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.
Why would anyone want to reach Nirvana?
I have been reading about Buddhism lately, and I'm sure I have a poor and incomplete understanding of it. One thing I cannot understand though is why anyone would willingly choose to reach nirvana.
The second noble truth states that life is suffering, and that suffering is rooted in attachment or desire; and it seems the noble eightfold path and other Buddhist philosophy is a means of creating detachment.
Yes, life will always include suffering. And materialism plays a role in that. But isn't the concept of nirvana taking this to too far of an extreme?
Anatta, the concept of "true self", does not include your conciousness or memory from what I understand, which Buddhists see as being a constantly refreshing "flux" which is actually quite in line with quantum field theories of the brain.
So the "true self" that is attained in nirvana is not our normal concept of ourself or conciousness, or our memory. It seems to me to be similar to the Taoist "qi" in that it is a generalized sort of life energy than has no individualism or distinct memory beyond what is described above. It is not concious. It is not self-aware. How does this even differ from the matter that composes our bodies?
So exactly why would I want to cease to exist? "I" being perhaps something distinct from the anatta, but real nonetheless.
Life may be suffering, but it isn't all suffering. It is dualistic. I would rather have both suffering and happiness, than nothingness. Perhaps nothingness is an alternative to exclusive suffering, but I don't believe that life is merely suffering.
Perhaps that's selfish, or at the very least, hedonistic. But I can't see rationally why I would want to take the concept of detachment to such an extreme.
The reason I started learning about Buddhism was I felt the philosophical truths and meditation could be used to improve my life; if the ultimate goal is the loss of any self, conciousness, sentience, memory, or identity I don't understand why I'd want to go down that road.
The second noble truth states that life is suffering, and that suffering is rooted in attachment or desire; and it seems the noble eightfold path and other Buddhist philosophy is a means of creating detachment.
Yes, life will always include suffering. And materialism plays a role in that. But isn't the concept of nirvana taking this to too far of an extreme?
Anatta, the concept of "true self", does not include your conciousness or memory from what I understand, which Buddhists see as being a constantly refreshing "flux" which is actually quite in line with quantum field theories of the brain.
So the "true self" that is attained in nirvana is not our normal concept of ourself or conciousness, or our memory. It seems to me to be similar to the Taoist "qi" in that it is a generalized sort of life energy than has no individualism or distinct memory beyond what is described above. It is not concious. It is not self-aware. How does this even differ from the matter that composes our bodies?
So exactly why would I want to cease to exist? "I" being perhaps something distinct from the anatta, but real nonetheless.
Life may be suffering, but it isn't all suffering. It is dualistic. I would rather have both suffering and happiness, than nothingness. Perhaps nothingness is an alternative to exclusive suffering, but I don't believe that life is merely suffering.
Perhaps that's selfish, or at the very least, hedonistic. But I can't see rationally why I would want to take the concept of detachment to such an extreme.
The reason I started learning about Buddhism was I felt the philosophical truths and meditation could be used to improve my life; if the ultimate goal is the loss of any self, conciousness, sentience, memory, or identity I don't understand why I'd want to go down that road.
0
Comments
Obviously, one cannot avoid death of the body. But abandonment of samsara for nirvana is voluntary. So why would one choose to do that, if the alternative (samsara) is reincarnation instead of nothingness?
For many years people have used the concept of hell, the opposite of heaven, a place of eternal suffering, to get attention and elicit fear. Perhaps nirvana would be preferable to such a thing. But isn't samsara preferable to either?
