Sinfest vs The World

[Protector]

The return of vs thread, yaaaaaaaaaay

 

I actually wanted to make this thread a long while ago since I couldn't find an equivalent on this site and I don't understand something.

 

So, one of the main goals of people around here seems to be escaping samsara and stopping reincarnation, or something like that.

That's what I don't get, why?

 

One Buddha had a quest of stopping suffering and at some point the wheal of samsara came up. Seems like there's an endless cycle of suffering that comes with living and attachment.

Some Buddhist people came up with an idea of removing attachments. The key word is 'some', the detachment almost became cannon if it wasn't for the other ideas.

 

So yeah, what's up, doc?

[Cat Pillar]

So, one of the main goals of people around here seems to be escaping samsara and stopping reincarnation, or something like that.

That's what I don't get, why?

 

Seems like an obvious explanation would be to stop experiencing suffering. Samsara is suffering, escape it and you don't suffer anymore.

 

Immortality might be another one, at least for escaping reincarnation.

 

Do you really not understand why some people would want to stop the ride?

[ChiDragon]

One Buddha had a quest of stopping suffering and at some point the wheal of samsara came up. Seems like there's an endless cycle of suffering that comes with living and attachment.

 

Some Buddhist people came up with an idea of removing attachments. The key word is 'some', the detachment almost became cannon if it wasn't for the other ideas.

 

If you understand what Buddhism was all about, then you wouldn't have had came up with this thread....!!!

[Protector]

I understand, stuff, but I don't understand the way others think and so I ask. It's not like everyone is following my cannon or something.

 

I learned this weird Taoist version of Buddhism, it's almost like self study but in perspective

 

Here's what happens to a person: Level one, realize that there is suffering

This is just feeling it and then later learn about what causes it, the attachments, and so we go to the next level

 

Level two, detachment

Touch a hot stove and you will move your hand, feel the suffering and you want it to stop, and so here we go

 

Level three, person tries to live without attachments, maybe become a makeshift monk and live in a cave

So let's say you live like that for a while, eventually you will give up on that thing that caused suffering

Say you touched a stove and your hand hurts, eventually it will stop hurting

 

Level four, this suffering doesn't bother you

Pain is one thing, at this point a person might even realize that suffering is not that bad and sometimes good

 

Level five, you touch the freaking stove

Here's where the real thing begins, you notice that this is a cycle

Be good, get worse, get better, get worse and so on. You understand the patterns behind all the level ones and twos

You know there's the wheal

 

Level six, we're smart enough to notice the pattern

So we can also notice the pattern withing a pattern. We could walk the same path we did when we discovered suffering on level one but this time we could group all the suffering together and walk with that, but we already know the outcome of that.

When we reach level three again and have no attachments at all, we will go to level four.

 

Level seven, stop

We know all this goes on and we can either keep going like this or realize all this and stop since we have knowledge.

 

If you guys have been following my learning thread, you would notice all these chakras in there.

And so, a preemptive strike using taiji: Just have level four from the start, that's the same as realizing that the attachment to suffering and basically, Liking to suffer by being mindful

But you know, this actually comes from experience and you can't just start off as a super awesome enlightened being just because someone told you to, so you half to walk the path until understanding is reached

 

It's one of the basics of Christianity but in modern Christianity people just call each other sinners all day and yell.

Human body is basically one big suffering machine, if you do nothing you suffer and if you do anything you suffer, too

If you don't move you die, if you move you will have to wrestle food from somebody.

It is also called a temple

One of the most quoted Jesus lines is also one of the most misinterpreted ones,

"I am the truth the light and the way, the way to the kingdom of God is through me."

He could have said, "Do this and that and you will be fine." He said that instead because he knew the difference between doing and being.

[Cat Pillar]

There may have been a better way for me to have worded that...

 

But in any case, it just seems like a simple question with a simple answer. There is a belief that samsara and reincarnation exist and can be escaped, and that by escaping them one will not suffer any more. People generally are not fans of suffering, so it's no wonder that people would want to escape samsara/reincarnation if they believe it means they won't suffer anymore.

