kiss the joy as it flies
During our ethics class last week, we were asked to split into our tutorial groups to discuss a range of different issues. One of the points of discussion involved deciding whether or not wellbeing was simply a higher income, and the discussion moved towards looking at the nature of happiness. I respect the opinions and the intelligence of my classmates, but it was interesting to see how raw and partially formed many of their opinions were. It was as though a lot of the people in our class had never really sat down and seriously contemplated the fundamental nature of happiness before. Or perhaps they had, but they found it very difficult to come to terms with the subject.
Of course, I can fully relate to that. The subject isn't exactly something you can sit down, contemplate and conquer. We all want to be happy, yet most of us are not happy at least some of the time, maybe even most of the time. I'm guessing that the big decisions that most of us make in life are generally driven by the pursuit of happiness, but we tend to struggle with these decisions. It seems that many of my friends have an underlying belief that happiness comes largely as a result of knowing what you want out of life in terms of lifestyle, career, family etc. A lot of my friends don't seem to know exactly what they want, and because of this, many of them already appear to have resigned to a comfortable life of least resistance. Maybe decent money, a nice girlfriend or boyfriend, a tolerable job and good health won't guarantee happiness, but these things certainly can't hurt, right? So many people that I know seem to have decided that this outlook upon things is probably the best way to go, and have run with it for lack of a better alternative.
But even if you do think that you know exactly what you want and have an ideal life course planned out in your head, you're hardly assured of being happy. Maybe your dream job turns out to be less than it was cracked up to be. Maybe you achieve all of your greatest ambitions, but are left with a sense of emptiness and lack of meaning after it's all over. Maybe you find your ideal partner, but he/she dies in a car accident.
Should we be pursuing people, jobs, and money if we want to be happy? Despite so much evidence that suggests otherwise, the discussions during our ethics class suggested that that's what most of my classmates are trying to do. Though my classmates seemed to know intuitively that happiness is very much something that relies upon what's going on inside of you, this line of thinking was clearly pushed into the background. The majority of the people in our class appeared to be basing their lives around the belief that external circumstances play a primary role in our sense of wellbeing. Though the classmates in my tutorial group seemed to agree with my belief that everyone has at least some potential to be happy no matter what their external circumstances are, it did not seem that they seriously acknowledged the implications of this; perhaps we should turn our pursuit of happiness inwards and let this be our life's primary focus? That's not to say that I think that most of my friends aren't in tune with their internal world, and I don't think that we should all turn into hermits and spend our lives meditating alone in snow caves. I still believe that we do generally let our health, relationships and finances have a large influence upon our state of mind, and therefore these things are important and should hardly be neglected. However, I believe that even though these things do affect the state of mind of most of us, this needn't necessarily be the case. Judging from my own experience, I believe the potential to feel happiness is still there even if I'm homeless and in the gutter, or ill and in pain. Coming from this standpoint, I think that my state of mind is therefore the ultimate factor in determining my sense of happiness, and hence the primary means by which I should attempt to achieve happiness should be directed inwards.
Buddhists talk about this stuff quite a bit, and there's a particularly poignant quote from the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, that I think illustrates this concept very well:
Our country can be invaded, our possessions can be destroyed, our friends can be killed, but these are secondary for our mental happiness. The ultimate source of my mental happiness is my peace of mind. Nothing can destroy this except my own anger.
What sort of beliefs drive such an outlook upon life? To better come to terms with my own beliefs concerning happiness, I thought that I'd use this entry to write about my understanding of Buddhism's Four Noble Truths because after a fair bit of introspection, these so-called 'facts of life' have made a lot of sense to me. I should make it clear that I have no religious faith and I don't call myself a Buddhist, so my interpretations of these 'Noble Truths' won't be done from the point of view of a religious zealot. Though a lot of what Buddhism talks about resonates quite strongly with me as a person, and though I have certain beliefs that have largely come through looking at things like Buddhist thought, these beliefs are hardly unshakeable and are always subject to my own questioning. (As a side note, I'd suspect that many people who actually do call themselves 'Buddhist' think in a similar manner.)
I should also make it clear that these are just my own interpretations of these Noble Truths, guided by what others have said and written, but based on my own experiences. I believe that only through genuine self-analysis can you fully decide whether or not these Noble Truths have any sort of legitimacy, so if you're looking for an authority on the subject, kill him!
The Four Noble Truths
(1) We experience suffering
(2) We suffer because we become attached to our desires
(3) The possibility of letting go of these desires and being truly happy exists for anyone
(4) There is a tried and true path to do this.
The First Noble Truth
Buddhists call this first fact of life the truth of dukkha. Dukkha seems to frequently be translated as 'suffering', though I've read that the literal meanings of dukkha are 'hard to bear', 'dissatisfactory', 'off the mark', 'frustrating' and 'hollow'. My understanding of this first Noble Truth is that as living beings, we do experience suffering. We all have our ups and downs no matter who we are. I don't think that anyone would deny this as being a fact of life.
