6 ms·

"This simplistic 'snap out of it' ideology" lies at the heart of Buddhism. It is neither ideology nor simplistic.

by kinleyd 13y ago

virtualwhys 13y ago
What is this Buddhism that you speak of? Put another way, what is Buddha? Given the epoch, it's not even clear that all of the teachings attributed to the Buddha derive from one being (i.e. Buddhism is the evolution of a core teaching that has become an ism). IIRC, from the Diamond Sutra: a cloud, a flash of lightening, a dew drop, a star...view all created things like this. If that doesn't divert one's attention from sex, beer, or a pint of Ben & Jerry's, nothing will ;-)
- kinleyd 13y ago
  True, Buddhism is no different from Hinduism, Christism, Muhammadism or any other ism in that it cannot escape the additions to the core teachings. Errors in narration, translation and interpretation all contribute to giving one a good reason to take what is passed down with healthy skepticism. IMHO, the Buddhist recommendation to exercise this type of necessary skepticism is to try it out, to experience it. If your experience confirms what the received wisdom is said to be, you are probably on the right track. Of course, there are lots of other basics, including the most basic of all - get a good teacher. Needless to say, the meaning of "good" in this respect always requires a modicum of circumspection. :) Yup, there's lots of stuff like those you mentioned to divert your attention. The idea is to give you a reason to get started. In this case I'd say something like Nike's Just Do It as mentioned in some of the other threads is a tad overconfident. The Buddhist way would more likely be Life is Short. Just Get Started.
  - virtualwhys 13y ago
    Playing a bit of devil's advocate here: why the need for a teacher? Buddha: "No teacher have I" Jesus: "Know thyself" I'm not convinced there is a "Buddhist way", but rather ways. I mean, Vipasana is almost entirely technique oriented, apparently following the historical Buddha's extant teaching to the letter. Tibetans do a boatload of visualization, while Zen tends to emphasize open eyed sitting and posture without any focal point. Same deal in Christianity, Islam, etc., many ways. And yet, mystics like Ramana Maharshi, Jiddu Krishnamurti, Eckhart Tolle, etc. all say, dispense with practice and teachers, these are extraneous to the fundamental matter. For Tolle it was rock bottom chronic depression; for Maharshi it was some kind of death experience, and for Krishnamurti it was talking a lot (heh, heh, kidding, he was apparently born without the sense of "I").
    - kinleyd 13y ago
      Again, you are right to say that there are many Buddhist ways, not one. While the goal is enlightenment, most Buddhist texts constantly talk about the different ways it has been achieved. My view of Buddhism is heavily Mahayana and Vajrayana based, and I know little of Hinayana and the other 'vehicles'. In this context, emphasis is placed on one's teacher mainly because it is believed that it is very, very easy to understand things completely wrongly and to go off on a tangent that is harmful to oneself and others. The teacher is thus your guide, while the work of attaining enlightenment is still very much your own. This of course is not to say that Buddhahood isn't possible without a teacher; it's just that it is rather more unlikely and difficult.
      - virtualwhys 13y ago
        The practice to awakening odds are pretty poor. If you were to ask your fellow practitioners how many of them felt as if they fully grasped (experienced) the teacher's teaching, I'd be shocked if more than 1 out of 20 said yes. Add to that the fact that practice in the Buddhist world is almost always an ass kicker of the highest order (hello screwdriver in the knees), then one wonders why take it up in the first place? The whole process seems a bit like the Christian, "yours is not to reason why"; i.e. it will become clear(er) later. Saying that, I did meet someone who awakened without a teacher. I suggested that he attend a couple of sitting groups that I used to go to. After the Dharma talk/discussion at each group, without having said a word, both teachers came up to him and basically said, how on earth did you do that? Talking with him later he said he came into this life to awaken; i.e. it wasn't difficult and he was only just scratching the surface. Pretty rare obviously, but then again, practicing for 5, 10, 20+ years and awakening is also not guaranteed.
        kinleyd 13y ago
        Saying that, I did meet someone who awakened without a teacher. I suggested that he attend a couple of sitting groups that I used to go to. After the Dharma talk/discussion at each group, without having said a word, both teachers came up to him and basically said, how on earth did you do that? That's an awesome story. I'm only scratching at the surface, and something tells me that it's going to take a lot longer than that, if ever, for me. but then again, practicing for 5, 10, 20+ years and awakening is also not guaranteed. For most of us, for sure. However, on the positive side, even many lifetimes of trying is but a mere tick on the clock of samsara. :)
  - swayvil 13y ago
    Luckily we in Buddhism have something better than mere teachings : Meditation. More educational than a billion wise words.
    - kinleyd 13y ago
      Yes, indeed. I was referring to the practice of meditation as a good basis for testing the worth of Buddhism.
    - qu4z-2 13y ago
      I'm fairly sure Christianity had this for most of its life as well, actually.
WalterSear 13y ago
In that were the case, Buddhism would lacking. But it isn't the heart of Buddhism.
- kinleyd 13y ago
  In Buddhism "the very real issues of fear, discouragement and depression", and indeed the entire range of human emotions, are themselves considered fabrications of the mind that are laid bare and exposed as such through the practice of meditation, mindfulness and rejection of ego. To me that pretty much qualifies as being at the heart though I certainly don't claim any solid expertise.
  - WalterSear 13y ago
    This position takes quite a reactionary view of mental health. If you have PTSD, it doesn't work like that. If you have schizophrenia, it doesn't work like that. If you have BPD, it doesn't work like that. If you have ADDHD, it doesn't work like that. These are all known mental health issues, with physiological markers, but ultimately they are aspects of human mentality that are present in everyone. So, to ignore these, and ignore the myriad other mental and environmental issues, and suggest that 'just do it' is actionable advice goes against the grain of much that is valuable in Bhuddism: namely mindfulness and the purposes of meditation. Essentially, it is telling people to achieve presence through force of will, instead of using insight to accommodate their mental situation: only the unencumbered can succeed.
    - throwaway1980 13y ago
      Yeah, be wary of anything that is basically code for "stop being such a crybaby".
      - kinleyd 13y ago
        Are there times when it's helpful to say "stop being such a crybaby"? You betcha! That's the only way to move away from over indulgence in our selves, a decidedly big problem in this day and age. Is anyone saying "stop being such a crybaby" is the solution for all problems? No way. And certainly not the Buddhist way.

