Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why Buddhism is True is the title of a recent book by Robert Wright. It is subtitled Why Buddhism is True; The Science of Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment.
I picked up this book from a crowded shelf on books on Buddhism at a local bookstore because the title annoyed me. It would be more likely for a Buddhist to say that there are many dhammas, many truths. But the author meant it ironically, and since I bought his book I suppose the title worked.
Robert Wright's position is that Buddhism is true because it deals with two of the Three Marks of Existence; Dukkha and Anicca, suffering and impermanence.
But the problem with dukkha is that there is no English word that entirely fits. The Pali language is lexically dense. A word like dukkha or anicca could take a paragraph in English to explain. The Ven. Bikkhu Bodhi prefers the word unsatisfactory for dukkha. Ven. Thanissaro Bikkhu translates dukkha as stress. The Pali Canon is explicit,
"Birth is dukkha, sickness is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha. Not getting what you want is dukkha."
Majjhima Nikaya 63
Why is there suffering? Because everything is impermanent and subject to change. The Theravada axiom is "Anicca vata sankhara" All sankharas, things, are subject to impermanence and flux. The car you drive today will someday be a pile of rust or recycled. Likewise, everything else as well.
Life is suffering because it ends, is unsatisfactory, and subject to change.
On a visit to Sri Lanka, Pope Francis insulted the people of Sri Lanka by saying Buddhism was a depressing religion. The truth is that it is neither depressing or elating. It is simply a reflection of what is.
Why Buddhism is True is the title of a recent book by Robert Wright. It is subtitled Why Buddhism is True; The Science of Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment.
I picked up this book from a crowded shelf on books on Buddhism at a local bookstore because the title annoyed me. It would be more likely for a Buddhist to say that there are many dhammas, many truths. But the author meant it ironically, and since I bought his book I suppose the title worked.
Robert Wright's position is that Buddhism is true because it deals with two of the Three Marks of Existence; Dukkha and Anicca, suffering and impermanence.
But the problem with dukkha is that there is no English word that entirely fits. The Pali language is lexically dense. A word like dukkha or anicca could take a paragraph in English to explain. The Ven. Bikkhu Bodhi prefers the word unsatisfactory for dukkha. Ven. Thanissaro Bikkhu translates dukkha as stress. The Pali Canon is explicit,
"Birth is dukkha, sickness is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha. Not getting what you want is dukkha."
Majjhima Nikaya 63
Why is there suffering? Because everything is impermanent and subject to change. The Theravada axiom is "Anicca vata sankhara" All sankharas, things, are subject to impermanence and flux. The car you drive today will someday be a pile of rust or recycled. Likewise, everything else as well.
Life is suffering because it ends, is unsatisfactory, and subject to change.
On a visit to Sri Lanka, Pope Francis insulted the people of Sri Lanka by saying Buddhism was a depressing religion. The truth is that it is neither depressing or elating. It is simply a reflection of what is.
Comments
Interesting.
I don't disagree with anything you say, but I'm not clear what your bottom line is.
Life is suffering because it ends, is unsatisfactory, and subject to change.
On a visit to Sri Lanka, Pope Francis insulted the people of Sri Lanka by saying Buddhism was a depressing religion.
I've always considering life ending to be natural and perfect. All living creatures do the same. We have our time on the "stage", and then leave. That doesn't make the whole thing - existence - just a sucky batch of suffering.
Some might think life is unsatisfactory, but that's not true for many, and perhaps most, people.
Subject to change? Well, we're all surrounded by change. Changes in clouds, weather, politics, cultures, creatures coming and going, the march of time, etc. Even the molecules in solid objects are in constant movement and change. That's just the reality we live in. It's something to simply accept and move on, not make issue over.
Some people are their own worst enemy. Fighting life, fighting nature, fighting the universe. Oh well, you have that freedom, but the world won't change for you or accommodate you.
