To equate the state of nibbana to nothingness is to imply there is no such thing as the state of nibanna.
nibbana is the cessation of turning away from experience. In dukkha are sentient beings to save. In sukkha the enjoyment body of the Buddha manifesting to teach Bodhisattvas in Purelands. This is the interface between us and the mandala of awakening. We experience dukkha while being awakened by the dharma, Bodhisattvas, gurus, scripture leads to sukkha in our experience, gradually approaching the Bodhisattva path and perhaps some leaps such as kensho and satori (those last two are the zen terms I don't know what the Tibetan Buddhism calls leaps.
Our lives are meaningful in relation to everyone else, and that isn't limiting meaning to "good" or "bad". Interdependence can really show us that it doesn't matter what we think, we're still fully integrated with the world around us and can't help but to affect others, just as others can't help but to affect us. I'm the person that I am today because of my experiences of the world, which includes my experiences of other people... it's all one interwoven tapestry. Perhaps that's not the kind of meaning people are looking for, but we'd never learn anything if things weren't just like this, and learning seems to be what we "do" as humans. The mind can abstract new concepts by combining or deconstructing its experiences, then put these new thoughts out into the world, and so we all are part of the engine.
Pick someone famous who most would say had a meaningful life. Let's say Mother Theresa. If she was wrong and there is no heaven, does that mean her life was not meaningful?
My point (maybe it wasn't clear) is when you ask the question about a meaningful life you are likely to get different and relative answers based on age and other factors such as health. With regard to Mother Teresa, she was quite depressed as she grew older. Her life was not meaningful.
“Where is my Faith - even deep down right in there is nothing but emptiness & darkness...” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
“In my soul I feel just that terrible pain of loss of God not wanting me - of God not being God - of God not existing.'” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
"I am told God loves me, and yet the reality of the darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. I have no faith. I dare not utter the words and thoughts that crowd in my heart." — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
It occurs to me that the problem is that you and I disagree with what have a meaningful life means, and that there are two ways to look at having a meaningful life. In regard to the latter, there is the way the individual looks at his or her own life, but there is also the way a reasonable/average person looks at someone else's life.
To continue to use the same phrasing, Vinlyn - there is also the way those who know the individual look at the person's life and the relationships which the person has created in their life.
The quotes attributed to Mother Teresa indicate doubt and existance of lack of meaning, don't they?
What about the reverse, 'can anyone have a meaningful afterlife without a meaningful life'?
I'm not sure why, but that resonates with me in relation to living with the feelings in our minds. If we feel meaning now then that will continue in the afterlife should it come to it.
To continue to use the same phrasing, Vinlyn - there is also the way those who know the individual look at the person's life and the relationships which the person has created in their life.
The quotes attributed to Mother Teresa indicate doubt and existance of lack of meaning, don't they?
That's not the way I look at it. Did she do compassionate deeds for others? To me, that is meaningful.
I agree with you, however it is not "our" assessment of Mother Teresa's life which is the most relevant in regards to it's meaning. Especially mine, as I did not know her = other than what I have read and heard from others.
But I would suggest that the individual is not always the best judge of the meaningfulness of their life. For example, a simple matter of depression could warp one's own perception of their life, well out of all proportion.
Again I agree with you, about Mother Teresa, from how I see meaningfulness. However, this has very little meaning - to her, her life especially and also to others. I did not know her and even in those moments when she reportedly made those statements, even if deeply depressed, would have had knowledge that many individuals around the world would have such opinions of her due to her actions. It may not mean much to her ... which is the salient point.
One more try - lol. (I am happy to agree to disagree too, however, I like discussing this point ). I see it as the salient point in this regard. Unless the individual experiences a sense of meaning due to their actions in this life others, ( including those who they are close to, people whose opinions the person values and admires and individuals that they do not know ), may express and respond towards the meaning in another's life and this will not give the life meaning. What I have read of Mother Teresa's experiences, confirm my faith in Buddhist understandings. A belief in an afterlife does not guarantee a sense of meaning - when a life is lived compassionately and ethically, without the Buddhist path.