"This simplistic 'snap out of it' ideology" lies at the heart of Buddhism. It is neither ideology nor simplistic.

by kinleyd 13y ago

"This simplistic 'snap out of it' ideology" lies at the heart of Buddhism. It is neither ideology nor simplistic.

What is this Buddhism that you speak of? Put another way, what is Buddha? Given the epoch, it's not even clear that all of the teachings attributed to the Buddha derive from one being (i.e. Buddhism is the evolution of a core teaching that has become an ism). IIRC, from the Diamond Sutra: a cloud, a flash of lightening, a dew drop, a star...view all created things like this. If that doesn't divert one's attention from sex, beer, or a pint of Ben & Jerry's, nothing will ;-)

kinleyd 13y ago
True, Buddhism is no different from Hinduism, Christism, Muhammadism or any other ism in that it cannot escape the additions to the core teachings. Errors in narration, translation and interpretation all contribute to giving one a good reason to take what is passed down with healthy skepticism. IMHO, the Buddhist recommendation to exercise this type of necessary skepticism is to try it out, to experience it. If your experience confirms what the received wisdom is said to be, you are probably on the right track. Of course, there are lots of other basics, including the most basic of all - get a good teacher. Needless to say, the meaning of "good" in this respect always requires a modicum of circumspection. :) Yup, there's lots of stuff like those you mentioned to divert your attention. The idea is to give you a reason to get started. In this case I'd say something like Nike's Just Do It as mentioned in some of the other threads is a tad overconfident. The Buddhist way would more likely be Life is Short. Just Get Started.
- virtualwhys 13y ago
  Playing a bit of devil's advocate here: why the need for a teacher? Buddha: "No teacher have I" Jesus: "Know thyself" I'm not convinced there is a "Buddhist way", but rather ways. I mean, Vipasana is almost entirely technique oriented, apparently following the historical Buddha's extant teaching to the letter. Tibetans do a boatload of visualization, while Zen tends to emphasize open eyed sitting and posture without any focal point. Same deal in Christianity, Islam, etc., many ways. And yet, mystics like Ramana Maharshi, Jiddu Krishnamurti, Eckhart Tolle, etc. all say, dispense with practice and teachers, these are extraneous to the fundamental matter. For Tolle it was rock bottom chronic depression; for Maharshi it was some kind of death experience, and for Krishnamurti it was talking a lot (heh, heh, kidding, he was apparently born without the sense of "I").
  - kinleyd 13y ago
    Again, you are right to say that there are many Buddhist ways, not one. While the goal is enlightenment, most Buddhist texts constantly talk about the different ways it has been achieved. My view of Buddhism is heavily Mahayana and Vajrayana based, and I know little of Hinayana and the other 'vehicles'. In this context, emphasis is placed on one's teacher mainly because it is believed that it is very, very easy to understand things completely wrongly and to go off on a tangent that is harmful to oneself and others. The teacher is thus your guide, while the work of attaining enlightenment is still very much your own. This of course is not to say that Buddhahood isn't possible without a teacher; it's just that it is rather more unlikely and difficult.
    - virtualwhys 13y ago
