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.
Starting to doubt Buddhism... was that all that Shakyamuni Buddha taught?
I mean looking at the Four Noble truths, is this the only thing that this big religion has to offer? Escaping suffering? Ok life is full of suffering... so what? What about love, and enjoyment and the pleasure of just living, or being glad that you are who you are even though you have flaws. I think that it is why there where 3 turnings on the Dharma wheel. People needed more. And ok, do I really want to stop being a human being with its fears, and longings and all that stuff that make me a human being?
All these might sound naive, considering the fact that I've just started exploring Buddhism, but I don't know. If the basis of Buddhism is the Four Noble Truths, about suffering, escaping it and such, then I feel that I'm missing the point here when an infinity of Universe lies in front of me, with so much more to be explored and discovered and understood. What makes Buddhism different from nihilism, when we are erasing all that is human within us?
Sorry about my bubbling but I felt the need to share this with you. What do you feel about my reduction of Buddhism to the Four Noble Truths...?
:-/
All these might sound naive, considering the fact that I've just started exploring Buddhism, but I don't know. If the basis of Buddhism is the Four Noble Truths, about suffering, escaping it and such, then I feel that I'm missing the point here when an infinity of Universe lies in front of me, with so much more to be explored and discovered and understood. What makes Buddhism different from nihilism, when we are erasing all that is human within us?
Sorry about my bubbling but I felt the need to share this with you. What do you feel about my reduction of Buddhism to the Four Noble Truths...?
:-/
0
Comments
You have to realize that when you remove fear and longings they will be replaced by better taints like compassing and joy. It's kind of logical, when you have nothing you to fear lose, you will be happy. Also when you have nothing to be guilty of, you will be at ease. This is one of the reasons why we have the moral precepts of not lying etc.
So Buddhism isn't nihilism. It's a road to something. Indeed the 4 noble truths are the core of Buddhism, but don't forget that 'cessation of suffering' means it will be replaced with happiness. I agree that looking at the 4 noble truths without this in mind Buddhism might seem quite depressing
With metta,
Sabre
I'll be interested to read the responses as they come in.
Personally, I think Buddhism does offer two things -- a way to diminish suffering, and a moral code.
But I'm not convinced that it has all the answers that mankind has always asked. I'm not sure any religion does.
But I do know that in many ways, Buddhist principles have helped me live a calmer more thoughtful life.
I hope the "taints" I come upon later are fun! (I assume you meant traits).
You're completely missing the point.
Forget the universe, forget infinity.
What you need to do is to stop suffering, and to just revel in love and enjoyment and the pleasure of living.
Exclusively.
Just do this, to the exclusion of everything else, and you'll have realised Buddhism..
Let me know when you get it.
because right now - I don't think you get it.
They are very deep and wide in their scope. They can be expressed in countless ways. They can be seen in countless states.
Keep on keepin' on!:)
Example, relationships, here and here, just a mere two:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.055.than.html
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/dn/dn.31.0.nara.html
In reality, there is no 2nd and 3rd turning of the wheel
In reality, folks have simply not studied & taken to heart the extensiveness of what Shakyamuni Buddha taught
Kind regards
http://www.sofiatopia.org/bodhi/buddha_nature.htm
"Shenpen:
Well - there has to be more to the story than just 'this is not me', doesn't there? So it's good to keep looking as it were. Even though the angry thought is just a thought and 'I had an angry thought' is just a thought - there is still the space of awareness which is very strange � it's not your ordinary space 'out there', is it?
There are many questions to be asked about this space of awareness. It's not at all obvious what we are talking about really. So it's right to have doubts. That is your intelligence! But you need to doubt meditatively - maybe its best to call me about how to do that."
"A student writes:
"I have been returning again and again to various exercises in the first coursebook, and feel like I'm beginning to have some glimpse of the meaning.
As far as I understand, 'mind' is that vague sense of space/ consciousness or awareness, which is a constant factor of all existence, even if one is not aware, so to speak, of the awareness and is caught up in some aspect of it.
Mental phenomena, for instance a thought, or a feeling, enter this space and then pass away. The space remains.
