Do you think Buddhsim promises too much?

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by greenberg, Nov 9, 2007.

  1. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    Well, we are "Westerners".
    One thing I found really odd but very telling about Buddhists from traditional Buddhists countries is that they don't talk all that much about Buddhism, if at all. Whereas American, European, Australian Buddhists are very very talkative about it.
    This is of course just my casual observation, but several other people confirmed it.

    I think we as "Westerners" suffer from this tendency to think that if we can't explain ourselves and have others understand us, then we're not entitled to think the way we do. And this translates also in the way we approach Buddhism.

    I myself often feel torn, because if I would speak only as much as I deem would be proper for a Buddhist, that would cause me a feeling of alienation so strong that I can't cope with for long.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Hey, no need to be Buddhist, just be yourself,
    what's more there to wish for?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    But that's probably because the term "psychological" doesn't mean much to them, nor are our explanations of it helpful.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    And for me that has seemed like a place they needed to learn from us, just as they have things to teach us.
     
  8. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    I don't notice you speaking about abstract things you haven't experienced here - setting aside the problem with experiencing abstract things. But maybe you re holding yourself back.

    When I traveled in the East I was certainly struck by certian kinds of strengths people had, perhaps stressed in more dedicated Buddhists, but I also felt like something was lacking in relation to what I want for myself. How I want to be and express myself in the world.

    One can assume because Buddhism 'works' to whatever degree it works for you that it is a perfect system and does not need complementing. You can draw that conclusion or make that intuitive jump. You could also consider that at least in your case, you want/need/are drawn to something more, something in addition, to get where you want to go. It might turn out to have been Buddhism after all - I mean there are Buddhist psychologists both here adn in the East and many of them and their clients blab away.

    Or maybe it will end up being something else, your own blend.
     
  9. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    I don't think so. The term "psychological" is part of our conception of the mind-body problem.
    They conceive of the mind-body problem differently than we do, but that doesn't necessarily mean they lack something or "have it wrong".

    There's plenty of terms that cannot be adequately translated from "West" to "East" and vice-versa.

    You'll probably pick on this - The by-now legendary story goes that the Dalai Lama when he first met with Westerners, didn't know what "self-hatred" was. When it was explained to him, he cried. He didn't think people could feel that way about themselves.
    It is said that "even the worst Tibetan villain loves himself".
     
  10. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    Wrong for me. Expression of emotions as viewed both culturally and in Buddhism is an area that does not feel right for me.



    I've met him and I can only tell you that he is not a role model for me, spiritually - not sure I like that word, but I want to make it clear I am not talking about his problems with the Chinese government. There are presumptions of authority and obedience and self-restraint in the East that I think have self-hatred in them. They are so accepted, they are not noticed. It is not my intention to pick on this. I just don't feel good about what they aim for in self-relation. If it feels good to you, go for it.
     
  11. DeepThought Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,461

    I agree.

    Surely it has a lot to do with the physical structure of the mind?
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2007
  12. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    i think, in order to couch your questions in the manner presented, you must have either negated the alleged claim or qualified it. the premises you appear to present are that there is either a partial or complete lack of a cessation in suffering

    if this proposal is valid, i would like to hear your reasoning

    my position on the alleged claim is that i really have no choice but to accept it at face value. i admit it as a possibility but have no conclusions to rank it as a probability. i yet remain noncommittal about it


    i have a post where i caterwauled into his ass. i'll dig it up. the good dalai was dogmeat. i think..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    it probably has a lot to do with it. meditative states have also, long been associated with the use of hallucinogens. however, i am pretty sure consciousness, the identity that experiences these states also plays a part.

    /snicker
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2007
  13. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    Personally, I find the promise that there could be a complete cessation of suffering rather outrageous, too much to realistically aim for. Also, except for Buddhism, I don't know of any religion who would make such a promise.

    But if I would have stated that in my OP, I suspect it would affect too much the way people would respond. So instead I went for a more general approach.
     