Before retiring I was a teacher for 13 years, then an assistant principal for 13 years, and finally a principal for 7 years. I was pretty good at what I did, but I was never too sure that others recognized just how good I was.
Not sure why it happened, but one year, on 2 different June days, 2 graduating seniors came back to my middle school and each came in to see me. Each said exactly the same thing: "Mr. Lynch, I came back to see you because I wanted to tell you that you made a difference in my life."
That really struck home with me because several years earlier I had tried to contact a number of my old elementary and high school teachers, only to find they were all departed. I had waited too long. And just a few months ago, I learned that a college professor of mine had died, although I had thought he had died years earlier after a heart attack. I wished I had known he had lived so much longer so I could have told him how much he meant to me.
My point here is that once in a great while a student or parent will tell a teacher or counselor or administrator how much they mean to them, but mostly it's not thought of, although the feeling and admiration may well be there...but left unspoken.
It's very easy to not realize that what you do makes so great a difference to many people. All too often many people never hear the praise and underestimate their own value.
I am also with you on that aspect. Part of my practice is taking up, being open to and being a part of creating opportunities which encourage and allow expression such as you describe well above. Practice is what gives my life meaning - it is what I live for.
To me, it would be more meaningful (or perhaps a better word would be precious) with only one life to live.
How I see it; irrespective of how one may imagine any ideas of afterlife, all we have to work with is this now and through practice I am getting to understand this, and how precious an opportunity that is.
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.""These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."
The other, nibbana-without-residue "wherin all modes of being utterly cease" is referring to the final-nibbana after the death of an enlightened being.
I'm not sure. If you read the sutta quote above carefully, does it really support your interpretation? Is it referring to pari-nibbana, or is it actually referring to full enightenment?
"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.""These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."
The other, nibbana-without-residue "wherin all modes of being utterly cease" is referring to the final-nibbana after the death of an enlightened being.
I'm not sure. If you read the sutta quote above carefully, does it really support your interpretation? Is it referring to pari-nibbana, or is it actually referring to full enightenment?
It says `in this life´ because it is the death in this life. Notice "here in this life all that is experienced.. will be extinguished". Or further down:
"The other, having no residue for the future, Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease."
I don't see another coherent interpretation other than the one I gave before. Also, it fits in with the suttas as a whole quite easily, while an interpretation of nibbana only in this life, wouldn't.
Apart from that, it seems to me quite logical that nibbana must be mainly about what happens after death. Because death is one of the issue that got the Buddha searching and is something that still gets a hold of us today, and will forever. If the Buddha had nothing meaningful to say about that, that would make Buddhism quite a useless path.
My opinion for your reflection. I think it fits in this thread still, but if anyone thinks differently, I'll open a thread on the nature of nirvana to discuss this further.
Embedded in the OP is a fair amount of 'no Buddhism' for want of a better term. The Buddha never taught that this corporeal life of ours is anything but duhkha. The Buddha never taught that everyone will attain nirvana in this life or that our present life is final (if this life were the only life nirvana would be unnecessary). We should not forget that before Gautama became awakened, that is, became Buddha, he went through many rebirths. Sure, we can dismiss this and follow the secular Buddhists. But their Buddhism is not authentic Buddhism. It is materialism, for the most part the kind of materialism Ajita Keshakambalin peddled who was a contemporary of the Buddha.
I would say that only the lack of an afterlife can give a meaningful life. Afterlives are almost always better than physical lives - the only bad afterlife I have ever heard of is the Christian invention of a Hell.. Even Hel in Norse mythology is a good enough place, being described as a little depressing but "filled with foods and mead"... The only reason to choose this life over the afterlife is the godly punishment of no-afterlife (or in Christianity Hell) for suicide or suicide without an honorable reason. Life becomes a prison, a thing to endure to find eternal bliss...
