Buddhism
30 12 2003Having investigated Buddhism some more (and if you don’t konw what I’m on about, go back a couple of entries) I tihnk I’ve found the really big flaw. I’m not trying to convert myself or deconvert anyone else, just gain a little understanding about another philosophy and why I agree or disagree. Bear with me:
Buddhism teaches karma, the idea that good acts bring you rewards and bad acts bring you punishments, just the idea that eventually everything comes back to you. It’s probably a good idea to avoid, for now, definitions of “good” and “bad” and indeed, the speculation that a good act can cause a bad thing to happen or vice versa.
Buddhism says that everything is transitory so you should free yourself from the desires of temporary things, posessions, relationships, these things shouldn’t be desired because eventually that causes sufferring, they shouldn’t be desired because everything is temporary - except for identity. Identity is continually reborn in a cycle of suffering and desire, the only escape being to reach Nirvana (the state, not the band) - and there’s my problem with Buddhism. I don’t believe in ressurrection, I don’t think identity is persistent and that in each new life your karma is carried over from the last.
Unfortunately, Buddhism therefore ends up containing one of the central flaws of most religions, the idea that you’ll one day be rewarded for arbitrarily “good” acts you do now. In Christianity, it’s heaven, in Buddhism it’s a life filled with good karma and the chance to attain Nirvana. Both of those things happen after you die, and neither come easily. Since I don’t think we have an eternal soul or that identity is persistent over several lifetimes - as much from total lack of evidence than from the science of it - I don’t see the point of subscribing to Buddhist doctrine.
As ever, the best option becomes to take from Buddhism the better ideas and use them to shape one’s existing philosophies, rather than subscribing to someone else’s. The idea of meditation amuses me because I spend so much time thinking about things anyway, forcing myself to devote specific time to it seems beyond superfluous. The claim seems to be that it just stops the world from getting on top of you and most of the time I find that avoidable anyway, probably because I tend to believe that things mostly work out for the best, so worrying about where you’re going isn’t half as important as how you get there.
With that in mind, of course, I have to question whether “suffering” in the Buddhist sense is even a bad thing. If it promotes personal change then surely that’s positive. I dunno. Dissecting eastern religions is new to me, I’m obviously not as clued up on those as I am the flavours of christianity. Still, I’ve devoted a lot of spare time to looking into it recently and I’m relatively satisfied that I’ve formed some valid opinions. I may have more to say on this yet, though…
Karma is intentional action, that is, a deed done deliberately through body, speech or mind. It’s the intention of doing good or bad that matters most.
The Buddha never taught that “identity” is persistent - though attachment to identity can be persistent. Habitual patterns are only as persistent as our attachment to them - and no patterns stay unchanging, as our mind changes all the time. In fact, the moment this is read, your mind would have rearranged all related information.
Buddhism teaches non-attachment, even our present identity. We don’t believe in resurrection as well. If you mean rebirth, every new birth is a brand new “identity”. Our present existence is the manifestation of our past karma and karma we are continuous doing now, it changes every second…
Buddha gained enlightenment alive and taught for 45years. He entered parinirvana (passing away of physical body) at the age of 80. There are many masters who have had attained nirvana and are still alive and teaching. Well, not everything can be explained by science. How do you explain people who can recall certain events clearly that hasn’t happened during their lifetime when neither have they have the means to read about related events or be there before? There’s no eternal soul or identity. If you mean consciousness, and it is in Buddhism sometimes nicely called “mindstream”- mind that flows on and on like a stream.
there is no mind, only “minding”, no stream, only “streaming”.
I don’t see anyone doubting the on-flowing “identity” of a river or stream?
There are in fact 3 kind of consciousness, past, present and future. Past doesn’t exist anymore, changes are through present conssciousness’s reinterpretation of experiences. Present consciousness is constantly changing moment to moment (eg. we can be conscious to different degrees about different things at different times. Full consciousness and transcending mind is enlightenment) Future consciousness is yet to come, therefore it cannot grasped. Ultimately these 3 kind of consciousness do not have a fixed reality of their own.
Meditation is not about thinking - it is about knowing how your mind works. Meditation done properly can allow one to see things as they really are, without our faulty perceptions. The world we are seeing now is not truly the way it is. If you micro-zoom into a particular object, lets say a table, what you see is not a table anymore, but mainly just moving atoms within empty space. What we are now having are too many unnecessary thoughts and opinions, thinking this is real and solid, but in meditation, one trains to quieten the mind and by doing so, we become one with existence, and truly see things as they are, perfecting our wisdom.
Dear friend, am afraid your opinions are not valid. Please visit http://asp.thedailyenlightenment.com/specials/lamp.asp for a concise summary of Buddhism.
Buddha taught 4 noble truths…
1) Life is predominant with suffering (birth, ageing , sickness, death, not getting what you want, being separated from the beloved, being with the detested… Even if you think you are “happy”, it’s not a permanent state and is always subjected to change)
2) Cause of suffering (craving and ignorance… because of constant craving or desire, we are never satisfied and always want more and more. This grows rom ignorance - not knowing the impermanent nature of things.)
3) Cessation of suffering (Attain true happpiness or enlightenment, exiting cycle of birth and death)
4) Path to the cessation of suffering (practising of the eightfold path: Right understanding, thoughts, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness and concentration)
And this is not yet 1% of Buddha’s teaching… and just how can one criticise Buddhism by merely thinking about it? :-)
with metta _/|\_
In this one phrase, you highlight my problem with religion: “What we are now having are too many unnecessary thoughts and opinions,” Frankly, that’s rubbish. All religion seems to want to do, ultimately, is prevent you from thinking for yourself. “Here, do what we tell you, think what we say, ignore reality and concentrate on abstractions like Karma and Prayer and this ineffable being named God.”
I am aware Buddhism doesn’t teach “resurrection” in the returning to life way, but it’s the cloest term I had for it. I admit persistence of identity was a misleading term to choose, because it’s not that either, it’s just some kind of intangible quality that achieves rebirth - your soul, your ghost, whatever. The problem is that it’s unprovable and immeasurable and thus quite possibly made up.
And meditation - well, I know how my mind words. Electrical impulses and chemicals filtered through my own bias of perception. You can’t remove this bias through meditation, all that occurs is you start tricking yourself into thinking otherwise. A rock is always a rock, it’s just that it’s also atoms and molecures and quantum probablility of being a rock. one does not preclude the other and you certainly can’t ignore the science of it. You can’t become one with existance, but you can certainly trick yourself into thinking you might’ve.
To be honest, I can’t argue either way for the 4 noble truths. I don’t see what makes them anymore truthful than anything else, why they’re so important, and indeed, even if they are truthful, because I might be inclined to say that some of them rely on you accepting certain concepts without question.
As for criticising something without having tried it - I’m sorry, but that’s just fucking inane. Can I criticise a diet before I’ve tried it? Can I criticise a personal trait that I don’t show myself?
Ultimately, whether Buddhism turns out to be correct, or Christianity, or me, or whatever, I want to feel like I’ve gotten there under my own decisions and reasoning. To that end, everything must be questioned, especially the things that purport to know the path to meaning or the point of existance. No religion has convinced me yet and that’s because they all require inexplainable leaps of judgement in accepting the truth of other people’s words without question.
comment
Can some one out there tell me what Nirvana really means. Is it close to the Christian heaven?