As for "nirvana", what is nirvana anyway? It's not a place to go. In fact, it's right here. So what is it? It's the ending of suffering, getting off the wheel of death and rebirth, constantly cycling through the six realms of existence. You know, not every rebirth is in the human realm where you have the luxury of actually sitting back and contemplating existence. In fact, a human rebirth is extraordinarily rare. When you contemplate all the sentient beings there are on just this one little hunk of rock amongst countless trillions of such planets just in this universe (and the Buddha taught that there are 10,000 myriads of universes, i.e. infinite universes), the number who have such a fortunate rebirth are as numerous as the grains of sand that you can fit on your thumbnail in comparison to all the grains of sand on all the beaches of the world. So that's why people want to attain nirvana. It happens when you've realized that there is no permanent happiness to be achieved in samsara. I don't know why anyone would want to stay trapped in samsara when there's a way out that's been proven time and time again!
And enlightenment has nothing to do with the loss of self. That's a misunderstanding on your part. It has nothing to do with extinction or fading into the void or anything like that.
Palzang
The detachment from illusions that I have about what my "self" is would lead to a more complete awareness of the experience of life.
Russell
Enlightenment is not the loss of the "true" anatta self, but it is the loss of the "percieved" santana self, right?
From the anatta thread:
So for the life force within us, the anatta, my understanding is that is our "true" self and in an enlightened death enters nirvana.
But the "santana" self is lost, which is the self I was referring to. The santana self is our conciousness, sentience, mental self, memories, right?
So, I, my conciousness, my memories, my sentience, my mind, are all santana and mortal; the part that is eternal, anatta, is none of these things. Anatta seems to me to be more like the carbon, oxygen, and hydrogen that make up our physical bodies; a component of the self.
Why is anatta called the self, when it has no identity? The very concept of self implies sentience and self-awareness. Without sentience it is just another building block for sentience.
So when my body dies physically, according to Buddhism as I understand it, the santana is lost as well. The only reincarnation is that the anatta is used in other life forms-- much like the carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen within my body.
The "way out" is the loss of santana though, right? Just because I have a bad day, or I suffer, does not mean I sedate myself into unconciousness or commit suicide, because I know suffering is only a minor aspect of life, and most of it is happiness.
In my day to day existance, I feel the value of the moments of happiness outweights the moments of suffering, and thus the suffering and unpleasant aspects of life are worth the good ones.
The problem as I see it is that nirvana doesn't cease the suffering and give you all happiness, which is more of a "heaven" paradigm. As I understand it, it ceases both, because the anatta is not self-aware and cannot percieve either. Only the santana is self-aware.
Why is the eternal cessation of self-awareness cause for someone to rejoice? Because a small minority of the time you suffer?
I'm just having a really hard time seeing the appeal of this over samsara. Samsara may always have suffering, but with suffering there is happiness. And more over, there is sentience.
In the X-Files's later seasons, Agent Dogget is captured in Mexico where his memory is erased by an alien. He fights to get it back, even though he has lived a painful life. Before giving his memory back to him, the alien asks, "Your memories have so much pain... why do you want this?" Dogget answered, "Because it's MY pain."
As long as suffering is not absolute, why would you want to surrender your sentience forever?
That's my take on it as well; I just worry with what lies at the end of that path.
Buddhism or the path of the Buddha Dharma is not IMO a self improvement course. It is a path to uncover the ultimate reality by forgoing the preconceptions of the conditioned mind and living in the present moment.
In Gassho
IAWA:type:
Maybe Buddhism just isn't for you at this point. Unless you have come here to be convinced, it just doesn't seem like you see even the first noble truth let alone the third or the fourth. Did you come here to be convinced? The Buddha himself said there would be few in the world friendly to his wisdom. Maybe you're not one of them? But then again only you can determine that. In the meantime his teachings are always open for investigation.
in friendliness,
V.
p.s. it looks like you do have a few terms and ideas mixed up a bit. Where, if I may ask, did you get your info about Buddhism?
What enlightenment really means is not some sort of extinction of self but the fullest realization of self beyond all imagination. What is there to fear about that? Better to contemplate what lies ahead if you don't make the effort, eh?
