12 ms·

I have a close friend who's an intentional Buddhist. Based on my values and habits, he refers to me as a Buddhist; though this isn't something I choose for myse

I have a close friend who's an intentional Buddhist. Based on my values and habits, he refers to me as a Buddhist; though this isn't something I choose for myself, I have a hard time disagreeing with him. So understand that my evaluation here is based on a limited understanding and not that of someone who follows this philosophy. Based on my understanding, this is crap. First off: Buddhists aren't trying to perfect themselves. They seek stillness and reflection, and harmony. Perfection isn't part of that lifestyle because it's not even a concept they believe in. Second: Essential? Essential IS sleeping and eating. What about programming or resolving any of the impermanent problems of the human race is any more important, in a necessary sense, than the very vital acts that result in one's continued existence? Life is short, and if we want to develop our inner qualities it's never too soon to start getting down to it. This post, in its entirely a quote (or pair of quotes, I can't quite tell), succeeds only in telling us that the things we think we ought to do don't matter at all and we should instead concentrate on... something, and that something isn't even hinted at, let alone defined in a meaningful way.

hkmurakami 13y ago
Wouldn't you say that that 'something' is an entirely personal choice?
- obviouslygreen 13y ago
  You certainly could. But if that were their intention, it'd kind of defeat the purpose of suggesting that some things didn't qualify as "something."
  - hkmurakami 13y ago
    Good point. I myself think that maximizing the time you get to spend in bed is a perfectly worthy objective for life. :)
  - brudgers 13y ago
    Does nothing qualify as something?
    - obviouslygreen 13y ago
      A worthy if abstract question, though it's presupposed by the original piece (or at least what it quotes), as it specifically dismisses certain things... so while it may allow nothing to be something, it indeed dismisses some things despite, perhaps, coincidentally accepting nothing. ;)
  - qu4z-2 13y ago
    I think the distinction is between "something" that you've chosen to do with your life and that you find fulfilling, and the "somethings" you just kind of end up falling back to, as a default without making a conscious decision. So yeah, I don't think there's really anything that doesn't qualify as "something", the point is just that the "somethings" that you want to do and the "somethings" you end up doing are often not quite aligned, and you kind of know it in the back of your mind but don't end up doing anything about it. "Yeah, I've always wanted to see the world, but it's not really a good time for it right now, so I'll just finish this project, and finish paying off my <X> loan, and then maybe I'll do it." You kind of end up living in The Waiting Place from Oh The Places You'll Go. And no-one wants that.
Volpe 13y ago
Talking about Buddhism as though it's just one belief is crap. That would be like grouping up Islam, Judaism, and the various Christian faiths and calling them the same. [1] Sure they all share "Buddha" in common, just as those above share "God" in common. > This post, in its entirely a quote (or pair of quotes, I can't quite tell), succeeds only in telling us that the things we think we ought to do don't matter at all and we should instead concentrate on... something, and that something isn't even hinted at, let alone defined in a meaningful way. You don't think the context of the heavy overtone of buddhism helps answer that "something"? Perhaps the article is hinting for you to make a conscious effort to find that "something" rather than just defaulting to what life throws at you. Or perhaps it was a more explicit effort to get you to explore buddhism? I'd reread the article with the idea that it is just giving you information to reflect on, rather than just information to respond to. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Schools_and_traditions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Schools_and_traditions

hkmurakami 13y ago

Wouldn't you say that that 'something' is an entirely personal choice?

obviouslygreen 13y ago
You certainly could. But if that were their intention, it'd kind of defeat the purpose of suggesting that some things didn't qualify as "something."
- hkmurakami 13y ago
  Good point. I myself think that maximizing the time you get to spend in bed is a perfectly worthy objective for life. :)
- brudgers 13y ago
  Does nothing qualify as something?
  - obviouslygreen 13y ago
    A worthy if abstract question, though it's presupposed by the original piece (or at least what it quotes), as it specifically dismisses certain things... so while it may allow nothing to be something, it indeed dismisses some things despite, perhaps, coincidentally accepting nothing. ;)
- qu4z-2 13y ago
  I think the distinction is between "something" that you've chosen to do with your life and that you find fulfilling, and the "somethings" you just kind of end up falling back to, as a default without making a conscious decision. So yeah, I don't think there's really anything that doesn't qualify as "something", the point is just that the "somethings" that you want to do and the "somethings" you end up doing are often not quite aligned, and you kind of know it in the back of your mind but don't end up doing anything about it. "Yeah, I've always wanted to see the world, but it's not really a good time for it right now, so I'll just finish this project, and finish paying off my <X> loan, and then maybe I'll do it." You kind of end up living in The Waiting Place from Oh The Places You'll Go. And no-one wants that.

Volpe 13y ago

Talking about Buddhism as though it's just one belief is crap. That would be like grouping up Islam, Judaism, and the various Christian faiths and calling them the same. [1] Sure they all share "Buddha" in common, just as those above share "God" in common. > This post, in its entirely a quote (or pair of quotes, I can't quite tell), succeeds only in telling us that the things we think we ought to do don't matter at all and we should instead concentrate on... something, and that something isn't even hinted at, let alone defined in a meaningful way. You don't think the context of the heavy overtone of buddhism helps answer that "something"? Perhaps the article is hinting for you to make a conscious effort to find that "something" rather than just defaulting to what life throws at you. Or perhaps it was a more explicit effort to get you to explore buddhism? I'd reread the article with the idea that it is just giving you information to reflect on, rather than just information to respond to. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Schools_and_traditions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#Schools_and_traditions