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.
What is it like to be here in samsara?
swaydam
Veteran
I've been thinking about right view. I was thinking if our situation (being unenlightened humans destined for death) could be described in some metaphorical sense it would clear things up. I was kind of thinking that being in samsara is kind of like being in a prison. No real happiness can be found in the prison, but only outside of it. Yet... true happiness is within oneself not in or outside of any prison, so I'm dissatisfied with that metaphor.
Are there any Buddhist texts which describe what the human situation is like metaphorically, or does anybody have a good way to describe it?
Are there any Buddhist texts which describe what the human situation is like metaphorically, or does anybody have a good way to describe it?
0
Comments
http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/fourtruths.html
Christianity is far more realistic in this respect - without making excuses, it acknowledges that the world IS an evil place, full of tears and errors and tragedies. And that Christ will make all things new. One may not believe this, but at least it is more realistic than closing one's eyes to the world and blaming everything on the ego.
It sounds really cliche, but at least it doesn't sound like we're advocating mass suicide... no offense. "Liberation from... the world outside" just sounds too much like a doomsday cult's excuse to spike Kool Aid.
Another description describes the far shore (enlightenment) and to get there we use the raft of the three jewels.
Another description is samsara is what we sleep in and enlightenment is awaking.
Another is the lotus, in mud, samsara, flowering and opening in enlightenment.
And those shiny toys and trinkets include what has been described as " talking school " Buddhism.
Dharma as a hobby. Dharma as a source of fascination.
Of course, this is a practice, so don't expect that your fellow Buddhists don't feel pain and suffering when something big comes along. The only way that can really happen is through enlightenment. But we practice it through meditation and we touch it, through smaller events. For example, we meditate on something like the fact that we have a pain somewhere in our body. And if we sit with it and be present with it, we eventually can let go of some of our instinct to push it away. Eventually, we can get a sense of acceptance-- that this is how it is and there is no use fighting it. The fighting it is causing us to suffer more than if we could accept it for what it is. Similarly, we can meditate on an argument that we had with someone we love or someone we don't love. Either way, if we sit with it and think deeply about it, we can come to the conclusion that it is in the past now and that the person is a human being worth loving. And we let it go, and we suffer less.
As @misecmisc1 says, the prison is within the ego, the "I". Instead of trying to assert our opinions on everything, trying to grasp it and control it when in reality we can't, we let it go; we accept it, and this is when we begin to open the door of our prison.
And I will stress again, this is a psychological practice, not just a philosophy. Acting in life compassionately towards others is also part of the practice. So there is an inward and an outward practice that works to eliminate or at least reduce suffering in two ways, but when practiced deeply, we can see that the inward and outward practices work together as one. Right View leads to Right Thought, which leads to Right Action. And Right Action leads to Right View and Right Thought. And Right Thought leads to Right View and Right Action. They are all contained within each other. This is how the entire 8FP works.
That is basically true to most of us, but have you not heard from the very rich that they are unhappy, money doesnt buy happiness etc, the famous would rather be less so, have more privacy.
This tells us that its a cycle, we want something we dont have, then when we reach our goal, the euphoria does not really last, a few years maybe.
How long does the new car or gadget bring excitement? How long can you be on holiday before yearning for home. How long can you indulge, etc etc, this is whats known as impermanence. Nothing really lasts. The rich are afraid of losing their fortune, of being ill, of being cheated, well everyone have their concerns and fears, it is Samsara after all. Can you take your millions to the after life, or will it be a curse to your children?
From a Buddhist perspective, knowing and understanding impermanence and that desire/cravings for money, objects, persons, status, are never going to bring everlasting happiness or satisfaction. Dont you think that the person who is content is happier. If we can control our cravings and brush it off, wouldn't it be better than unrequited cravings, which will lead to anger, envy, greed and other negative emotions.