So this corresponds to Openness and Clarity: the mind is fundamentally open and clear- it is Openness, Awareness/ Clarity which remains (even when it feels like it doesn't).
'Heart' corresponds to Sensitivity, which is experienced either as Dukkha (suffering) or Sukkha (bliss) ... it is also constant, somehow, as the base of our being."
Shenpen replies:
Yes.
Student:
"So you are right that (maybe due to our cultural baggage) heart and mind seem separate and indeed they are experienced in this way as well. Together they comprise Openness, Clarity and Sensitivity - which is chitta (I'm still hazy on this area, but I'm working on it). Even though all else passes, this (chitta) is permanent, although it is not fixed but dynamic and ever changing."
Shenpen:
You cannot really say it's ever-changing � that would make it impermanent. I know what you mean though. How can one express this? It's a kind of movement within itself that isn't some 'thing' or some object of knowledge that moves or changes - yet you are right, it's alive and it's uncertain how it will manifest.
Shenpen:
"This also makes sense of the Three Truths of not-self, dukkha and impermanence, if I understand�"
Shenpen:
Although of course it's true, I am not sure quite what you have in mind here. Mind is openness which is not-self in the sense that what we usually take to be self is not this. Clarity is awareness of impermanence, seeing that the nature of what we usually take to be objects of knowledge never really arises or perishes. Sensitivity is dukkha, suffering.
As we open to the pain in our experience we find it is nothing other than the sensitivity and responsiveness of our essential nature, our true being and as such it is not the suffering we construct around it. It is pure compassion or even pure bliss - qualities we associate more with heart than mind I think.
Student:
"The truth of heart and mind can only be known (i.e., intellectually) retrospectively. I have found it very useful to reflect that a particular thought or feeling (like when I got very angry for a second) entered, stayed and passed inside this space of awareness, but that 'mind' and 'heart' remained. But in a sense, 'knowing' in this way is not true knowledge: Only by having faith in the nature of mind and sensitivity, i.e., just letting everything be - can one truly live it and truly experience it as oneself (non-conceptual) not as another thought."
Shenpen:
That is right
Student:
"I have found that when a powerful emotion or thought arises, it helps me to hold it in that space of awareness if I can simply reflect that it is not me. By reflecting that it is simply a passing phenomenon I find it's easier to let go of it, and everything goes swimmingly. But then doubt kicks in and I think 'well, it IS me, isn't it' or 'well then, what AM I, if this isn't?'"
Shenpen:
Well - there has to be more to the story than just 'this is not me', doesn't there? So it's good to keep looking as it were. Even though the angry thought is just a thought and 'I had an angry thought' is just a thought - there is still the space of awareness which is very strange � it's not your ordinary space 'out there', is it?
There are many questions to be asked about this space of awareness. It's not at all obvious what we are talking about really. So it's right to have doubts. That is your intelligence! But you need to doubt meditatively - maybe its best to call me about how to do that.
Student:
"Somewhere you wrote about how the ego kind of reacts to insights which will challenge it and puts a halt to them."
Shenpen:
There is that as well, of course � the backlash of the departing ego.
Student:
"It feels like that might be what's happening, but I find it very difficult to let go of the doubt itself.""
Shenpen:
The doubt is good. It's the basis for further insight.
I believe that to deny the possibility of the Third and Fourth Turnings of the Wheel is to deify Siddhartha Gautama- I believe it entirely possible that Mahayana and Vajrayana are very valid forms of Buddhism, and as a Mahayana/Vajrayanist, I take a great deal of comfort from them. I am especially fond of HH Dalai Lama (if you see the abbreviation HHDL here that's what it means).
HH Dalai Lama has called himself a "professional laugher". I have been less than a foot away from HHDL for two or three hours, so, no matter what others may say about him, his vibes are right for me. He radiates happiness and compassion but is also an extremely astute statesman and Buddhist scholar. I recommend any of his books for general readership as "starters".
Don't worry. Be happy.
Through gentle wisdom
Possibly try Christianity. Modern Christians enjoy the notion of intelligent design & the wonder of creation.
In fact, Islam is also enamoured with the wonder of creation.
