Buddhists and Desire

[robcantrell11]

The differences between any two religions relies upon the conviction of the one over the other. If convinced, then the difference is what is seen.

I need to put it out there, too, that the views I am ascribing too are more directly associated with my experience, and less associated with my learning. So, they are not standard Buddhist views, as you would find among the pure Hinayanists and Mahayanists. My instruction was from the Vajrayana, where there are no holds barred

I think I may have to leave the discussion at this. I do not want to cause confusion, since much of what I say is not orthodox Buddhism. Also, I really don't want to convince anyone of anything - God teaches us, as we move along throughout our life, and uses whatever he can to move us in the right direction, under the auspices of our free will. But when I speak of God, this word has a much different meaning for me than for you, just as it has a different meaning for the Afghanis I work with every day, and fight with. The problem with these terms and words, is that they are defined by each of us in different ways, even though we are using them together in the same conversation. How can I propose to define God in order to even have this conversation? You can use the Bible, which sets up distinct parameters, but from my experience there is no definition, no parameter which can begin to touch what it is we call God. "Freeing yourself from words is liberation." Bodhidharma. If you really want to see what the Buddhist means by this or that, experience it directly. The essence of Buddhism is Practice, not dialogue. Meditation and Mindfulness. Nothing more.

[Josh]

The differences between any two religions relies upon the conviction of the one over the other. If convinced, then the difference is what is seen.

With as little bias as I can muster, I see both similarities and differences. If the basic rules of logic are used, there certainly are contradictions between these two great religious traditions. However, it has also been my experience that Buddhists often don't give much creedence to logic.

I need to put it out there, too, that the views I am ascribing too are more directly associated with my experience, and less associated with my learning. So, they are not standard Buddhist views, as you would find among the pure Hinayanists and Mahayanists. My instruction was from the Vajrayana, where there are no holds barred

That's completely fine. I'm much more curious about your particular views than trying in vain to pin down a monolithic officially Buddhist answer.

Also, my interest is less in convincing than in discussing and learning. I don't share the same degree of doubt in "words" as you do (though of course it is always important to define terms as best as possible before digging in to a conversation like this), but surely, if one is attempting a "middle way", some emphasis must be placed on rational discussion as well as experience, on logic as well as mystery, on every God-given faculty we possess.

On another note, I have a related question:

You implied that you see Jesus as taking on our attachments through his death- an interesting theory, which at least in some ways is akin to Jesus becoming "sin" for us.

However, whereas we are never told that Jesus himself actually committed sin, we are told that he greived and suffered in various ways before his "work on the cross".

Was Jesus showing attachment when he greived for Lazarus at his tomb, or was he merely experiencing his emotions? I think you'd say the latter, but, then, whether he was showing attachment or not in that poignant scene, wouldn't we agree that He was at least suffering in some sense? But isn't all suffering connected with Desire/Attachment?

Perhaps Buddhists separate the notion of pain from the experience of suffering? Are the two synonymous or can someone experience pain without being considered to suffer?

[yeshuafreak]

Whiile I'm waiting, what's the WTG?

sorry- the Will to Give- as opposed to the Will to Recieve, which we acquired as a result of developing Ego.

[Kirby]

Interesting interview:
www.oregonlive.com/living/index.ssf/2009/11/zen_buddhists_host_session_on.html

I was especially interested in this quote:

The Buddha taught that it's OK for us to have reasonable material comfort, for our needs to be met, and that our wealth was to be in the service of doing good. We all have desires for the greater good, not just for ourselves but for others and our environment. If we're just eking out a meager, survival kind of life, what good are we to others?

Food for thought.

[Josh]

RobC- curious what you think of this, from G.K. Chesterton:

"The more we really appreciate the noble revulsion and renunciation of Buddha, the more we see that intellectually it was the converse and almost the contrary of the salvation of the world by Christ. The Christian would escape from the world into the universe: the Buddhist wishes to escape from the universe even more than from the world. One would uncreate himself; the other would return to his Creation: to his Creator."

[robcantrell11]

Yeah, from what I understand, enlightenment, and final enlightenment, takes us off of the wheel of death and rebirth so that having been said - the final enlightenment is a step into oblivion. No more incarnation. No more return. Thus, no more suffering. There are many worlds that we can find ourselves in in each incarnation. You might wake up in Portland OR to a lower middle class family, and that is your karma - it reflects the state of mind from your previous incarnation - so there you are, with people you've been with before, or not. You may find yourself incarnated in a mud qalat in Afghanistan with rockets flying outside you house, and war at your doorstep. This is your karma, the state of mind you had when you left the body of your previous incarnation. The universe gives you ample chances to either F*** it up and find yourself in a hell world, or find salvation through an intermediary god in one of the lower heavens for a time. But nothing lasts here - it is the banal moment of doing the same thing over and over. Incarnation after incarnation. So the Buddhas seek the enlightenment which will, in the, after the final stage of enlightenment has been achieved, and there is a fully Enlightened Jivanmukta liberated soul - a Tathagata - a World Soul - the Final Phase of this Enlightenment is the release of the body. When the body is left there is no return. It is not nirvana - for nirvana is samsara, and it is definitely not samsara. It is nothingness - oblivion. No more incarnation. They uncreate themselves. The truest end of suffering. The end.