I don't see why we should pay attention to any pope or the Catholic Church. If anything, they are depressing. Of course he's going to throw rocks at healthier belief systems. He's in charge of PR and damage control for the constant messes that huge church organization gets into. And stepping on others to elevate his club surely won't be a surprise.
Last edited by Thoreau424; 09-19-2019 at 09:23 PM..
Well, hi Thoreau, I guess I don't really have anything to say now. Lol
My comments are shorter that life is not suffering cuz it ends (but, actually, the opposite, a new adventure begins),
change is not bad, and life is not unsatisfying. (Tho, it may have been in Buddha's day...and now for many.)
If 'comments' weren't invited I might have said nothing and let Buddhists believe what they want...it's
working for them, and that's great.
Depressing religion? Nonsense, shame on the Pope...at least he could have said, "It feels to me that..."
That's Couple's Therapy 101.
While we are on death subject..
Every human starts dying right after birth. Actually, right after conception. But some are not born, so...
Any "life" is pretty much process od death-ing, taking over the process of liv-ing, until death takes over a living being completely.
Then, natural cycle of life and death repeats itself.
I've always considering life ending to be natural and perfect. All living creatures do the same. We have our time on the "stage", and then leave. That doesn't make the whole thing - existence - just a sucky batch of suffering.
Some might think life is unsatisfactory, but that's not true for many, and perhaps most, people.
Subject to change? Well, we're all surrounded by change. Changes in clouds, weather, politics, cultures, creatures coming and going, the march of time, etc. Even the molecules in solid objects are in constant movement and change. That's just the reality we live in. It's something to simply accept and move on, not make issue over.
Some people are their own worst enemy. Fighting life, fighting nature, fighting the universe. Oh well, you have that freedom, but the world won't change for you or accommodate you.
I don't see why we should pay attention to any pope or the Catholic Church. If anything, they are depressing. Of course he's going to throw rocks at healthier belief systems. He's in charge of PR and damage control for the constant messes that huge church organization gets into. And stepping on others to elevate his club surely won't be a surprise.
Question then do have I.
Have you suffered? As in general?
Question then do have I.
Have you suffered? As in general?
As a living, breathing creature of the planet, sure I have suffered some. Not much; or at least, not to the point of debilitation, or anything excessive to complain about. Anything resembling suffering quickly becomes a tool for remembering and attitude adjustment. Reminders that there are always others who have it worse. Reminders that suffering can increase endurance. Reminders that suffering and pain can lead to strength (such as in weight-training, or an intense training program). Suffering can be considered something useful and valuable.
But suffering as something to dwell on, and/or something to ruin or lessen the value of life, no.
This really isn't about the existence of suffering, but how we choose to respond to it. We can lessen its effects, or increase and contribute to them. A person will reap the effects of whatever direction he/she chooses.
Last edited by Thoreau424; 09-20-2019 at 12:52 PM..
Correct. Buddhism is not about dwelling IN suffering. It is not masochistic religion.
Besides, suffering is not a good interpretation anyway.
It is more about impossibility of fulfillment in the world, where everything is transient and perishable. When one understands this, one understands the futility of pursuing earthly goals. As when you live and dedicate your life to "normal living", you do pursue earthly goals, right? That's what happened to young prince Siddhartha, when he saw a dead body for the first time.
Then one can make a decision. Do I want to stay on that never ending path, or I want to move on into what is eternal and permanent?
I don't want to mis - interpret your 2 posts, they are very good.... but they sort of have that "I am hiding in my shell" taste to them..... like as if you are letting life be and not bother you? Just go with the flow?
Sri Bhagwan Radjnish said, that knowledge of the rebirths had devastating effect on India, by turning entire nation into biggest apathy nation in the world...like they simply gave up and succumbed to the wheel of samsara...
Maybe, this is why Islam and Christianity were provided, as they do not lull one with "you have infinite number of existences to work it out" lullaby, what leads to cosmic procrastination in most cases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lol