 

I'm not making any statements about the veracity of these beliefs (edit: one way or the other), simply pointing out that they are out there.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Cat Pillar

[thelerner]

I kinda agree with the sinner.. If I have an immortal soul, given choices of heaven, reincarnation or destruction of all parts of my soul, I'd choose heaven first, reincarnation next. For all its trials, there's enough good in the world, at least this life time, that I'd rather gamble for another shot at it, rather then poof, be totally gone.

 

 

Maybe after enough heaven I'd also choose reincarnation or even a few weeks sun bathing in hell. I don't know, probably won't be asked and not sure how much the Universe cares about little old me.

Edited November 12, 2012 by thelerner

[Cat Pillar]

I used to be all about escaping samsara and ending reincarnation, but... I realized that doesn't really address anything right here and right now.

 

If I understand Sinfest correctly, I think I'm pretty much in agreement with him. I'm only really commenting on the original question of "why do people want to escape samsara" and providing my view of the motivations.

[Cheshire Cat]

To understand something of buddhism, we must look at where it originated: India.

In India there was a long spiritual tradition of mixed beliefs in which there was an esoteric concept: reincarnation. This originated probably as philosophical stuff and then became social truth.

 

Hence, it was natural for the Buddha to speak about karma and reincarnation, even where he stated that there is no permanent Self!

Karma was a common sense approach to life and nobody would dare to question its truths.

 

At first, suffering (dukka) wasn't something to realize in a spiritual way... but a starting point: the real, down to earth experience of spiritual people in ancient India. This starting point was a common feeling as we have the feeling of having a neck under our heads.

 

So, the Dharma is for the people and not People for the Dharma.

If a particular person could not understand dukkha because it is outside of his experience, then there were other approaches.

 

Now, attachments is something that were already basic knowledge at the time of the Buddha: he created a monastic society where monks had almost nothing on their own!

They should abandon their family (this was unacceptable for chinese thought), shave their head and meditate on their own decaying body.

Oh! Attachments were considered very very seriously.

 

When Dharma reached lay people, then the attachments issue were adapted to match different life-style. The focus shifted from what you actually have business with, to what is running in your mind (chinese style wu-wei).

 

The return of vs thread, yaaaaaaaaaay

 

I actually wanted to make this thread a long while ago since I couldn't find an equivalent on this site and I don't understand something.

 

So, one of the main goals of people around here seems to be escaping samsara and stopping reincarnation, or something like that.

That's what I don't get, why?

 

One Buddha had a quest of stopping suffering and at some point the wheal of samsara came up. Seems like there's an endless cycle of suffering that comes with living and attachment.

Some Buddhist people came up with an idea of removing attachments. The key word is 'some', the detachment almost became cannon if it wasn't for the other ideas.

 

So yeah, what's up, doc?

[Apech]

....

 

Now, attachments is something that were already basic knowledge at the time of the Buddha: he created a monastic society where monks had almost nothing on their own!

They should abandon their family (this was unacceptable for chinese thought), shave their head and meditate on their own decaying body.

Oh! Attachments were considered very very seriously.

 

When Dharma reached lay people, then the attachments issue were adapted to match different life-style. The focus shifted from what you actually have business with, to what is running in your mind (chinese style wu-wei).

 

I think the creation of a monastic order can be understood as freeing people up from the trappings of what was a very tightly controlled society ... arranged marriages, strict behaviour and so on. Rather than taking away from people it gave them the individual freedom to pursue spiritual goals in life without the responsibilities of marriage, children, work to feed oneself and others and social duty and obligation. Nowadays in the west I am not so sure that it all means quite the same thing as we have come to understand the life of a monk as being about discipline and privation.

[Aaron]

Sinfest, it could be because it's a nice gimic that keeps people coming back. Hey you can end all your suffering, PROBABLY not in this life, but surely the next. Just give us your money, kids, and utter devotion, then you'll see, that wheel of kharma/dharma will make you clean as snow. It's the same old schtick, just an eastern flavor.

 

You probably don't understand why they fall for this, because unlike them you don't see anything wrong with the world. Maybe you have an understanding that suffering is natural and that without suffering there could be no pleasure. Maybe you don't fall for the sin and righteousness bullshit either. In the end my question is if they want to be zombies without any emotion, then why not just find a drug that induces a coma? I mean that's the ultimate escape from attachments if you ask me. Well probably because the monks don't make no money if everyone is in a coma! LOL!