      The practice to awakening odds are pretty poor. If you were to ask your fellow practitioners how many of them felt as if they fully grasped (experienced) the teacher's teaching, I'd be shocked if more than 1 out of 20 said yes. Add to that the fact that practice in the Buddhist world is almost always an ass kicker of the highest order (hello screwdriver in the knees), then one wonders why take it up in the first place? The whole process seems a bit like the Christian, "yours is not to reason why"; i.e. it will become clear(er) later. Saying that, I did meet someone who awakened without a teacher. I suggested that he attend a couple of sitting groups that I used to go to. After the Dharma talk/discussion at each group, without having said a word, both teachers came up to him and basically said, how on earth did you do that? Talking with him later he said he came into this life to awaken; i.e. it wasn't difficult and he was only just scratching the surface. Pretty rare obviously, but then again, practicing for 5, 10, 20+ years and awakening is also not guaranteed.
      - kinleyd 13y ago
        Saying that, I did meet someone who awakened without a teacher. I suggested that he attend a couple of sitting groups that I used to go to. After the Dharma talk/discussion at each group, without having said a word, both teachers came up to him and basically said, how on earth did you do that? That's an awesome story. I'm only scratching at the surface, and something tells me that it's going to take a lot longer than that, if ever, for me. but then again, practicing for 5, 10, 20+ years and awakening is also not guaranteed. For most of us, for sure. However, on the positive side, even many lifetimes of trying is but a mere tick on the clock of samsara. :)
- swayvil 13y ago
  Luckily we in Buddhism have something better than mere teachings : Meditation. More educational than a billion wise words.
  - kinleyd 13y ago
    Yes, indeed. I was referring to the practice of meditation as a good basis for testing the worth of Buddhism.
  - qu4z-2 13y ago
    I'm fairly sure Christianity had this for most of its life as well, actually.

WalterSear 13y ago

In that were the case, Buddhism would lacking. But it isn't the heart of Buddhism.

kinleyd 13y ago
In Buddhism "the very real issues of fear, discouragement and depression", and indeed the entire range of human emotions, are themselves considered fabrications of the mind that are laid bare and exposed as such through the practice of meditation, mindfulness and rejection of ego. To me that pretty much qualifies as being at the heart though I certainly don't claim any solid expertise.
- WalterSear 13y ago
  This position takes quite a reactionary view of mental health. If you have PTSD, it doesn't work like that. If you have schizophrenia, it doesn't work like that. If you have BPD, it doesn't work like that. If you have ADDHD, it doesn't work like that. These are all known mental health issues, with physiological markers, but ultimately they are aspects of human mentality that are present in everyone. So, to ignore these, and ignore the myriad other mental and environmental issues, and suggest that 'just do it' is actionable advice goes against the grain of much that is valuable in Bhuddism: namely mindfulness and the purposes of meditation. Essentially, it is telling people to achieve presence through force of will, instead of using insight to accommodate their mental situation: only the unencumbered can succeed.
  - throwaway1980 13y ago
    Yeah, be wary of anything that is basically code for "stop being such a crybaby".
    - kinleyd 13y ago
      Are there times when it's helpful to say "stop being such a crybaby"? You betcha! That's the only way to move away from over indulgence in our selves, a decidedly big problem in this day and age. Is anyone saying "stop being such a crybaby" is the solution for all problems? No way. And certainly not the Buddhist way.