tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post2874025501091263240..comments2012-01-13T17:30:22.398-08:00Comments on Doubt Rests: My Problems With Buddhismdiotimajshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15147159146635381147noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-86299169816858039802008-08-16T04:25:00.000-07:002008-08-16T04:25:00.000-07:00interested: Thank you for the comment. You raise s...interested: Thank you for the comment. You raise some important considerations for sure.<BR/><BR/>I'm sort of wrapped up in some private concerns at the moment; but, hopefully I'll be able to give a more thorough response later.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for reading, at any rate :)diotimajshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15147159146635381147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-6124827632978319602008-08-05T04:20:00.000-07:002008-08-05T04:20:00.000-07:00Hi, I found your blog through philosophyforums :) ...Hi, I found your blog through philosophyforums :) I'm interested in buddhism, too, although I'm not a buddhist myself.<BR/><BR/>"I imagine most Buddhists would adopt an "If you don't believe it, try it yourself" attitude, saying that I too would eventually experience The Truth if I got to that point myself. But, attaining nirvana is supposed to be incredibly difficult"<BR/><BR/>You don't have to reach nirvana, buddhists claim that you'll understand correctness of anatman and other concepts long before you've reached nirvana (probably once you've experienced "emptyness"). So technically speaking, they offer you to suspend belief for a while and try to verify everything on your own.<BR/><BR/>"Is it really the case that all suffering results from desire?"<BR/><BR/>By suffering buddhists do not mean literate suffering. E.g. pleasant feelings are also considered to be suffering. In other words, suffering is a nature of ours that permeats everything, because we're attached to everything, starting from ourselves. Getting rid of attachment is supposed to eliminate this ever-present nature of suffering, but not an ability to feel!<BR/><BR/>"I may feel hurt that my son dies, and this hurt derived from my feelings of love and care - my attachment - that I experienced toward him."<BR/><BR/>Attachment is not love or care, attachment is an idea to signify that you're dualistic (i.e. you have "me " and "the world", and so you get attached to "the world" as long as you have the idea of a separate "me"). As for love and care, buddhists consider them to be very good emotions and even attribute them to the natural set of emotions of "the awakened mind".<BR/><BR/>"If there is no self, what precisely is being deluded and subject to suffering?"<BR/><BR/>The illusion of the self as a separate entity. The illusion of the self as separate is considered to be one of reasons for attachment, since there's something to attach to. If there wouldn't be (i.e. if you became non-dualistic), then attachment wouldn't happen either.<BR/><BR/>"If all desires lead to suffering, what is the worth of compassion?"<BR/><BR/>Why isn't suffering of others worth compassion? Besides, compassion is considered to be the inherent nature of "the awakened mind". So technically speaking, if your mind would become awakened, you'd feel it naturally, no matter if you wanted to :)<BR/><BR/>"And, on that note, is it even possible for a sentient, conscious being to still exist without desire?"<BR/><BR/>The awakened mind still has "desires", they're not tinged with suffering, though.<BR/><BR/>"If so, it is not actually true that all desires or attachments cause suffering."<BR/><BR/>As I mentioned above, suffering is not necessarily literate suffering, it's a quality of our feelings. Desire to get rid of suffering also stems from suffering, since it's caused by running from suffering that you're experiencing.<BR/><BR/>I don't see any real contradictions in all of that, to be honest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-87795579448078217612008-07-12T03:50:00.000-07:002008-07-12T03:50:00.000-07:00As far as Zen Buddhism goes, I'd like to say somet...As far as Zen Buddhism goes, I'd like to say something.<BR/><BR/>In a Zen Buddhism, meditation uses the body and mind to achieve a stillness which would be complete lack of ego. You are awake and aware, but there are no thoughts. The reflection on what happened after you leave the trance would bind that egoless self to you just a little bit more. From his training, a Zen master would be more like his egoless self at all times (note: <I>more like</I>, not actually <I>without</I> an ego). This egoless self is the "enlightenment" and also the idea of "no self" you mentioned.<I> Enlightenment is more or less understanding your own thoughts</I>. The idea is that everyone is all reaction and emotion as they grow up, but the enlightenment is that understanding, whether its gained through meditation or not. It's not unique to Buddhism and it's always possible to deepen this understanding. By continuing meditation it becomes more ingrain into your nature and you become more "whole". Anyone can reach that simple egoless state with some training. It doesn't take long, and its not some exclusive club. One of the virtues of Zen is that nobody will expect you to believe something you can't prove yourself. So try it if you want. I can testify to it. The point is to be more whole and less based on desire. This in turn would lead to spontaneously helping people and not becoming attached, a happier life ect, ect.<BR/><BR/>This, to me, is basis of Zen. And it seems worth it to me to practice it. But I agree with you on the reincarnation, 6 states of existence and all that. It's just superstitious belief. If you focus on any religion the way you did, it's going to end up in shambles :D. What I said above is probably the most practical and useful part of Zen.<BR/><BR/>Lets be clear tho, not everyone agrees with me, and I'm not a Zen master. This isn't a standard to go off of, but hopefully its an insight. I'm still learning as I go too.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for reading!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-51181572993755066312008-07-04T18:41:00.000-07:002008-07-04T18:41:00.000-07:00michael: Actually, I don't deny that pursuing Budd...michael: Actually, I don't deny that pursuing Buddhist practices can have beneficial results from a practical standpoint - meditation, focusing on the moment, and recognizing the ultimately unfulfilling nature of desire are all useful techniques to incorporate into one's everyday life. I take issue with the metaphysical claims, however, particularly if they're intended to motivate us.<BR/><BR/>Another perspective on the contradiction thing, following the Zen route a little further, is that maybe it doesn't matter in the first place. Maybe contradictions aren't necessarily a bad thing; Zen pedagogy uses explicit contradictions for their own purposes, after all. As you say, discussions are moot, and the important thing is the practice - so it may not matter how many apparent logical problems there are.<BR/><BR/>craig: Thank you for the suggestion, I will try and pursue it further if I get the chance. I hadn't encountered the Madhyamika doctrines yet, and they look intriguing.diotimajshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15147159146635381147noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-29761852767626394502008-07-03T08:43:00.000-07:002008-07-03T08:43:00.000-07:00you need to study Nagarjuna and the Madhyamika dia...you need to study Nagarjuna and the Madhyamika dialectic. As you probably know, there were three turnings of the wheel. As words are inherently dualistic and embedded in desire, the second and third turning teachings provide the 'footnotes' to be able to discern the proper context (ie; emptiness) and deeper meaning behind the seemingly 'problematic' formulation of the original teaching which you have attempted to address here.Ogminhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14996427148545690194noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6658649732133414052.post-38857290268148347602008-07-03T08:42:00.000-07:002008-07-03T08:42:00.000-07:00Interesting points! You definitely hit Buddhism pr...Interesting points! You definitely hit Buddhism pretty well, it can seem totally contradictory if you take into account every teaching from the Buddha on down. If you're looking for evidence, all you really need to do is meet someone who is already enlightened, and all your doubts will be erased. Believe me, I was with you, and then I met a Japanese monk with such energy even a skeptic could tell.<BR/><BR/>And of course, don't forget the famous zen koan, "If you meet the buddha, kill him." Words, explanations and discussions are moot, just sit. If you don't get anything out of it, no loss.Michaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02632290501884417322noreply@blogger.com