 

Aaron

Edited November 12, 2012 by Aaron

[Marblehead]

Seems funny to me. I still have my attachments and my ego but yet I'm not suffering.

 

Maybe there are some people who just like to suffer so they create religions that tell them that they are suffering. Then they say, "Yep, I'm suffering."

 

I would rather dance.

[Ish]

Seems funny to me. I still have my attachments and my ego but yet I'm not suffering.

 

Maybe there are some people who just like to suffer so they create religions that tell them that they are suffering. Then they say, "Yep, I'm suffering."

 

I would rather dance.

 

I think using the word "suffering" to encompass the whole idea makes it seem very strong. Suffering gives the feel of extreme negative conditions, when its not necessarily that blatant.

 

So in my opinion while you still have this ego and attachments there's at least the potential for "suffering", the things that make up your ego and the things you are attached to are just impermanent and are subject to change. So therefore it doesn't make sense to base happiness on these things.

 

Also we can look at it like someone who has only eaten rice in their whole life, they may be OK with that but would not even have an idea that something can be sweet like honey. So that could be a rough comparison between the limited ego state to nirvana.

[Stosh]

your ego and the things you are attached to are just impermanent and are subject to change. So therefore it doesn't make sense to base happiness on these things.

 

I just never understood this scenario-conclusion ,

it is said in a way that its supposed to be unrefutably obvious ,

but its not

If unhappiness and happiness are both parts of life

neither is permanent ,

many folks are just fine with the ebb and flow of joy and sadness.

And even a devout buddhist has to have had fun at some point ,,

 

At least for the time one has it

one actually has joy , dont they?

Or is the argument that no one is ever ever happy,

and if they think they are ,

they are wrong?

 

Who the heck can say Im not happy if I think I am?

[Marblehead]

I think using the word "suffering" to encompass the whole idea makes it seem very strong. Suffering gives the feel of extreme negative conditions, when its not necessarily that blatant.

 

So in my opinion while you still have this ego and attachments there's at least the potential for "suffering", the things that make up your ego and the things you are attached to are just impermanent and are subject to change. So therefore it doesn't make sense to base happiness on these things.

 

Also we can look at it like someone who has only eaten rice in their whole life, they may be OK with that but would not even have an idea that something can be sweet like honey. So that could be a rough comparison between the limited ego state to nirvana.

Hi Ish,

 

Is this the first time we have been in conversation? Regardless, welcome to my world.

 

First, I need say that I have never suggested that I do not exaggerate at times in order to make a point.

 

Yes, I am aware that my ego and my attachments are not permanent; not immortal. But then, neither am I.

 

No, I doubt that there will ever be another time in my life when I will suffer. Have pain? Oh!, no doubt I will experience pain, and you know what?, the older we get the more frequent we experience the pains of old age. But should that cause me suffering? I think not. In fact, I should be pleased that I am still alive and capable of experiencing these pains of a fully-realizing body.

 

But the mind? No need to let that go to the negative. Even in my old age I still dance whenever I can, even if it is just with myself.

 

Anyhow, you know I am a materialist, right? When I go outside in the morning and see a newly opehed flower much joy is brought into my life. And even the work required in order to establish conditions favorable for the flower to bloom was a joy (and hard work) because I was directly interacting with nature in its purest form.

 

To enjoy the fullness of life doesn't need any suppliments. Just jump in and start swimming!

[Marblehead]

Who the heck can say Im not happy if I think I am?

There you go. And who am I to suggest that those who feel the need to suffer are not happy while they are suffering because it is supporting a belief that they have.

 

Happiness is a really hard thing to describe. Chuang Tzu tried but never came to a conclusion. Nietzsche tried but I think he did not die happy.

 

I suggest that happiness too is in the eye of the beholder.

[GrandmasterP]

Suffering my erse. By and large life is pretty sweet. It's what you make of it.

Many Buddhists are repressed miserablists, they actually enjoy suffering.

Hence the wealth of miserable Buddhist literature that they can buy so as to feel even worse about themselves and life in general.

They like that sort of thing and for those who like that sort of thing... that is the sort of thing that they like.