As for if atheists feel like "not harming their fellow people"... Come on... That's ridiculous... How would you feel if I told you, that I only refrain from armed robbery, because I believe Santa won't give me present if I don't? You would think I'm very dangerous.. That's how the "only God can make me behave" sounds to the atheist - very offending, in fact hurtful! To be atheist just means to believe as little in the Christian god (or any other god) as the Christian believes in a Hindu god. There is no "what if". The issue just doesn't arise in the mind of the atheist.. Or as I tell people who don't understand why I won't marry in a church: Would you marry in a mosque?
I know atheism has a theism-like life in the US, which is a shame as it fosters a lot of conflicts and misunderstandings. Atheism has nothing to do with science or being "superior" - it's just not believing in any god. Atheists should distinguish the fight against religion from atheism - it's not the same..
What about the reverse, 'can anyone have a meaningful afterlife without a meaningful life'?
I'm not sure why, but that resonates with me in relation to living with the feelings in our minds. If we feel meaning now then that will continue in the afterlife should it come to it.
LOL, that reminds me of some lyrics to a Modest Mouse song, "The Ocean Breathes Salty"
"You wasted life, why won't you waste the afterlife."
What is a "meaningful" life? It is a life full of attachment to that which they view as having been deemed good, either by the intent of a deity, or some intrinsic intent in the Universe.
There seems to be some debate about if it is skillful or not. Perhaps a monk will claim that of course there is some amount of attachment to path of enlightenment, and this must be good or else why would you stay on the path, how would you stay on the path?
And a spiritually devout layperson might think that the monk is deceiving himself, and he should indeed give up any attachment to or expectation of rewards, and simply stay on the path because it is a good path with less suffering.
So perhaps the issue of the afterlife is irrelevant to the issue living a meaningful life. If a person believes in attachment to spiritual improvement, then they will naturally have an attachment to living "a meaningful life." And if a person rejects that attachment as wishful thinking, then "a meaningful life" is a sort of boast that is likely to bring them self-doubt, guilt, and other suffering.
Comments
I still stand by my first point that most atheistic meaningfulness is an illusion of satiation of desires. I'm not saying atheists cannot live by my interpretation of meaningful, I'm saying I'm not sure as many feel the moral obligation to serve. Do atheists feel as though they should always forgive, never harm others and serve whenever possible? In my experience, Atheists rank people based on Intelligence. Scientists are on top, and fools are useless. I was an atheist at one point too, and I know that my experience is not the same as everyone else's.
I hope to see an opposing view of my side, because I always like to see a "fuller" picture.
The meaning is what you make of it.
“Where is my Faith - even deep down right in there is nothing but emptiness & darkness...” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
“In my soul I feel just that terrible pain of loss of God not wanting me - of God not being God - of God not existing.'” — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
"I am told God loves me, and yet the reality of the darkness and coldness and emptiness is so great that nothing touches my soul. I have no faith. I dare not utter the words and thoughts that crowd in my heart." — Mother Teresa (Mother Teresa: Come Be My Light by Mother Teresa and Brian Kolodiejchuk)
However, as there is no absolute destruction, I don't believe in nothingness as it is a word that denotes a quality. If there is qualities or attributes of any kind it is not nothing and so "nothing" impossible to experience which makes "nothingness" an impossible quality. Even Buddhas physical remains are with us today in some form or another...
To equate the state of nibbana to nothingness is to imply there is no such thing as the state of nibanna.
The quotes attributed to Mother Teresa indicate doubt and existance of lack of meaning, don't they?
I'm not sure why, but that resonates with me in relation to living with the feelings in our minds. If we feel meaning now then that will continue in the afterlife should it come to it.
I did not know her and even in those moments when she reportedly made those statements, even if deeply depressed, would have had knowledge that many individuals around the world would have such opinions of her due to her actions. It may not mean much to her ... which is the salient point.
