Siddh?rtha Gautama was a con-artist who enticed others to follow a path that only led back to the same place: the truth of existence.
Maybe because existence
is existence. But in Buddhism, it's something else too, it's existence re-conceived. It's the same old existence, but a new way of relating to it, a new way of responding to it.
Let's face it, he was a prince who struggled with the realities of life. Searching for an answer, he finally came to terms with it. What a waste of time...or maybe not.
That's a victory of a sort, in a universe, in a real-life, that so many people dream of escaping. Into what, I don't think that they have any precise idea. It doesn't really matter. Some place, some heaven or something, where everyone will finally be fully content, happy and satisfied, and where they won't ever suffer again.
Buddhism is something different than that. It's more of a transformative psychology than a transformative ontology. Buddhism doesn't just leave us as we are, while promising to make the surrounding universe and the suffering it contains go away, to be replaced by an imagined paradise. Buddhism is a unique form of religious realism that accepts the universe as it appears and then tries to help us finally stop being psychic puppets who are constantly being jerked around by events.
Anyway, it's a long journey to take towards the realization that things are just the way they are, regardless of how we think they should be.
I don't think that Buddhism says that, exactly. It would be a negation of Buddhist ethics for one thing, turning it into a kind of fatalism.
Buddhists can and do think that things can improve and many of them (not enough surely, humans being humans) work to make things better. Not just by preaching Buddhism either. There are a number of suttas in the Pali tripitaka that depict the Buddha advising local kings on how to better govern their states in the interests of their people. The Buddha took an interest in that kind of stuff, he didn't just dismiss it as unimportant.
Once again, it's the issue of attachment, I think. The Buddha didn't tell people to just be morally inert, accepting and approving of everything. He doesn't seem to have been that way himself. What he did do was teach those that listened to him how they could still be satisfied and avoid suffering in their own lives even when things aren't happening just the way that they want them to happen.
I could never follow the "Eightfold Path;"
The eightfold path is an entire spiritual path summarized in a very succinct outline form. Just about all of the thousands of suttas in the Pali tripitaka represent expansions and commentary on different parts of it. The path needn't be all that difficult or all that demanding, for those that don't want it to be. It doesn't demand that people have any kind of supernatural faith in order to begin. It's very do-able and comes in easy to manage steps. It offers rewards from the very beginning to those who practice it. And although it starts out simply, it reveals impressive sophistication and depth for those who advance further.
1.
Right understanding - Most superficially, somebody has to have heard about Buddhism and developed some interest in it in order to initially decide to pursue it. As one moves along the path, the perfecting of the understanding of Buddhist doctrine, philosophy and psychology can grow very sophisticated indeed.
2.
Right resolve - In order to pursue the Buddhist path, there has to be a motivational factor. So right there, we have evidence that Buddhism isn't counseling that people not have any motivation. It's proposing ways in which motivation can be improved. That's the topic of the rest of the path factors, which address 'sila', or Buddhist ethics (external behavior), and 'samadhi', or Buddhist meditation (internal behavior).
3.
Right speech - If somebody is going to be a Buddhist, then I guess that they need to start talking like a Buddhist. It's interesting how talking-the-talk can start to change a person in deeper and less superficial ways. The talk becomes habitual and kind of inserts itself into the person's whole way of thinking and behaving. Others start to think of the person as being Buddhist and provide reinforcement. And it's very important to notice that right-speech isn't really about spouting Buddhist doctrine and pieties. It isn't preaching. It's about using words skillfully and helpfully, avoiding verbal combativeness, ego-struggles and words that hurt others.
4.
Right action - Just talking isn't enough. Buddhism typically addresses the subject of action by recommending lists of precepts. There are lots of these lists in Buddhism. These aren't conceived as being commandments, they are more along the lines of training-rules in various traditions and at various stages. The lists vary from the five basic precepts that every Buddhist layman is supposed to practice (many don't) to the hundreds of precepts followed by monastics. The five laypeople's 'pancasila' are: 1.
don't kill. Buddhists are divided among themselves about whether this means taking all sentient life (some but not all Buddhists are vegetarians) or whether it just means murder. 2.
don't steal and cultivate generosity instead. 3.
don't lie and cultivate truthfulness instead. 4.
don't engage in sexual misconduct. Once again, Buddhists are divided among themselves about what that includes, but everyone agrees on things like rape, child molesting and stuff like that. 5.
don't abuse mind-clouding intoxicants that reduce mindfullness.
5.
Right livelihood - Eventually, right action should expand and grow to the point that it encompasses all of a person's life. It isn't just words to say and it isn't just rules that are honored on special religious-observance days or when visiting a temple or meeting monks.
6.
Right effort - This one sounds like a restatement of right resolve, but now it's signalling that the subject is turning to 'samadhi', to inner discipline and transformation. Again, the beginning is the motivation to start. And once embarked, this inner work needs to be done the right way.
7.
Right mindfulness - This is vipassana meditation which is discussed at great length in the suttas.
8.
Right concentration - This is samatha meditation, which is discussed at great length as well.
I've given greater emphasis to 'sila' than to 'samadhi' in this little description of the eightfold path for two reasons. First, because Buddhist ethics often don't get the attention that they deserve. Western descriptions of Buddhism often give beginners the impression that the eight-fold path is really just a two-fold path, consisting of nothing but the last two path factors. And second, because Buddhist meditation is kind of technical and best practiced with the help of a qualified teacher.
therefore, I guess I'm doomed to walk this Earth for eternity, playing out my Karmic role forever, or so the story goes. As for the Four Noble Truths, I can see where desires might be problematic, but they are not the source of all our woes. For many they are a source of great hope and the motivator to move forward.
I hope that you noted that none of the eight path-factors was --
Lose all desire and motivation. Instead, what we saw was Right resolve and Right effort. There's a motivational component inherent in all of the eight path-factors.
Again, I think that we might better conceive of this stuff in terms of 'attachment' than in terms of 'desire'. The goal isn't to lose all motivation. The summom-bonum isn't just to sit down in one final spot, wither-away and die. The goal is to move away from the situation where our desire and our suffering are tied together by dependent-origination (in our modern vocabulary, causally). Presumably motivations will continue for as long as we continue to live. That's just how it is. But we won't be psychologically
dependent on them in the way that we presently are.