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.
I think to a degree, pain and suffering are not distinct.
You mean they are not entirely distinct in your understanding of Buddhism?
That does not seem like it makes it easy to understand or discuss Buddhism's central truth, that life IS suffering. Does Buddhism offer ways to eradicate both pain and suffering? If not, then it seems to me that some sort of distinction becomes necessary.
It seems just barely plausible that one could eradicate all suffering. I do not see how one can eradicate all pain. By this point in my life almost every physical movement is painful and I've had enough non-physical pain that much of my life is structured around avoiding that too.
You mean they are not entirely distinct in your understanding of Buddhism?
That does not seem like it makes it easy to understand or discuss Buddhism's central truth, that life IS suffering. Does Buddhism offer ways to eradicate both pain and suffering? If not, then it seems to me that some sort of distinction becomes necessary.
It seems just barely plausible that one could eradicate all suffering. I do not see how one can eradicate all pain. By this point in my life almost every physical movement is painful and I've had enough non-physical pain that much of my life is structured around avoiding that too.
I meant exactly what I said. They are different but most often accompany each other and are therefore not always easily distinguished.
But you're free to believe as you wish. Mai pben rai.
I meant exactly what I said. They are different but most often accompany each other and are therefore not always easily distinguished. But you're free to believe as you wish. Mai pben rai.
bold above
people are able to learn how to distinguish between them.
it is useful, practical, and beneficial.
a person verifies and validates this for themself, through practice and application in their own life.
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 05-18-2022 at 05:19 PM..
bold above
people are able to learn how to distinguish between them.
it is useful, practical, and beneficial.
a person verifies and validates this for themself, through practice and application in their own life.
You may believe anything you wish. I may believe anything I wish. I don't care what you think. What you think will not change my view, particularly since you want argue about something that is just a little more than semantics. I hope someday you have an experience where you deeply have to consider your inability to see the other side of the this issue. It isn't as easy as flipping a switch when you think you have or do have cancer, as one example.
You may believe anything you wish. I may believe anything I wish. I don't care what you think. What you think will not change my view, particularly since you want argue about something that is just a little more than semantics. I hope someday you have an experience where you deeply have to consider your inability to see the other side of the this issue. It isn't as easy as flipping a switch when you think you have or do have cancer, as one example.
it's not a belief, it's a practice.
paths of religion and spirituality are far more than a list of beliefs.
for them to be of any use to a person, a person needs to put them into practice.
there are powerful elements in paths of religion and spirituality, which are not "just a cliche" or "platitude"
or "little more than semantics."
however nobody convinces others of that. a person verifies and validates it for themself,
if it is not put into practice then it is just words on a page.
paths of religion and spirituality are far more than a list of beliefs.
for them to be of any use to a person, a person needs to put them into practice.
there are powerful elements in paths of religion and spirituality, which are not "just a cliche" or "platitude"
or "little more than semantics."
however nobody convinces others of that. a person verifies and validates it for themself,
if it is not put into practice then it is just words on a page.
I've told you that you may believe anything you want.
You mean they are not entirely distinct in your understanding of Buddhism?
That does not seem like it makes it easy to understand or discuss Buddhism's central truth, that life IS suffering. Does Buddhism offer ways to eradicate both pain and suffering? If not, then it seems to me that some sort of distinction becomes necessary.
It seems just barely plausible that one could eradicate all suffering. I do not see how one can eradicate all pain. By this point in my life almost every physical movement is painful and I've had enough non-physical pain that much of my life is structured around avoiding that too.
Dukka does not translate well into English, as I have said before. And that is what Buddha said. Dukka. Dukka is deep sadness. When you long for something and do not get it Dukka happens. No longing, craving, attachment to things, no more Dukka. once you get what you long for you will long for another thing. There is no end to craving. But one can stop the craving. One can be content with what one has.
Buddha did offer the 8 fold path as a way to end suffering. There is no picking and choosing, you follow the path if you want end to suffering. American Buddhists may not be able to do that.
Dukka does not translate well into English, as I have said before. And that is what Buddha said. Dukka. Dukka is deep sadness. When you long for something and do not get it Dukka happens. No longing, craving, attachment to things, no more Dukka. once you get what you long for you will long for another thing. There is no end to craving. But one can stop the craving. One can be content with what one has.
Buddha did offer the 8 fold path as a way to end suffering. There is no picking and choosing, you follow the path if you want end to suffering. American Buddhists may not be able to do that.
Well, which is it?
And btw, I don't think a Hindu can fully understand Theravada Buddhism.
And btw, I don't think a Hindu can fully understand Theravada Buddhism.
I dont know theravada but I know Buddhism is not some mystery and it is not a thing you can own. It belongs to everyone. You are ridiculous and acting like a child. I am not sure you understand Buddhism.
Well, which is it?
And btw, I don't think a Hindu can fully understand Theravada Buddhism.
concepts are concepts and can be understood.
they are not proprietary and they do not belong to this or that group labeled this or that way.
there is no "us and them"
just concepts for understanding.
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.