The Buddha was interested that each person find the religion or philosophy that suits them. The Buddha was not interested in entertaining people with laughter just to recruit them.
So you are basically saying:
a) Buddhism doesnt develop love, enjoyment, pleasure,"being glad" and accepting reality.
b)Without Fears and longings there is no point in existence.
Shakyamuni Buddha taught extensively about developing mature emotions, such as gratitude, loving-kindness, compassion, appreciation, etc
as I see it, buddhism is not nihilistic, because it sees suffering as a problem. To hold the view that suffering is irrelevant would seem nihilistic to me.
Maybe suffering does not seem that big a problem to you, because you feel that the human condition (I mean your view on what it means to be human), in combination with the pleasant things that life has to offer, gives a satisfactory balance. Keep in mind though that grasping for those pleasant things will produce suffering. I'm not trying to convince you that suffering is a problem, just 'be a light onto yourself'. If suffering does become an important problem for you at some point, you will no doubt start searching.
Best regards
Maarten
Shakyamuni Buddha taught extensively about ordinary human beings enjoying pleasure in appropriate ways
It is like visiting a hospital and expecting the hospital to be same as Disneyland.
The Buddha was the Spiritual Doctor.
The Buddha came to offer remedies for human problems, uncertainties & difficulties
Kind regards
therefore do not give up investigating (whenever possible) what you have learned, please
"When Xuanzang, a Buddhist scholar from China decided to take the long journey to India to better understand the teachings of the Buddha, out of gratitude an old diseased man offered Xuanzang a copy of Prajñaparamita Sutra to ease the tortures of the journey. Xuanzang made a habit of reciting it continually throughout his journey of 15 thousand miles to land of the Buddha. He encountered many obstacles and survived many near death situations, and each time his recitation of Prajñaparamita Sutra with utmost devotion invoked Matriyea Buddha. The miraculous pilgrimage of Xuanzang led people of China for many centuries, to believe that Lotus sutra has miraculous power and its reciting could ward off the troubles of life and help achieve the ultimate destiny and even today people in china continue to recite heart sutra as a part of their daily prayers and at the time of difficulties."
This is why I really don't like, as an English speaking person, to use English words for certain Buddhist terms-- "Dukkha" does not just mean "suffering"-- it covers a much more broader range than just this. In fact, it was this narrow understanding of "dukkha" that kept me away from investigating Buddhism for years, dismissing it as merely a "pessimistic" religion.
My personal doorway in was in a circuitous fashion-- through the Dao De Jing (or, often transliterated, the Tao Te Ching) and Japanese haiku, and then into Zen Buddhism, which is, I think, partly indebted to Daoism. The Zen approach has a different flavour which then made my understanding of Buddhism as a whole much clearer.
But to get back to dukkha: Dukkha comes about by wanting things to be different from how they are-- which means we are always thinking of the past and thinking of the future. But there is one thing we are not doing, and that is, being present in THIS moment, THIS place. This is the flip-side of dukkha. Dukkha arises because of clinging, yes, but another way of saying this is that we simply aren't mindful of THIS.
I think, in the most basic sense, this is what is meant in the Mahayana saying (via Nagarjuna) that samsara is nirvana and nirvana is samsara (its a bit more complex than that, but basically that is it). It is all in your mind, and Buddhism is learning to transform your mind (and by total extension, one's life as well as all lives you are interconnected with).
To me there is nothing more life affirming than this: To be awake in this place, this moment, rather than chasing thoughts around of woulda-coulda-shoulda. This is not nihilism, however. Ironically, it can only be seen as nihilism if one actually devalues THIS miracle of a universe because they want something OTHER than this. It is precisely that Buddhism is life-affirming that I seek to practise inasmuch as I am able.
Here is an old Zen story about Bankei and miracles:
When Bankei was preaching at Ryumon temple, a Shinshu priest, who believed in salvation through the repitition of the name of the Buddha of Love, was jealous of his large audience and wanted to debate with him.
Bankei was in the midst of a talk when the priest appeared, but the fellow made such a disturbance that Bankei stopped his discourse and asked about the noise.
