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 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.
I suggest you buy a ticket to California and spend some time wine tasting in the Napa Valley. And think about why I'm suggesting 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.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Well, which is it? And btw, I don't think a Hindu can fully understand Theravada Buddhism.
the bold in the first post above makes sense.
as I read it, when a person craves, the person is never fulfilled. because when one craving is achieved, then another craving appears. so the person is always craving, this or that.
as I read it, when a person craves, the person is never fulfilled. because when one craving is achieved, then another craving appears. so the person is always craving, this or that.
Well here again the definition of "suffering" is slippery and starts to elude us again. You are equating it with "experiencing pain" and I think the entire point of Buddhism is that suffering has to do not with pain but with attachment and grasping and control.
I believe that is the problem on this thread, people are using the word 'suffering' to mean two different but related things, the actual experience of suffering, and whether one allows it to control your life or not.
Some people can not recognize the ambiguity because they are focused on their spiritual path, thinking their use of the word is the correct one and that everyone else is wrong when the OP is about actual suffering.
I suggest you buy a ticket to California and spend some time wine tasting in the Napa Valley. And think about why I'm suggesting that.
What you think you are Buddha now, that we all have to contemplate your ramblings? Your ego is your first problem why you are unable to understand Buddhism.
I have done that California thing and found some very tasty wines. I can recommend a few.
I believe that is the problem on this thread, people are using the word 'suffering' to mean two different but related things, the actual experience of suffering, and whether one allows it to control your life or not. Some people can not recognize the ambiguity because they are focused on their spiritual path, thinking their use of the word is the correct one and that everyone else is wrong when the OP is about actual suffering.
many paths of religion and spirituality make the simple distinction between "pain" and "suffering."
there is no "ambiguity" when the simple difference is understood and recognized.
it is powerful, when put into practice.
the discussion of pain and suffering is in the context of paths of religion and spirituality, because that is the forum this topic resides in. however the powerful distinction between pain and suffering is also recognized as useful and effective in a secular framework, for improving our health and well-being. as noted in this Psychology Today article on chronic pain, "Pain Is Inevitable; Suffering Is Optional - When it comes to how we respond to physical and emotional pain, we have a choice"
Last edited by Tzaphkiel; 05-19-2022 at 07:15 AM..
many paths of religion and spirituality make the simple distinction between "pain" and "suffering."
there is no "ambiguity" when the simple difference is understood and recognized.
it is powerful, when put into practice.
As I said, some egos can not recognize the ambiguity because they are focused on their spiritual pathinstead of how others use the word.
You are just repeating the problem I have just explained.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel
the discussion of pain and suffering is in the context of paths of religion and spirituality, because that is the forum this topic resides in. however the powerful distinction between pain and suffering is also recognized as useful and effective in a secular framework, for improving our health and well-being. as noted in this Psychology Today article on chronic pain, "Pain Is Inevitable; Suffering Is Optional - When it comes to how we respond to physical and emotional pain, we have a choice"
As I said, some people are using the word 'suffering' to mean two different but related things, the actual experience of suffering, and whether one allows it to control your life or not.
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.