And I understand where you're coming from. In fact, it's a common feeling among those just starting out in their study of Buddhism. Don't let it throw you is my advice. Just keep contemplating and studying. I'd really suggest meditation as that can cut through some of the intellectualism that we're so comfortable with but that can sometimes lead us down the garden path, if you know what I mean. Just rest with your mind and see what happens!
Palzang
Perhaps you're right. I came here so people more enlightened than I could correct my misunderstandings. I've read the Buddhism wikipedia article, the Buddha Vacana, and misc online articles and posts on this forum.
I've previously studied Tao Te Ching and the Christian Bible, so I'm sure I'm probably confusing and combining them to some degree.
I would rather correct my misunderstandings than keep them, though. I see a lot of similarities in the philosophy of Buddhism to Taoism and Christianity, but the ultimate theology just seems terribly depressing to me.
Perhaps I have bad assumptions, conclusions, or as the previous poster suggested, too selfish of judgment. Or all of the above. But even if I am not able to agree with Buddhism I would like to understand it correctly rather than incorrectly.
I got the term from this thread: http://www.newbuddhist.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1237
I can meditate to some degree and do so regularily but am not very good at it; I can clear my mind usually but feeling "qi" (temperature changes?) as Taoists describe it is fleeting and inconsistent. Only very rarely can I sense a "presence".
Perhaps I don't really understand nirvana or enlightment, then. But I do believe the philosophical truths of Buddhism, not only in my life but in others. I too think following them leads to increased happiness. Even if my understanding of them is incomplete, I try every day to improve myself mentally, physically and spiritually and help others.
These things seem easier for me to understand, because I can do them and see a result, and thus they are "real". I have a harder time understanding things beyond my perception.
I also think you need to address your interpretation of the word "suffering" in the context of Buddhism, and to understand the context, examine each of the Four Noble Truths in detail....
The First Noble Truth does indeed (widely) state that Life is "suffering".... but the original word is Dhukkha - which may also be variously seen translated as 'unsatisfactory, up-and-down, difficult, frustrating, and even (as I saw once in a UK newspaper article) maddening' - !
(Dhukkha is often also further sub-divided into two varieties of 'suffering' or 'unsatisfactoryness' - the Dhukkha of the physical state, affecting the Body's health and well-being, and theDhukkha of the Emotional state, affecting the person's Essential Mental State of Being.....)
The second Noble Truth goes on to explain that the reason it is 'Dhukka' (all translations above) is because we insist on remaining attached to all the impermanent and transitory factors, desiring them to be in fact permanent. We therefore suffer through the discovery that they are not - the aversion to letting all these things go, as one must, is what makes Life so frustrating and unsatisfactory...Our clinging desire to render permanent, that which never can be.....
Many new students and curious examiners of Buddhism have often, at this point, been moved to find Buddhism a depressing and Negative Philosophy....one laden in Doom 'n' Gloom....Nothing could be further from the Truths....
If this were so, there would be no solution offered...
The Third Noble Truth encourages us to take heart, because there is a way to escape the cyclical existence of Good/Bad, Happy/sad, Up/Down, Yes/no, Joyful/Angry see-sawing yo-yo-ing that continuously pulls us to and fro'....
And the Fourth Noble Truth is the Signpost to the Path we call the Eightfold....
Which is the fundamental concrete solid foundation to every Buddhist's practise....
Right View
Right Intention
Right Speech
Right Action
Right Livelyhood
Right Effort
Right Awareness
Right Mindfulness or Meditation....
Right Everything....
Not a rigid set of Rules and Regulations, but a sound collection of guidelines and explanations of what, how and why it pays to follow the Eight and enjoy life to the full, no matter what may touch us......
Thanks... perhaps my ignorance was shocking to them
My confusion here is that while I agree life and attachment cause suffering, frustration, etc... don't they also cause happiness? Can you have happiness without suffering? (see, my Tao Te Ching reading is clouding my interpretation) Where does this path lead?
The more I have done this in my life, the happier and more content I have been; but I think about the ultimate expression of this-- no desire, no attachment-- and that seems uncomfortable to me.