I see it as the salient point in this regard. Unless the individual experiences a sense of meaning due to their actions in this life others, ( including those who they are close to, people whose opinions the person values and admires and individuals that they do not know ), may express and respond towards the meaning in another's life and this will not give the life meaning.
What I have read of Mother Teresa's experiences, confirm my faith in Buddhist understandings. A belief in an afterlife does not guarantee a sense of meaning - when a life is lived compassionately and ethically, without the Buddhist path.
Not sure why it happened, but one year, on 2 different June days, 2 graduating seniors came back to my middle school and each came in to see me. Each said exactly the same thing: "Mr. Lynch, I came back to see you because I wanted to tell you that you made a difference in my life."
That really struck home with me because several years earlier I had tried to contact a number of my old elementary and high school teachers, only to find they were all departed. I had waited too long. And just a few months ago, I learned that a college professor of mine had died, although I had thought he had died years earlier after a heart attack. I wished I had known he had lived so much longer so I could have told him how much he meant to me.
My point here is that once in a great while a student or parent will tell a teacher or counselor or administrator how much they mean to them, but mostly it's not thought of, although the feeling and admiration may well be there...but left unspoken.
It's very easy to not realize that what you do makes so great a difference to many people. All too often many people never hear the praise and underestimate their own value.
Practice is what gives my life meaning - it is what I live for.
"The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease."
I don't see another coherent interpretation other than the one I gave before. Also, it fits in with the suttas as a whole quite easily, while an interpretation of nibbana only in this life, wouldn't.
Apart from that, it seems to me quite logical that nibbana must be mainly about what happens after death. Because death is one of the issue that got the Buddha searching and is something that still gets a hold of us today, and will forever. If the Buddha had nothing meaningful to say about that, that would make Buddhism quite a useless path.
My opinion for your reflection.
I think it fits in this thread still, but if anyone thinks differently, I'll open a thread on the nature of nirvana to discuss this further.
Metta!
"Does my life have meaning? And does this answer have anything to do with my belief or nonbelief in an afterlife?"
Yes, and no, in my case.
The only reason to choose this life over the afterlife is the godly punishment of no-afterlife (or in Christianity Hell) for suicide or suicide without an honorable reason.
Life becomes a prison, a thing to endure to find eternal bliss...
As for if atheists feel like "not harming their fellow people"... Come on... That's ridiculous...
How would you feel if I told you, that I only refrain from armed robbery, because I believe Santa won't give me present if I don't? You would think I'm very dangerous..
That's how the "only God can make me behave" sounds to the atheist - very offending, in fact hurtful!
To be atheist just means to believe as little in the Christian god (or any other god) as the Christian believes in a Hindu god. There is no "what if". The issue just doesn't arise in the mind of the atheist..
Or as I tell people who don't understand why I won't marry in a church: Would you marry in a mosque?
I know atheism has a theism-like life in the US, which is a shame as it fosters a lot of conflicts and misunderstandings. Atheism has nothing to do with science or being "superior" - it's just not believing in any god.
Atheists should distinguish the fight against religion from atheism - it's not the same..
If one were seriously asking that question, they are not appreciating life.
"You wasted life, why won't you waste the afterlife."
There seems to be some debate about if it is skillful or not. Perhaps a monk will claim that of course there is some amount of attachment to path of enlightenment, and this must be good or else why would you stay on the path, how would you stay on the path?
And a spiritually devout layperson might think that the monk is deceiving himself, and he should indeed give up any attachment to or expectation of rewards, and simply stay on the path because it is a good path with less suffering.
So perhaps the issue of the afterlife is irrelevant to the issue living a meaningful life. If a person believes in attachment to spiritual improvement, then they will naturally have an attachment to living "a meaningful life." And if a person rejects that attachment as wishful thinking, then "a meaningful life" is a sort of boast that is likely to bring them self-doubt, guilt, and other suffering.