 

Taoism on the other hand is a cheery and positive path, we cultivate we get better at it. We die, we're reborn and get a chance to become even beter at cultivation, eventually we get off the wheel if we want to or stick around as a spirit guide (a.k.a 'angel' or 'boddhisatva' of 'demi-deity') if we don't fancy 'heaven' just yet but quite fancy the idea of a few decades or more fecking about helping human mortals on this side of life.

 

Taoism's a win - win situation whereas , apart from the Pure Land variety which almost identical to Taoism; Buddhism exists for exceptionally sad losers who like being the sad sacks they are and wish to remain the same, over and over again.

Good luck to 'em too, more fun for the rest of us to enjoy.

Plus it is quite amusing to listen to the poor wee lambs' constant doleful bleatings both on here and elsewhere.

Edited November 12, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[Ish]

I just never understood this scenario-conclusion ,

it is said in a way that its supposed to be unrefutably obvious ,

but its not

If unhappiness and happiness are both parts of life

neither is permanent ,

many folks are just fine with the ebb and flow of joy and sadness.

And even a devout buddhist has to have had fun at some point ,,

 

At least for the time one has it

one actually has joy , dont they?

Or is the argument that no one is ever ever happy,

and if they think they are ,

they are wrong?

 

Who the heck can say Im not happy if I think I am?

 

When i said about ones happiness should not be based on external things - let me explain that a bit more.

The important word here is "based", for example, you can still enjoy a hot shower, but even in the lack of it you are still happy. This means by your own nature you can be free and openhearted, not due to external conditions.

 

So for my own personal experience, just BEING in the present and allowing the smile to blossom from the heart causes great happiness whenever, wherever not as a result of anything outside.

[Ish]

Suffering my erse. By and large life is pretty sweet. It's what you make of it.

Many Buddhists are repressed miserablists, they actually enjoy suffering.

Hence the wealth of miserable Buddhist literature that they can buy so as to feel even worse about themselves and life in general.

They like that sort of thing and for those who like that sort of thing... that is the sort of thing that they like.

 

Taoism on the other hand is a cheery and positive path, we cultivate we get better at it. We die, we're reborn and get a chance to become even beter at cultivation, eventually we get off the wheel if we want to or stick around as a spirit guide (a.k.a 'angel' or 'boddhisatva' of 'demi-deity') if we don't fancy 'heaven' just yet but quite fancy the idea of a few decades or more fecking about helping human mortals on this side of life.

 

Taoism's a win - win situation whereas , aprt from te Pure Land variety which almost identical to Taoism; Buddhism's for exceptionally sad losers who like being te sad sacks who they are and wish to remain the same, over and over again.

Good luck to 'em too, more fun for the rest of us to enjoy, and it is amusing to listen to the poor lambs constant bleating.

 

Can you tell me the names of some the "wealth of miserable Buddhist literature", I would be interested to see what you're pointing too.

[Marblehead]

I'm not gonna' repeat that other stuff. Hehehe. It's a little harsher than I like being.

 

However, ...

 

Taoism on the other hand is a cheery and positive path, we cultivate we get better at it. We die, we're reborn and get a chance to become even beter at cultivation, eventually we get off the wheel if we want to or stick around as a spirit guide (a.k.a 'angel' or 'boddhisatva' of 'demi-deity') if we don't fancy 'heaven' just yet but quite fancy the idea of a few decades or more fecking about helping human mortals on this side of life.

 

I actually enjoyed this even though I don't hold to this belief. Whenever someone says stuff like this I think that maybe I should convert to Buddhism so I can have another life because there were many women I never had a chance to kiss that I am sure would have been most enjoyable.

 

Kinda' like having sex; if you don't get it right the first time just keep on trying over and over and over again until you get it right. But make sure you set your expectations so high that there will never be the possibility of attaining those expectations.

[GrandmasterP]

Can you tell me the names of some the "wealth of miserable Buddhist literature", I would be interested to see what you're pointing too.

 

Kalachakra Initiation by the DL.

Not exactly a laugh a minute is it?

Dhammapada,.. a prolonged sob .. in book form..

Lotus Sutra.. no gags at all.

Diamond Sutra (Leonard Cohen lyric adapted for Buddhist readers)

Anything that guru of the New Kadampa has ever written

The FWBO website (or whatever the Friends of the Western Buddhist order are calling themselves this year).