  14. Avatar smoking revolver Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    19,083
    Why?
     
  15. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    To me -and I am certainly not the only one- a complete cessation of suffering is as outlandish a notion as it gets.
    If I look at this world, at my life, it doesn't appear that there could be an end to the hellish round; an amelioration, a temporary break, yes; but a complete cessation of suffering doesn't appear to be possible.

    I'm not saying that I think that a complete cessation of suffering is impossible. Just that it is unlikely, not apparent, or very difficult to attain.
    -But then again, such a stance is in line with the Buddhist teachings: they don't suggest that suffering could be ended just like that, without putting in the right effort.
     
  16. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    You come off here, and in general, as a very, very honest person. Very self aware. It is impressive.
     
  17. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    i agree. both you and green are an excellent read. welcome to sci, guys

    ------------------------------------
    thank you. however, the repeated usage of the qualifier; "complete", forces me to reiterate my original question and present, once again for your consideration. please answer at your convenience

    perhaps a clarification of the question. i shall reword...what then?

    /cackle

    suffering. there seems to be an implicit acceptance of siddharta's definition. justify, please
     
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2007
  18. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    Thank you. I'm glad to hear that.
     
  19. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    Thank you, too.



    Yes, I am accepting Siddhartha's definition. It seems to be the one that covers best what I'm having in mind.

    It also seems to be the only one that frames the issue of suffering in a manner that makes suffering appear to be something that can be ended by one's own efforts. As opposed to many other religions and philosophies that frame suffering as, for example, "an illusion", "something only God can save a person from" and many others that don't give suffering and happiness much regard at all. (Note that believing that one cannot end one's suffering is another enormous source of suffering.)

    What I find appealing about Buddhism is that it deals with things that actually matter to me in my life - my happiness and my suffering. Whereas many other religions and philosophies have most intricate metaphysics, dazzling concepts, they pay all too little attention to the daily grind of an individual's existence, the-hour-by-hour, 24-7. In my opinion, at least.


    I'm not sure I've answered your question, though, as I'm not sure I understand it correctly.
    I'm presuming you're familiar with the Buddhist teachings on suffering?


    I'm not sure I understand. You mean something like "What happens after the complete cessation of suffering?"
     
  20. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    Greenberg,
    Have you experienced reduction in suffering so far from Buddhist practice?
    (and by the way, a negative answer is not something I would consider telling. I mean I've had a boil lanced - I did it myself - and it hurt like hell, but it certainly reduced suffering after the transition period was over. For example.)
     
  21. Grantywanty Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,888
    My first infatuation with Buddhism came through ZEn stories - later meditation. I loved the sense of freedom, the creativity, the attempt to teach people to be transcultural. I also loved the skepticism aimed at thinking and words and what the past has taught us. Toss in the often natural settings and I was hooked.
     
  22. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    sorry buddy
    i tend to get nitpicky about semantics. i should have simply pointed out that using "complete" is redundant as cessation by itself implies complete. what the usage of this qualifier does however is complicate matters.

    it introduces further notions such as, incomplete, somewhat complete, not complete. there seems to be an a infinite amount of "degrees of completion" within the concept of complete. we have setup the conception in such a manner that there is a substance or quantity to it at all times. the negation of cessation will not occur thru it. there always a degree of completeness or incompleteness,which ever way you want to look at it.

    so inherent in your question was the notion of some degree of completion. if that is accepted, i am almost certain that there is no logical reason to deny a complete cessation is possible

    "what then" referred to the degree of partiality you necessarily had to assume in order to be logically consistent

    trick question hence the cackle

    ps: delving into semantics is like navigating a minefield and i hope i come out unscathed

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. greenberg until the end of the world Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,811
    The phrase in the OP was "complete cessation of suffering".
    "Of suffering" is a crucial part of the phrase.

    Your breaking it down and focusing only on the first part seems unjustified.
     

Share This Page