This is the meaning of looking within for answers, for us to recognise our emotional attachments and to overcome them. But having enough money to live comfortably is definitely a better option.
There is the suffering of change, losing what we value.
And there is the suffering inherent in a compound world.
It is like having an itch, not being able to find it, yet still having an itch.
Or the weeping and laughter of humans. Right there, so much hope and so much fear. So much acceptance and rejection.
That's it.
It had occurred to me at the time that the feeling wasn't so different than the way I often felt in life. That restless boredom that sometimes creeps up. Addiction is like an intense version of samsara, so obvious that you have to pay attention to it... but general attachment... that is harder to see, but still as painful at times.
. . . I even heard [whispers] samsara and nirvana are the same place
:rocker:
or . . .
a place were the dead come to live (or vice versa)
or . . .
an ocean where the fish think they are drowning
or . . .
a rubbish heap made up of the most precious jewels
or . . .
a house built out of imagination
or . . .
an oar rowing without a boat
:clap:
But why be dead before hand? Why dread the coming suffering? Why destroy this life for the sake of something that has not happened yet?
While I respect the opinion that Buddhists are self-deluding, I can not agree with it.
I hate to enact Godwin's Law, but to avoid talking so vaguely, I'll bring up an extreme example:
To many people what the Nazis did in WW2 was "wrong." But to the Nazis, it was "right." Disallowing women to have jobs used to be "right" but in most modern societies, it is "wrong." See where the problem lies in relying on constructed and ultimately provisional concepts of "good" and "evil' and "right" and "wrong?" The Holocaust, gender oppression (even this word is problematic in this context), etc are "wrong" and "evil" according to many but not all. So how can this objectively be called reality?
I know this will sound really bad - and I don't intend it to be offensive so I apologize in advance if people are offended - but tragic events in history just are. It's on a slippery slope to nihilism, but it's true. To avoid totally slipping into nihilism though, we have to make sure we don't become apathetic to suffering despite avoiding ideological and socially constructed paradigms. It's not about punishing Nazis. It's about seeing the suffering of the victims as well as the suffering of the Germans who joined the Nazi movement because of their suffering and work to lessen the suffering. If I'm not mistaken, this is similar to what Thich Nhat Hanh advocated during the Vietnam War. He didn't see the Vietcong nor the Americans as "evil," but rather as both being victims of fear & suffering and guided his peace work accordingly.
It's way more work than simple black and white punishment/reward. But, in theory, it's more objective and thus addresses suffering directly, not from any side.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.028.than.html
"Just as when boys or girls are playing with little sand castles:[4] as long as they are not free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, that's how long they have fun with those sand castles, enjoy them, treasure them, feel possessive of them. But when they become free from passion, desire, love, thirst, fever, & craving for those little sand castles, then they smash them, scatter them, demolish them with their hands or feet and make them unfit for play.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn23/sn23.002.than.html
http://www.odditycentral.com/pics/tibetan-sand-mandals-the-sacred-art-of-painting-with-colored-sand.html
I understand what you're saying. Things just are. That may be. All I am saying is, as long as we're in the body, there is always going to be the subject-object division. Earthquakes and cancers may be understood in terms of science, but that doesn't change the fact that to me, the subject/observer, it is a painful process. So much so that I may call it evil. But it doesnt matter whether we call it evil or XYZ. My only point is, pure observation is not possible because we will always exist as a subject influencing what we observe.
Perhaps the influencing self, the individual, that which has a self is lessened with practice . . .
The observed is integrated with our being, without this subjective separation . . .
:wave:
Until there is a deep realisation that the separation is illusory, you are trapped in a prison of your own making--it is not the fault of earthquakes or cancer that makes one's life miserable, but how we relate to it--which is due to our own conditioning which should be overcome--or, decide to just remain a slave to circumstance.
The wheel of Fortuna and the wheel of samsara are two different but similar cultural expressions of the same idea.
In my mind - one hot smoking gun for non-dualism.