"The founder of our sect," boasted the priest, "had such miraculous powers that he held a brush in his hand on one bank of the river, his attendant held up a paper on the other bank, and the teacher wrote the holy name of Amida through the air. Can you do such a wonderful thing?"
Bankei replied lightly: "Perhaps your fox can perform that trick, but that is not the manner of Zen. My miracle is that when I feel hungry I eat, and when I feel thirsty I drink."
Or, as Albert Camus once wrote, "If there is a sin against life, it consists perhaps not so much in despairing of life as in hoping for another, and in eluding the implacable grandeur of this life."
Budding Flowers need to be given time to bloom, there is no need to hurry! :-)
The two plum trees—
I love their blooming!
one early, one later.
~ Buson
I have - YET AGAIN! - removed and deleted several posts here which were merely tit-for-tat bickering and point scoring:
Would Dhamma Dhatu, jeffrey and Vinlyn kindly keep their personal spats to PMs and resist the temptation of broadcasting how clever, witty, articulate and erudite they are, on public forum, in someone else's thread, which is after all, in the Buddhism FOR BEGINNERS thread?
Thank you all so much.
Carry on, and address the OP's points, and those alone.
In the same way which the existentialist view from Camus which you cited identifies, the Christian religion has identified that the only unforgiveable sin is to permanently turn one's back on the Holy Spirit - the consequences of which is that we give up trying.
As DD discussed earlier, Buddhist practice for me is about us, as individuals, developing and maturing in our ability to accept and live in reality - as it is.
A very good friend of mine, who is also a monk, told me that one could spend a life-time studying the Four Noble truths, and even then, not fully appreciate the lesson and profound teachings therein.
It is one thing to read them. It is another thing to understand them. It is yet another, to recognise and know their profound Truth. And again, realising them, and living by them, with each breath you take, is the greatest challenge of them all.
Perhaps it may be of service to us, if you try to let us know what you truly perceive their meaning to be.
What do you see as their basic primary message?
This really should have been asked earlier.....
In this, you will be glad to know, you are absolutely spot-on-correct, by the way.....
But I am more sceptical to the teachings of karma and rebirth. Also I don´t like how they talk about extinguish desire and our self, because I think that we need this and it is a natural force of a human being. So I think a balance is necessary, a little desire is needed and a sense of self is also needed. But not clinging to a big EGO or unchanging self.
If we don´t have this balance and go to far or deep with the teachings, I think we can become dysfunctional human beings. That is my point of view: BALANCE
It is, indeed, easy to read the Four Noble Truths or the Eightfold Path, etc. It can be done in minutes.
It is far more difficult to be MINDFUL of them in daily life. As Federica pointed out, I wasn't very mindful of right speech earlier in this thread. A good example of how easy it is to stray from the path in an attempt to be clever.
When I was a school principal and had a difficult conference coming up (whether it might be an evaluation conference with a teacher or a suspension conference with a parent, for example), I try to spend some time in preparation literally being mindful of my goals and how BEST to achieve them in a way that incorporated the Noble Eightfold Path. Usually, those conferences went pretty well. Some other times, when I didn't have time to contemplate in advance in that way, I wouldn't end up being as skillful, and sometimes those conferences didn't go so well.
So for me, it isn't how many different books can I read about Buddhist principles, and I am lazy about that, but how can I be best be mindful of the basic teachings of Buddhism.
And Frederica, are you a Theravada follower, for it seems to me that you are a more litelarist in your approach of the Dharma than others. I would to hear from you...
It seems to me that there are two views that Buddhists have about kamma.
One is that it is a rather simple action causes reaction. Bad action causes bad reaction. Good action causes good reaction. Perhaps due to my background in science, that makes a lot of sense to me.
The other view of kamma that I have seen is that there is some sort of "dispenser of the 'fruits' of karma", and that kamma can occur over different lifetimes. For example, there is a belief by many (if not most Thais) that those with birth defects are suffering from kamma of a past life. For me, that takes the concept of action causing reaction too far, although I will remain open minded about it.