It has been said that the Buddha broke dukkha down into three different categories. I don't think that these categories are necessarily completely distinct from one another, and they were probably formulated so that we can gain a better understanding of the nature of individual suffering.
i/ The first category of dukkha can be looked at as the everyday problems that we all face. All of us have experienced physical and emotional pain. We don't always get what we think we want, we all experience disapointments. We all grieve, experience loss, feel mistreated, have felt mentally traumatised by ourselves and others, and suffer through injuries and illness. This is the nature of reality (a reality which still has wonderful potential for joy and fulfillment), and if we can't somehow come to terms with this flawed nature of everyday life, we'll be hurt time and again.
ii/ The second category is the dukkha of changing circumstances. Everything about our world is impermanent. We can see this at a purely physical level; some day the house you grew up in will be knocked down, some day our sun will burn out, our bodies are a ceaseless flux of matter, matter is a dynamic dance of energy patterns. On a more human level, the most beautiful moments in our lives are fleeting. Have you ever shared a terrific conversation with your best friends over dinner? As a child, did you ever spend time playing with a loving grandparent? Have you ever felt perfectly content walking in a park as the sun sets? Beautiful sunsets turn into cold nights. We lose touch of old friends. Loved ones pass away. We feel nostalgia, loss and disappointment.
iii/ The third category is the dukkha caused by the flawed nature of conditioned existence. This category's a little more esoteric, though no less intuitive. When you look at yourself and wonder who you are, what do you conclude? Do you identify yourself with your body? What about your taste in music, your taste in art, your taste in people? Do you identify with the intentions that you have as a person? What about your thoughts and feelings, or the fact that you are conscious? Do these things help give you a sense of identity?
After looking at this on a personal level, my understanding of this third category of dukkha is that our conditioned existence is inherently unsatisfying because we are forever grasping at an unreliable and tenuous sense of self. Our bodies will not last forever, in fact our bodies are changing all the time. Our tastes in music, art and people are certainly capable of changing over time, as are our intentions. The thoughts and feelings that we have don't last. What about our consciousness, will that last forever if nothing else about you does? This third category of dukkha suggests that one of the reasons that we experience frustrations as living beings is because we strongly cling to a sense of self that is intrinsically impermanent.
Even though these three suggested categories of suffering are just an attempt to classify how we suffer, it can be seen that by trying to understand these categorisations we can already begin to take guesses at why we experience suffering...
The Second Noble Truth
The first Noble Truth tells us that as living beings, we experience suffering. The second Noble Truth tells us that there is a cause for this suffering, and this cause is tanha, which can be translated to 'craving' or 'desire'. To decide whether or not this makes any sense, perhaps it'd be useful to better understand what Buddhists mean by craving. As with dukkha, attempts have also been made to categorise tanha. Once again, these classifications should not be considered entirely distinct from one another but they do serve as a useful means to understand the nature of desire.
i/ Kama tanha is the desire for sensual pleasures. We could want to sense pleasure through the body... not too hard to accept the truth of that. Some Buddhists also see the mind as a sense, so I'd guess that this category of tanha would also include pleasures of the mind. For instance, we may desire to love and to feel loved. We may crave peace of mind, or we may crave the feeling that you get after listening to a great piece of music. We could desire the comfort associated with a firm sense of self, or we could desire the comfort associated with feeling accepted by others.
ii/ Bhava tanha is the desire we experience when we want to become something. Maybe we want to become a qualified professional of some sort, or maybe we want to become a parent. Maybe we crave wealth. Maybe we want to become someone who can change the world for the better. Maybe we want to become someone who is happy, or someone who is wise. Maybe we desire to be enlightened, or to become someone who is closer to God. These are all desires to become something; bhava tanha.
iii/ Vibhava tanha is the desire to get rid of things. We may crave to get rid of mental or physical pain, to get rid of anger, jealousy, grey moods, hatred or anxiety. Perhaps we want to get rid of our greediness, our self-centredness or our ego. We could even crave to get rid of our cravings.
So what's so bad about these desires, why should they cause us suffering? What's so bad about wanting to be closer to God, what's so bad about wanting to be a happier person, wanting to be free of trauma? If we get rid of our desires, doesn't that mean we won't be able to love or to live with passion?
Buddhists say that it's not the things that we desire which are the problem, it's our attachment with and identification to these things that are the problem. Our wants and desires are an issue because they take hold of our lives, and cloud our view of reality. When this happens, we get caught up in the web of our conditioned existence, samsara. That's not to say that samsara is constant misery, devoid of joy and filled with suffering. However, Buddhists feel that to find true, lasting happiness and the complete cessation of all suffering, we must remove the veils of delusion that entangle us in samsara.