[christopher]

So, what happens when everyone achieves oblivion? Is there any reality left? Thinking about this kinda makes my head hurt

[Josh]

So, Chesterton is right that ultimately, the eastern religious vision is world-denying and despises physicality.

Directly at odds, of course, with the Judeo-Christian viewpoint that the created physical world is truly "good".

Regarding their perspective on physicality, Buddhists are more at home with Manichees, Gnostics, Cathars, and uber-Platonists* than with Christianity.

*all cult offshoots of Christianity that shun physicality.

[Josh]

So, RobC, is Jesus merely an "intermediary god in the lower heavens for a time" to you or are you just describing what you've learned about Buddhism? From other comments you've made, you seem to see Jesus as the savior of the world, but are you really saying He is just one more bodhisattva?

[robcantrell11]

That was just a description of what I've learned about Buddhist thought, which, by the way, has evolved over time. Basically the Buddha was born into the worldview of ancient Indians, which was pretty close to Hinduism today, with some of the gods moved around. So, when he looked at the system, which had us going through incalcuable lifetimes, and looking around at his world at the time and seeing that for the most part, everyone was suffering, he sought for an escape from this cycle. Back then there was no distinction between the spiritual and the physical, the political and the religious. Everything was intertwined. There was one God, Brahman, but he had many faces. So to the Buddha, their was no need for salvation, just escape from the wheel of eternal suffering. We have successfully killed off all the old gods, and have in the west inherited the duality of flesh and spirit. The Buddha didn't see the physical as evil or bad, just something that kept you bound to the wheel of death and rebirth. For the early Buddhists, and recent I assume, the phyiscal wasn't something to overcome, it was something to just forget about so you wouldn't be attached to it and return to the wheel of death and rebirth. I have no opinion about Jesus - who am I to say? I regard him as the Son of God and the Savior of the world. But this is also how the Buddhists talk about bodhisattvas. I don't adhere to the old Indian gods, like I said, they are us moot. We have flushed them out with science and reason, but science can't flush out the final cause. It can't even speak about it. That is why so many scientists who consider themselves athiests don't even talk about God - there is no way to prove or disprove, scientifically, the existence of God. So, going back to Buddhism, their worldview in the beginning was so different than ours that we could say they lived in a different universe where there was no question Ishwara was the god the interacted with humans, that Indra caused storms, and that Shiva would open his third eye at the end of the Kalpa and the universe would begin again. So, in the face of this, instead of looking for a way to heaven, to the seat of the gods, which would ultimately in their worldview end and begin again, continuing the whole cycle of death and rebirth, suffering and pleasure, the Buddha looked for a way out. Many of the Enlightened masters who followed after in the millenia after his Mahasamadhi (final samadhi - leaving the body - death) found that Enlightenment was possible before death, so that you could still live in this world, and yet not be subject to the cycles of pleasure and pain, and that this would lead to fewer and fewer incarnations, and eventually the Final Incarnation of the Tathagata and you wouldn't incarnate anymore. They never said where you go - just that you wouldn't come back here.

And you are absolutely right - Buddhism has more in common with Manichees, Gnostics, Cathars, and uber-Platonists* than with Christianity. I would venture to say that many of these "heresies" were directly influenced by Buddhist thought brought back by the Greeks living in Bactria. One of the great Buddhist kingdoms was in post-Alexandrian Afghanistan, the Greco-Buddhist center of Gandahar. When Alexander came here, and after Alexander's generals split up the world, the Seleucid Greeks encountered Buddhism from India. Some experts believe that Greek thinking influenced the shift towards Mahayana Buddhism. The Mahayana, or Greater Vehicle, originated around the 1st century bce and introduced most of the Buddhist art and thought that we are familiar with today. As well, there are many Buddhist elements among Jewish Gnostics, like those in Qumran, and the Gnostic Christians.

I don't have time to proof read this - I am writing this between missions and building a base for the Afghanis, so it isn't tight. But I tried to address questions here as fully as possible.

[robcantrell11]

Dec 13, 2009 20:36:53 GMT -8 christopher said:

So, what happens when everyone achieves oblivion? Is there any reality left? Thinking about this kinda makes my head hurt

I have no idea. I don't think oblivion was the right word for it, but I don't really have another one that describes it better. We definitely have a aversion to the idea of oblivion - of not being. And I'm sure that someone who had actually experienced Enlightened states of mind would say I was full of crap and I have no authority to be talking about this stuff, and they'd be right.

[Josh]

Thanks for the response, Lincoln.

The Buddha didn't see the physical as evil or bad, just something that kept you bound to the wheel of death and rebirth.

Again, one of the major points of divergence between the Christian and the Buddhist- the Buddhist desiring to cast off the physical, the Christian desiring to be clothed with imperishable physicality, as Jesus himself was*

*Just one major difference between the Christian idea of Savior and the Buddhist bodhisattvas.