I want to try to live these better, because I know what I have done already here has tremendously improved my life, and that of those around me.
I just have a hard time grappling with what it ultimately means...
Welcome! It's very nice to meet you. And don't worry. I've knocked all the shock from ignorance out of them already.
This can be cleared up for you by going into the Buddha's teachings on suffering a little deeper. For example, happiness also has elements of suffering in it because it is impermanent and although one can enjoy happiness, one must also eventually suffer its loss. Ultimately, life in samsara is not satisfying and can never be fully satisfying. But happily there is something better.
Keep asking these questions. You'll find the answers reasonable and helpful in your life.
Brigid
Feeling uncomfortable can be a very good thing. It can mean that some part of our firmly held but deluded understanding of reality is resisting. Buddhism is about seeing reality as it really is and being with it as it really is. This is not always comfortable or comforting. A very wise person here once told me that the Buddhist path is not an easy one. It's full of sharp corners and it's challenging. That's why it works.
Also, Buddhist meditation is probably going to be very different from what you're used to. What you described here: is very different from Buddhist meditation. I think you're going to be pleasantly surprised when you start to learn and practice it because there is no "not very good at it" in Buddhist meditation so you'll be able to get rid of that judgment right away. lol!
Brigid
I think you've hit the crux of the matter, and here maybe, through learning with my own experiences, I might be able to shed some light on another way of viewing this...
(lovely word, 'View'....We're all on the mountain top, but what we're all 'viewing' may inspire different conclusions and comments....)
Happiness is a wonderful thing... we've all experienced it, and we've also all experienced its absence, or opposite, even....Sadness..... Up and down then.... the yo-yo effect....
However, the way in which Buddhism indicates that this yo-yo-ing can be endured, is to understand that Things are Simply as they Are....Life goes on..... You win some, you lose some.... You fall in love, you fall out of love....you live in a shack, then move to a four bedroom town house....you win on the horses, and lose on the dogs....ping-pong, ding-dong.....pendulum swing like a pendulum do....
But whilst this is all going on Externally, we bring ourselves inwardly, 'Home', and dwell in Serene Joy.....
We are subject to the fluctuations of events and the effect these events have on our emotions, but we pull back and detach.... because these events are not US....These emotions are not Who We Are..... they define what our senses and mind are experiencing, but they do not define US. So whilst we may be in the midst of inexpressible happiness or cataclysmic sadness.... We just are....At the centre of all this, we remain composed, balanced and calm.
This too shall pass, because we "Meet with Triumph and Disaster, and treat these two impostors just the same"....
So whilst Life is Difficult, and even in Happiness, as Brigid says, there is sadness, because it does not last, what the Buddha taught is that ultimate Joy is attainable through detachment... freedom from grasping and clinging Desire...... Rising above it.... floating on cloud 9.....
Any better....?
Or shall I just stick to brewing the tea.....? :tongue2:
I can empathize Frangible with the confusion from the various sources that you've mentioned. Myself a recovered Catholic have been a student of sociology, psychology, neuropsychology, Toaism, Hinduism, Kabbalah, and Sufism, as well as, the Buddha dharma.
I find that I don't see where my path is leading. It is always unfolding as if out of the fog. To know a glimpse of where it's leading look deeply into where you are now. Events of the future are determined by your present actions, just as, your past contains the causes of your present. To say I know where I am going I close myself to limitless possibilities (See film -"What The Bleep Were We Thinking"). When I pick up a stick (action) I don't know before hand what is on the other end of it, be it a snake, a treasure, or a lotus growing in the mud.
As far as happiness is concerned. I often don't even realize that I've been in happiness until I come to a place where I'm filled with dissatifaction. That "there's something wrong" feeling, which, in turn takes it's course down the EFP (eight fold path) provided I'm being with what is, rather then being focused on obtaining a result.
Also, do you have any preconditions for happiness. You know, "I've got to have this to feel or have that?" Happiness is a state of being and like all states of being they come and go, just like suffering.
