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.
Buddhism v. Taoism
I have been very attracted to both Taoism and Buddhism over the past couple of years and began practicing mindfulness and the Eightfold Path. I find both to be brilliant and as true as truth can get. However, I have struggled with the Four Noble Truths. The idea that life is suffering/dissatisfaction just never sat well with me. I can recognize clearly that there is a lot of suffering in the world but I also believe that by living by the Eightfold Path, in Nowness, with less attachment and a recognition of emptiness, one can enjoy life on a regular basis. Other than the Four Noble Truths these are all Taoist philosophies which predated Buddhism.
I think maybe I'm misinterpreting the Four Noble Truths to mean that life is never enjoyable because that enjoyment is gone as soon as it arrives. But suffering melts into enjoyment in the same way as the opposite occurs, so why did the Buddha choose suffering over enjoyment? Taoism believes that life is not so bitter. That yes there are attachments that we need to replace with mindfulness but that in the process one can truly enjoy life on a less dramatic basis just by saying to oneself, "Here I am now and I can enjoy this now." Whether it's sitting in traffic, waiting on line or eating a small but delicious meal.
So I guess I'm just asking for some thoughts on these topics. I believe Buddhism to be a beautiful philosophy and feel it can change the world one being at a time. But I'm struggling as I believe we can be happy daily without reaching enlightenment, by just having the right mindset and not harping on suffering so much. So what does everyone think/feel/know?
I think maybe I'm misinterpreting the Four Noble Truths to mean that life is never enjoyable because that enjoyment is gone as soon as it arrives. But suffering melts into enjoyment in the same way as the opposite occurs, so why did the Buddha choose suffering over enjoyment? Taoism believes that life is not so bitter. That yes there are attachments that we need to replace with mindfulness but that in the process one can truly enjoy life on a less dramatic basis just by saying to oneself, "Here I am now and I can enjoy this now." Whether it's sitting in traffic, waiting on line or eating a small but delicious meal.
So I guess I'm just asking for some thoughts on these topics. I believe Buddhism to be a beautiful philosophy and feel it can change the world one being at a time. But I'm struggling as I believe we can be happy daily without reaching enlightenment, by just having the right mindset and not harping on suffering so much. So what does everyone think/feel/know?
0
Comments
Maybe this thought is too westernized but the Buddha did want us to test his teachings for ourselves. Thoughts?
Why does the state of enjoyment depend on the timeframe you experience it? Enjoyment is enjoyment, whether you let it pass, or cling to it.
If you enjoy something, you enjoy it, and then that's it -- the moment's over. Whether you enjoy it for a week, a day, or a year, it's all temporary (impermanent). As a result, hanging on to attachments toward anything (be it positive or negative) creates nothing but an illusion. That which makes you happy, or the happiness itself, is eventually going to be gone. It's a false perception.
Letting go of these attachments doesn't mean you don't enjoy life. It just means you live in reality, rather than in an illusionary state.
But suffering melts into enjoyment in the same way as the opposite occurs, so why did the Buddha choose suffering over enjoyment?
Buddha did not choose suffering over enjoyment. Buddha only points out that life contains suffering, due to attachment (not joy, not emotion, not experience, but attachment to any of those things and then some). He also points out how we can overcome it.
Buddha actually rejected the idea that choosing suffering was a way to enlightenment. He starved himself in the forest for years and in the end, realized it was not the way.
Taoism believes that life is not so bitter.
This may seem a little blunt, please excuse me as a result, but: In a way, I read this as almost "I want to follow Taoism because I am attached to the desire to feel all warm and fluffy inside." Life is temporary. We live, we die. Life is not fluffy.. life contains suffering.
The Buddhist path isn't bitter and nihilistic... it's realism. That's all
That yes there are attachments that we need to replace with mindfulness but that in the process one can truly enjoy life on a less dramatic basis just by saying to oneself, "Here I am now and I can enjoy this now."
Again, Buddhism doesn't seek to extinguish your humanity. Humanity involves emotion. But instead, it teaches that suffering arises from attachment to emotions or situations or objects and so on. The emotions arise, but let them pass -- why not? They are temporary. Why even live in a state of illusion for even a single moment?
Buddhism doesn't say drive away the joy, though. That would be just as bad, don't you see? Forcing out emotion isn't being realistic either.
You are viewing Buddhism as an extreme: The elimination of sensation. Buddhism instead is the Middle Path: Experience, sure.. but eliminate attachment to that which is temporary. Let it pass as it arises, and live in reality.
Sorry, I think others on this forum will be able to address it much more clearly than I, I just thought I'd add something
I follow Buddhism because I test it and see that it is true. That's all.
If one adds to his life before removing the cause of misery in his life, he has merely added more misery along with more life and thus has done little more than become bigger but not better with merely more of the same.
Why? The 4NTs advise us there is a here & now end of suffering.
Personally, I find this very optimistic & empowering.
You actually do not understand the 4NTs at all. The 4NTs do not state this. You have misunderstood the 4NTs and possibly read & heard too many incorrect teachings about them.
True.
The Buddha said birth is difficult to bear (dukkha). When most women give birth to a child, is this difficult or is this easy? When a child is born, helpless, deficating & urinating uncontrollably, is this difficult or is this easy for the child & mother?
Sickness, aging, death, pain, separation...are these things generally difficult or easy to bear?
At the end of the 1st NT, the Buddha provided an enlightened view of suffering and advised, in essence, suffering is clinging to the five aggregrates as "I" and "mine".
In essence, the enlightened viewpoint is birth, aging, sickness, death, pain, separation, etc, are only suffering when these experiences are regarded as "I", "me" and "mine".
The Buddha chose the end of suffering.
The Buddha chose an enjoyment that is permanent & reliable (rather than enjoyments that bring fleeting happiness & much disappointment).
The Buddha advised Nibbanam paranam sukham: nirvana is the supreme happiness.
Kind regards
Our suffering is only in that we try and create permanence in an ever-changing reality that has none.
"Life Isn't Just Suffering", by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight, June 7, 2009, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/lifeisnt.html .
More specifically the 4th and 5th paragraphs.
Respectfully,
Raven