The Art of Happiness
Jeroen
Luminous beings are we, not this crude matterNetherlands Veteran
A friend on another forum said to me, “You seem to want to idealise poor people. Would you ever choose to live long-term as a poor man in India?”
I would wish for them to have happiness, which cannot be bought, but which can be found in Freedom. I don’t think that’s idealising people, just acknowledging that the quest for happiness is universal.
Often it is people’s desires that make them unhappy, whether they realise it or not. People who think they are too fat, lonely and wanting a rich husband, envious of the status of others, it all is desire and part of the mind.
So I think whether you are rich or poor, there is a way to happiness, as long as you know the art of being satisfied with life’s small pleasures. A cup of tea, or a favourite piece of music on the radio.
As a child, your expectations are small. As an adult, things get out of hand. Your desires get large, until you start on the spiritual path and let it all go again, recognising the ultimate futility of the thing. And in the end you are satisfied with a cup of tea again.
In Poonjaji the other day I read “this is the discrimination of the burning ghat: in the end there is nothing left of your body but a few ounces of ash.” And you can’t take possessions, money or family with you when you go.
Comments
I am happy to be mad enough to use Linux
@Jeroen you might find it interesting to read a bit about research into subjective well-being (SWB). From what I gather, SWB increases with wealth, up to a certain point where it does not any more. So the 'intuitive' answer that we need to have the basics covered but don't need Ferraris appears to hold true.
Thanks @marcitko I had heard that before, but had ‘conveniently’ forgotten about it.
...is when one is happy for no particular reason
I have a bad smelling zen confession from the bah humbug collections..
When our mentality reduces one's worth in the world to whether we are happy or not, serious suffering is already in play.
Here, even the "May all beings be happy", sounds like more soporific twaddle.
I think the word "happiness" is very vague, especially when thought of as something that's good and worthy of being sought after. It's just an emotion. It will come and go. It is morally neutral and may very well be a cause of one's wider delusion & suffering.
A Meditation teacher that I respected used to say, "A dog asleep in the sun is happy. If that's really all you're after, please don't hesitate to take that snoozing somewhere else."
Society today chases after happiness like junkies tweaking after stimulations that will never be enough.
Did the Buddha teach anything more than how to awaken from such dreaming's.
I have a suspicion that a certain amount of dreaming is inevitable.
The thing is, pretty much all spirituality involves some imagination. Gods, myths, heroes, the hereafter, all are imagination-heavy processes. You can place your trust in the Buddha, that he saw the cosmology correctly, but that is about as far as it goes.
Nope! It was those pesky Bodhisattva's that introduced Gunk-Buddhism...
I have until recently only regularly ever practised just sitting, vipassana and very minimal visualisations.
However we all start with fantasy Buddhism or whatever initially, rings our fly whisk, bell etc.
Anyway I am off to save the world for the Maitriya...
Happy or knot.
to me, happyness is peace of mind. buddhist view anchors wise living. wise living subside unhappy states,dukkhas. more happy states, in the buddhist path leads to an awaken life, more peace and less drama. when we continue on, the buddha eye opens to
a peace of mind what he calles nirvana. no more grasping. complete in your self in the metaphor, arrive to the new day. hence. buddhist habit becomes a happy way of life.
what has help me is ask, does this lead to suffering. for me if it leads to suffering dont do it. conversly, does this lead to happy, then do it. i.e. does stealing lead to suffering, yes.does giving lead to happyness, yes for me, giving makes others and me happy--share and care.
I’ve come to the conclusion that what I believe in is what I have experienced, seen or have been able to discover for myself. So things like karma and rebirth are outside of my experience; I have heard about them but have been unable to truly discern them. Therefore the Buddha’s view on becoming free from rebirth has become largely meaningless to me.
For many ordinary Buddhists too I think Nirvana is a distant goal, but they could make use of simple techniques to reduce suffering, such as mindfulness and letting go. I believe that these techniques should be the first things that are taught on the path to happiness.
Learning to relax and be in the body, to actually feel the body-mind without judgment and learning to observe it and know it’s ways, makes more sense to me than focussing on sitting meditation. Let peace and quiet come, they will naturally after a period of observing.
And even then, it becomes more a belief than a rational or scientific approach to religion.
I think this is sort of how I feel about the teachings as well in a practical sense. Though not fully, because I do think deep down I still hold out the possibility for karma and rebirth. For some patterns I've had in life, karma fits as a contributing factor, but far from anything provable, so I just hold open the possibility in my mind.
I try to live in a way that allows for some peace and happiness in the here and now but still prepares the way for a happy future life should that be the case. There isn't much conflict I don't think.
I'm not familiar with the styles of meditation Osho or other non dual teachers teach. What you're describing though sounds pretty much like my sitting practice. There are lots of differing techniques, perhaps the type taught by the Insight Meditation Society (Joseph Goldstein, Jack Kornfield, Sharon Salzberg, Gil Fronsdale, etc.) would better suit you?
Thanks @person… I haven’t looked at the Insight Meditation Society before, I’ll take a look the next time I’m feeling meditative
I know what you mean when you say “you hold open the possibility in your mind”, that’s exactly what I did too for some years. But that takes effort and it creates uncertainty. So when I recently had a look at what I really believe, I realised that some of these ‘maybes’ did not have the support of heart or mind or experience. In a way I am simplifying my beliefs.
With Osho too, I am coming to realise that much of what he said was aimed specifically at the people asking the questions, and can’t be taken as general advice. Often he talked in terms of what was poetic, or in esoteric forms. So there is further simplification.
I'm reflecting on this and am unsure how to feel. On the one hand simplifying beliefs and letting go of excess makes sense. On the other, uncertainty and "not knowing" is a positive spiritual and intellectual state of mind and practice. I think for myself, I like the complexity, it feels more in line with the world, and considering multiple perspectives has many benefits.
Thus have I heard and so I've been told...
Ehipassiko.... experience it/see for yourself
So I had a gander at their website, they say they are a “Theravada-inspired society” and teach vipassana. They teach in combination with Spirit Rock in California and have quite a few big names on their roster. Insight are well-known and visited by a lot of media personalities like Dan Harris. I’ll have a look at their main teachers, you never know what you might find…
Thanks for the reminder @Shoshin1 … even the idea of ‘sticking by your own experience’ is old, as the saying Ehipassiko shows. Nothing new under the sun.