On intellectual learning:
In " Zen Keys", master Tich Naht Hahn speaks that,
"Intellectual learning is nothing but studying the menu, while actual practice is the eating of the meal." As Naht Hahn says, the truth of existence is revealed through a deepening awareness that comes from a life of single-mindedness, of being "awake" in whatever one is doing. There is no better labrotory for doing this "aware work" then everyday life, especially ones daily work.
So, do you have anywhere that you can practice near you?
http://www.buddhanet.net/worlddir.htm
And finally, YOU are your own authourity! Even the Buddha said, "Don't just believe what I tell you, go find out for your self."
I know...Your pipe and slippers.... I'll get them.....
Sorry, I used all the tobacco :crazy:
This link is elsewhere, but I found this very useful on meditation:
Meditation Instructions
Sas :buck:
He was a prince of the realm. When he saw all the suffering in the world - and was driven to find some answer for all of this suffering.
Now... if we think back 2,500 years ago, life isn't what it is today. Yes, there is stil poverty, there is still hunger, there are still many, many things that cause suffering in life. But, I'm thinking on the world as a whole. There weren't agriculture co-ops. There weren't special fertilizers, plumbing, hybred grains, etc. People scraped out a meager living. Not to mention what they had to pay as taxes if they lived in a kingdom. Children died all the time from diseases that we don't even fret about anymore. You scraped and worked by the sweat of your brow just to have, what we would consider now, scraps of food to live off of.
Life truly was suffering.
If you were disease ridden - could not work or grow food - crippled with no government subsidies - life was awful.
I sometimes wonder if this is the mentality that was commonplace during Buddha's time. Reincarnation was a common belief back then.
If your life was crap now - why would you want to keep coming back and going through all of that pain and misery again and again.
I believe that is why people, especially after Gotama's enlightenment, would actually wish for an end to this cycle of suffering.
-bf
Pal (grim reaper) zang
Cholera
TB
Consumption
Piles
Diarrhea
Dysentary
Drought
Famine
The Black Plague
The Red Plague
Leprosy
Syphillus
Death in Childbirth
Cancer
Measels
Pox
Malaria
Influenza
You don't think modern medicine, government programs, global charity groups, etc. make any differnce in making "now" better than "then"!?!?! Many, many people suffered with these things and diseases who didn't even have the benefit of pain killers.
You think people in India, who have been living with flooding because of the geography for thousands of years, really give a rip about "Global Warming"!?!?!?! Ooooh... it sounds scary - but they've been living with trajedy for a looooooooooooooooooooooooong time.
C'mon man... now you're just trying to be argumentative, no?
-bf
Not at all. True, now many of those diseases are controlled, maybe a few even wiped out. In their place we have drug-resistant strains that are not only deadly, but we can't kill them! And personally I'd much rather have to deal with typhus than a hydrogen bomb any day. Maybe you didn't live through the Cuban Missile Crisis (or at least remember it), but I did, and we all thought we were going to be nuked at any minute without warning. Now, what was your argument again?
Palzang
I believe suffering was much greater back in Gotama's time than it is today. I agree with you that there are terrible diseases that we are dealing with where early mortality is a person's only option. But, you would have to agree that physical suffering can be reduced today in ways that were unconceivable back then.
Yes... you can worry about being nuked and be scared to death. Was mentally worrying about being nuked really worse than slowly dying of starvation, being captured or tortured by invading hordes, you and your children being placed into a life of tortured slavery, being stoned, etc.!?!?! Not to mention the possibly and enduring these things PLUS everything I mentioned earlier?
Me? I'd personally live through the 1/1,000,000,000 of a second it's going to take me to die in the direct hit of a hydrogen bomb rather than wasting aways years of my life in utter agony.
But... to each his own. You must have a higher pain thresh-hold than I do.
