4 ms·

I'm not an expert, but I think the translation to the english word suffering isn't perfect. It comes with a lot of heavy connotations. I've always thought strug

by gph 13y ago

I'm not an expert, but I think the translation to the english word suffering isn't perfect. It comes with a lot of heavy connotations. I've always thought struggle is a better word. Some people have negative reactions to struggle, but others use them to grow and become stronger. Again I'm not a buddhist adherent, but I think the general idea is that life is a constant struggle and it's how you view and react to that struggle that will define your life. Reaching peace and eternal happiness comes from accepting that struggle and growing with it. Or something like that.

ars 13y ago
If that's what he meant, then we can agree, and I was too harsh in what I wrote. virtualwhys: If this really is what you meant, then please, start using a different word.
- markost 13y ago
  Buddha said life is "dukkha", a word that his listeners would have recognized as sounding like a wheel with the axle slightly out of true: "Duka-duka-duka"... He indeed meant that life is suffering. English speakers today translate the word as "suffering", "pain", "disappointment", or perhaps "striving" (a sentiment you will find echoed in Ecclesiastes). Buddha also spoke about the cause of suffering, and suggested that if you can escape from the cause, you can escape from the suffering. I personally disagree with this advice: Why would I want to escape from love, hate, pain, joy, and everything else? But I don't disagree with the basic teaching. Everyone has a cross to bear.
  - cellularmitosis 13y ago
    I've struggled a lot with truly understanding what it means to strike attachment from one's life. When you take it to its logical conclusion, it seems absurd (being unattached to your wife? To your children?). I think of it like this: when the untrained mind is enjoying something, there are two aspects to that experience: the appreciation of the beauty or pleasure you derive from it, but also the attachment, the clutching or grasping and anxiety which would follow that thing being taken away. I think "no attachment" is advocating that you get yourself in a mental state where you can have one without the other: to appreciate something while it lasts but not clutch to it or get hung up on it when it passes.

by gph 13y ago

ars 13y ago

If that's what he meant, then we can agree, and I was too harsh in what I wrote. virtualwhys: If this really is what you meant, then please, start using a different word.

markost 13y ago
Buddha said life is "dukkha", a word that his listeners would have recognized as sounding like a wheel with the axle slightly out of true: "Duka-duka-duka"... He indeed meant that life is suffering. English speakers today translate the word as "suffering", "pain", "disappointment", or perhaps "striving" (a sentiment you will find echoed in Ecclesiastes). Buddha also spoke about the cause of suffering, and suggested that if you can escape from the cause, you can escape from the suffering. I personally disagree with this advice: Why would I want to escape from love, hate, pain, joy, and everything else? But I don't disagree with the basic teaching. Everyone has a cross to bear.
- cellularmitosis 13y ago
  I've struggled a lot with truly understanding what it means to strike attachment from one's life. When you take it to its logical conclusion, it seems absurd (being unattached to your wife? To your children?). I think of it like this: when the untrained mind is enjoying something, there are two aspects to that experience: the appreciation of the beauty or pleasure you derive from it, but also the attachment, the clutching or grasping and anxiety which would follow that thing being taken away. I think "no attachment" is advocating that you get yourself in a mental state where you can have one without the other: to appreciate something while it lasts but not clutch to it or get hung up on it when it passes.