As you practice, if you apply the teachings to your life, you begin to realize that you're not becoming less human, but more so. You don't stop feeling pain, but you stop inflicting it upon yourself and others, because life includes enough pain as it is. You stop judging yourself and others and begin seeing everyone, everywhere, as the precious lives they are. You stop letting the little worries and attitudes get in the way of appreciating and enjoying the life around you at this moment. In other words, Buddhism opens up your life to all that reality has to offer, in all its glory and mess and sometimes tragedy and sometimes marvelous beauty.
Buddhism can be a path to transforming your life. Don't mistake what we do here, as useful as it is sometimes, for applying the teachings to your life. Don't mistake even meditation for getting up off your ass and diving head first into what life brings you today. All the teachings, all the sutras and meditation in the world can't nudge you that tiny, extra distance to a clear mind, unless you are willing to change.
Hope this helps.
I agree that it is good to have balance, and I believe that if we do not create obstacles, a balance will establish (this is a matter of faith). In my opinion, holding views is what creates obstacles. That's why I think it's better not to maintain the view that we need a sense of self, or that we need to have desires. Likewise, I would not advocate the view that we need to be without a sense of self, and without desires. The best thing to do (again, in my opinion) is to let go of views and trust that the wisdom to live well will arise naturally (I'm not saying to not study buddhism or other philosophy, as I do feel that it helps to awaken this wisdom).
Absence of any uncertainty, any doubt, any confusion, any delusion & all ignorance…
Presence of confidence, cleared certainty, understanding all, and direct experience…
Absence of any greed, lust, desire, urge, attraction, hunger, temptation and pull…
Absence of any hate, anger, aversion, hostility, irritation, & stubborn rigidity…
Presence of universal goodwill, infinite friendliness, all-embracing & boundless kindness…"
That sounds pretty good if you ask me.
One could use an analogy of a glass of water to describe it. Most people are like a glass of cloudy, polluted water. The water is cloudy and polluted because it contains impurities. Buddhism does not erase the water, it simply erases the impurities that are in the water, so in the end you are left with a completely clean and pure glass of water. It does not erase all that it human, it simply purifies it. Does that make sense?
Everything subsequently broadcast and taught by the Buddha, comes back to these, and takes from these.
The Dhammapada is said to be the sum of all his teachings, presented in brief and digestible bites.
It is true; I am a simply-minded person.
I sometimes feel long discussions particularly on hypothesis can be needlessly time-consuming and ultimately frustrating, when in truth, all we need, is right there, within these 17.
But what a "17" it is - !!
My own take on Kamma, is that there is Positive Kamma, which we strive to cultivate and focus on; negative Kamma - to be eliminated and worked through, and neutral kamma, which either has a neutral indifferent effect, or may cumulate one way or the other, dependant on circumstances.
The most important moment to consider, is the one you're in right now. Whether past kamma ripens or not, is speculative and impossible to determine. Best not dwell on what possibly might have been; best focus on what is.
:om: :rolleyes:
As for reducing Buddhism to the four noble truths , I think they give a fair overview of Buddhism, which is all about the pursuit of true happiness.
The Buddha approached the problem of mental stress and suffering like a doctor, formulating the four noble truths in the same way that ancient Indian physicians formulated medical diagnoses, i.e., disease (stress), cause (craving), prognosis (a cure/cessation of craving is possible) and treatment (the noble eightfold path).
While it may sounds overly simplistic, the basic premise of the path can be summed up by this short passage from the Dhammapada: Ultimately, every teaching in Buddhism is a tool to be used in the pursuit of happiness, and the majority of them focus on our actions and intentions because that's where the real work of moral and spiritual purification takes place (e.g., MN 61). That's why, in Buddhism, wisdom begins by asking the following questions: This sort of contemplative practice isn't necessarily for everyone, but the teachings are there for whomever finds them useful. The Buddha's teachings are nothing if not pragmatic in nature. I think this is made especially clear in MN 22, where the Buddha likens his teachings to a raft:
Great post. Nice to see ou quoting the dharmapada(IMO, that is the book all Buddhists would be wise to read throughout their lives).
The only area I think that is underlooked by the kind of account you give is the place of cold hard philosophising on the three marks of existence and how they condition experience. Anyone can understand that and it brings its own illuminations on the "human" dharma you rightly say is the core of the practice.
Namaste