I'm not saying life now is perfect - my only point was that I believe life 2,500 years ago was more difficult and included more suffering on a daily basis.
-bf
The most helpful advance in preventative medicines in the last century is treated water and sewage/garbage disposal. These have saved more lives than any other medical related implementations.
As far as the BOMB is concerned, the fact is that more people were killed by typhus than by the Bomb. Fear of massive destruction and loss of life by the enemy has always been with us. Mongol, Vandal and Crusader invasions had many in those times in fear all the time.
When was the last time that a Bomb killed 1/3 of a continent like the european plagues did?
Dying one by one through disease or by the hundreds of thousands by a nuclear blast is the same to the individuals who died. Many more had long painful deaths from typhus than died from USA use of atomic weapons.
Even with the deaths caused by AIDs world wide the number of deaths by in pale in comparison to the number who died from polio, which is extremely rare today.
You seem to be in fear of what MAY happen because of pollution, global warming etc. but in speaking of past things that caused massive death that no longer do is dealing with facts not conjecture.
The duck and cover training the USA students went through in the 50's and 60's left many of us paranoid of nuclear war.
When i think of improvements I look at China. Even with its massive human rights violations the people eat more and live longer lives than ever before. Have you eaten today I belive was the tradition Chinese greeting.
I too believe for the vast majority life is better. That is why deaths of 35 civilians Afghanistan is news. And why genocide as in Africa is an abberation rather than the way things normally are.
Fear drives out reason.
Seeking nirvana , hopefully, would drive out fears of self extinction which is the same today as it ever was to vast majority of those living, no matter the cause of death.
Russell
Palzang
Yum!
-bf
Palzang
1. Life in the Indian Subcontinent during Brahmanical times is crappy
2. the reason it is crappy is because of how unadvanced our society is
3. If we make societal advances things won't suck so bad
4. The path to societal advancement is the emphasis on education, technology, medicine, sewage treatment, drive-through restaurants, etc.
The buddha did not limit his teachings to such contemporary or regional concerns. And certainly suffering can be experienced by those who are in good health and have plenty of material comforts. Instead he said
1. There is suffering
2. Suffering has a cause (craving/grasping/clinging)
3. Suffering has a cessation
4. There activities which bring about the cessation of suffering (the Eightfold path)
Comparing one set of suffering to another set of suffering, may make you feel good or put things in a broader perspective, but it also breeds complacency and and a false sense of security (as this state is impermanent and unreliable). It is also a way of covering up the truth of the suffering in your current experience which takes you out of the present moment. I understand that it is very difficult to quit covering up the suffering that is there or to stop rationalizing it away. Staring the 1st noble truth of suffering starkly in the face is not for the faint of heart, and many times I run for cover myself. And suffering is certainly a fearsome beast, even moreso if we forget that it is caused and has an end. Also, a lot of the fearsomeness comes from the thought "I am suffering." Nobody wants to suffer. So they instead try to block it out from view. If we block out suffering, we cannot let go of it and it will affect our actions on an unconscious level causing countless neurotic and unskillful habits.
An excerpt on this by Ajahn Sumedho:
http://www.amaravati.org/abm/english/documents/4noble2/cont.html
Instead we are to investigate and understand suffering (from the same link):
This understanding involves the second noble truth and leads us to the third. Without looking at suffering to understand it, there is no getting off this series of suffering after suffering.
this long round is owing to our not discovering,
not penetrating four truths. What four?
They are: The Noble Truth of Suffering,
The Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering, The Noble Truth
of the Cessation of Suffering, and the Noble Truth of the Way
Leading to the Cessation of Suffering.
[Digha Nikaya, Sutta 16]
May all beings be well. May all beings be free from suffering.
_/\_
metta
You are absolutely correct.
My only point was looking at how and why things came about.
I agree with you that Buddha didn't share these teachings because of the state of the Indian continent versus what it is today or the lack of medical expertise.