Ditto any Budhist sect or cult website, ditto any of the books on said sect or cults bookshelves or on sale at prices to suit every miserablist via their prolific sales outlets.

 

Should I go on?

Edited November 12, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[Apech]

Kalachakra Initiation by the DL.

Not exactly a laugh a minute is it?

Dhammapada,.. a prolonged sob .. in book form..

Lotus Sutra.. no gags at all.

Diamond Sutra (Leonard Cohen lyric adapted for Buddhist readers)

Anything that guru of the New Kadampa has ever written

The FWBO website (or whatever the Friends of the Western Buddhist order are calling themselves this year).

Ditto any Budhist sect or cult website, ditto any of the books on said sect or cults bookshelves or on sale at prices to suit every miserablist via their prolific sales outlets.

 

Should I go on?

 

There are plenty of good Buddhist gags. Like the old one about why a Buddhist can't use his vacuum cleaner ... 'cos he lacks the attachment.

 

Anyway most Buddhists I know are happy cheery types and great company. Tho' none belong to the NKD or FWBO and so on .. s maybe that's the secret to happy buddhing.

[GrandmasterP]

There's a guy on Dharma Wheel (and I am not making this up), English guy but lives in USA, calls himself a monk; who writes thus..."Well I have set myself the task of reading everything in the original Tibetan'...

and so on.....

LOSER.

 

Fair play to anyone who feels they need to defend their Buddhism, I'm not playing, just here to say..

"Get a suit, get a job, grow your hair back then get on your knees and beg your mother for forgiveness. Then get a feckin' life brother"

(It's always men and ten years later they are running survivalist communes in Montana, tea shoppes in Pinner along with Bruce their significant other or something similar and equally not to do with Buddhism).

 

[GrandmasterP]

DL says to the hot dog vendor..

 

 

"Make me one with everything"

 

Suicide rates amongst Buddhist converts are right up there alongside those for psychiatrists and Swedes.

Check out the happy little Buddhist bunnies posting on here or over at Dharma Wheel.

 

I rest my case.

Edited November 12, 2012 by GrandmasterP

[Ish]

Hi Ish,

 

Is this the first time we have been in conversation? Regardless, welcome to my world.

 

First, I need say that I have never suggested that I do not exaggerate at times in order to make a point.

 

Yes, I am aware that my ego and my attachments are not permanent; not immortal. But then, neither am I.

 

No, I doubt that there will ever be another time in my life when I will suffer. Have pain? Oh!, no doubt I will experience pain, and you know what?, the older we get the more frequent we experience the pains of old age. But should that cause me suffering? I think not. In fact, I should be pleased that I am still alive and capable of experiencing these pains of a fully-realizing body.

 

But the mind? No need to let that go to the negative. Even in my old age I still dance whenever I can, even if it is just with myself.

 

Anyhow, you know I am a materialist, right? When I go outside in the morning and see a newly opehed flower much joy is brought into my life. And even the work required in order to establish conditions favorable for the flower to bloom was a joy (and hard work) because I was directly interacting with nature in its purest form.

 

To enjoy the fullness of life doesn't need any suppliments. Just jump in and start swimming!

 

I completely agree with you, this is a great way to live.

 

While still enjoying life - in its common definition - due to my personal experience with meditation and practice there is definitely greater freedom that we can return to.

[Ish]

Kalachakra Initiation by the DL.

Not exactly a laugh a minute is it?

Dhammapada,.. a prolonged sob .. in book form..

Lotus Sutra.. no gags at all.

Diamond Sutra (Leonard Cohen lyric adapted for Buddhist readers)

Anything that guru of the New Kadampa has ever written

The FWBO website (or whatever the Friends of the Western Buddhist order are calling themselves this year).

Ditto any Budhist sect or cult website, ditto any of the books on said sect or cults bookshelves or on sale at prices to suit every miserablist via their prolific sales outlets.

 

Should I go on?

 

No need, forgetting all the Cult BS (not even worth talking about), none of the things you mentioned strike me as negative or depressing.

What strikes me as more negative is you trying to put Taoism on a pedestal above Buddhism based on a few misguided practitioners. Such a huge generalization to condemn the whole of Buddhism is really narrow minded.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Ish