I was only hypothesizing about the conditions, environment, scope - all the variables that were at that point in time which was in effect when Gotama received his enlightenment. It was also a different culture from what has sprang up with Christianity, the eternal soul, Heaven and Hell.
To say that Buddha's teachings were only for that point in time when (in my opinion) suffering was greater than it is today - would mean that Buddha's teachings today are useless.
-bf
Thank God the Chinese were still able to give us Fortune Cookies.
-bf
P.S. And the French for their Fries.
Okay, that's good. I was a bit uncertain as to what you were trying to get across with that post. I think I get what you were saying now.
And keep in mind, also, that the sights of Old Age, Sickness, Death and a Wandering Ascetic were the main driving factors which spurred the buddhas inquiry into suffering (as far as the story goes). And from that point, no earthly pleasure could satisfy the Buddha and he had no choice but to seek out the truth of suffering. These 'four sights' (hmm... can somebody say quiz?) are major points of reflection in the buddhist tradition, which also have some interesting correlations with the Four Noble Truths. Contemplation of these subjects brings about a spirit of renunciation and the wish for buddhahood for the sake of oneself and others.
_/\_
metta
Frangible,
I stumbled across this discourse of the Buddha in my studies and immediately I thought of you. It's a discourse from the Pali canon, the 41st sutta of the book of the nines from the Anguttara Nikaya. I sincerely hope it offers some inspiration to you. I offer an introductory passage here (I took the liberty of bolding the text which may pique your interest), and if you are interested the rest can be read at the link below the passage. Best wishes!
The Buddha's response to the householder's issue follows...find the entire sutta at the following:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an09-041.html
in friendliness,
V.
And chop suey.
As for relevance, it's true that times are different. That's why Padmasambhava (Guru Rinpoche) hid termas that were to be revealed at those times when they were needed. There are still termas being revealed today because they are needed at this time. So while the Buddha's teachings remain true and relevant, the needs of the practitioners do change.
Palzang
I loved the argument between Palzang and BF. It was nice and short, well put forward and without anger. It was a good balance to read both views. And then Not1 comes in with his zinger! What a post! Not1, that one's being saved by me. It brought up all sorts of teachings for me like Pema Chodron speaking on Fear and Fearlessness about our constant tendency to avoid pretty much everything that's even slightly unpleasant. I love that talk. It's so damned true!
I was also of the opinion that we were socially advanced today and that things have gotten better. But now I can let go of that opinion, too, because you're right, Not1, at best it's irrelevant and at worst it's another technique of avoidance. I don't need an opinion on the state of the world anymore after reading this. Things are as they are. There is always room for improvement and we can always do better, but things things are as they are nonetheless.
I LOVE this thread.
I think I'm even going to *gasp* reread it! Sooo good!
Now THIS is what I call entertainment.
Love,
Brigid
It smacks entirely of:
"Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" - !!
It seems the same questions, arguments and dilemmas faced people then, as are facing people now.....!
So we can illustrate the types of 'suffering' which were highly pertinent then, and itemise the different types of 'suffering' more pertinent to now....
Call it, define it and illustrate it as you will - 'suffering' is still 'suffering'......
Great thread, people.... And I hope Frangible is enjoying it -
Now ya see whatcha done - ?!?
Wow, this is exactly the answer to my question that I was not aware existed. Thank you very much for sharing it. I'm still a little confused and will have to study it further.
Nicely done, Vacch! Haven't read through the whole thing yet, but it's perfect! Thank you from me, too.
Pal,
That's a good point. I never really thought about how "seductive" samsara can be. A very good and frightening point. It is one thing to be suffering and seeking enlightenment - because you know to be true -versus- suffering and being too ignorant to know it or do anything about it.
I kind of got off track from my initial response... suffering Now -vs Then. I think the point I wanted to make is: people in Gotama's time WANTED to end a cycle of rebirth. We, as Westerner's, find this a very odd concept. Westerner's LOOK for a reason for something of us to continue on.
-bf