Let's think about this concept of samsara a bit more. What happens when we spend the majority of our lives consumed by our attachment to and identification with material possessions, people, thoughts, feelings, memories, sensations, moods, careers, goals, a sense of self... anything? Do we see the world as it is, do we keep in touch with reality - of the relativism and changing nature of everything around us? Is it possible that our attachments to these things and the 'desires' associated with them create a world of everyday hopes, wants and worries? Would it be possible that this clouds an innate, radiant spiritual nature that we all have? Buddhists believe that to realise true happiness, this innate spiritual nature, we have to learn to let go of our desires. We can contemplate our desires, and we can listen to them. We can set them aside and let them be as they are, without letting them take hold of us.
The Third Noble Truth
If you're like me, you may think that most of the above is logically acceptable up until the 'innate, radiant spiritual nature' bit. Sure, we do seem to have all of these attachments and desires, and yeah, it's not too hard to see how all of these different desires play a huge role in our lives. But do our attachments to these desires really muddy up our world, are they really the root cause of all of our suffering as the Second Noble Truth says? The answer to that would appear to be a distinct 'yes' if you believe that you have something that is often referred to as Buddha nature. According to Buddhists, we all have a perfect, inherently wise, warm, free and complete core. Our attachments cause us to suffer because they cause us to become consumed by our everyday conditioned existence, and our Buddha nature becomes lost in delusion. The Third Noble Truth says that by letting go of our cravings and desires, by removing our attachments, we no longer become consumed by our delusions. Nirvana is the inconceivable inner peace attained after the cessation of craving and clinging. It is the complete realization of our Buddha nature, and this possibility of liberation from difficulties exists for everyone.
On the surface, it would appear that accepting the above to be true would require a large element of religious faith, something that certainly does not appeal to me. What if we don't really have Buddha nature? What if we let go of our desires and nirvana doesn't exist? Fortunately, Buddhists tell you not to trust what you hear from others. Find things out for yourself. This is something that I find really attractive about Buddhism; it does not rely upon faith. I don't have to believe that I have a Buddha nature that is being obscured by my attachments. I can test this out for myself, and see if it is compatible with my experience of the world. If my own experiences do indeed prove to be compatible with this idea that my delusions are obscuring my innate Buddha nature, I can accept that this hypothesis is a possibility and can even use this hypothesis as a framework for further self-analysis. By doing this, I may begin to form certain beliefs, but these beliefs are constantly subject to scrutiny and must be compatible with further experiences. In this regard, I find the approach that you have to take with Buddhism a lot like applying the scientific method to self-analysis.
It's all well and good that Buddhism encourages a very appealing approach towards dealing with spiritual matters, but what about the actual hypotheses on offer? Do we have something that we could call Buddha nature? Will we achieve something that we could call nirvana if we let go of our desires? From my own experiences, this does seem possible, if not likely. The above Noble Truths do indeed provide a fantastic framework for my own experiences of the world. I love drawing. When I sit down and draw something, if all goes well and I don't become too distracted, I become immersed into the present moment and just draw. No thoughts jabber around in my head, I don't care about what I did in the morning or what I'll be doing later on. I let go of everything, the world consists of nothing more than the present moment, and I couldn't be happier. When that happens, it does feel as though walls of delusion fall down, and some beautiful part of being alive, something that's always present in me shines through. The same sort of thing happens when I'm soaking up the sun on the beach during a beautiful summer's day, letting drops of seawater evaporate off my skin, immersed in the here and now. I get a similar feeling when I see a dried autumn leaf finally dislodge from a tree branch and twirl it's way to the ground. Doesn't the world feel so whole, rich and amazing when something like this happens? In fact, I find that these moments peek through all over the place if my head's screwed on right and I'm not utterly consumed with things like uni work, basketball, deciding what I'm going to do with myself next year, or anything else that you could easily associate with my 'attachments'. You could say that these little experiences do occur when I'm not being caught in a web of attachments, when my mind is free and un-muddied. I know that these experiences always have the potential to shine through, no matter where I am or what I'm doing. Perhaps you could call these moments little glimpses of an innate Buddha nature, little glimpses of enlightenment.
The Fourth Noble Truth
The Fourth Noble Truth says that there is a tried and true path towards the cessation of cravings known as nirvana, towards a full realization of our Buddha nature. This middle-way of the Noble Eight-Fold Path to Enlightenment involves leading a compassionate life of virtue, wisdom and meditation.
I won't go into the details of this Noble Eight-Fold Path not only because it would extend this blog entry into the realms of the Tassie trip entry in terms of length, but more importantly, because my writing about it would predominantly involve regurgitating the words of others with only a very limited amount of understanding based on my own experiences. There are plenty of good websites around that describe this path in a whole lot of detail.
So in summary, once again: (1) We experience suffering, (2) we suffer because we become attached to our desires, (3) the possibility of letting go of these desires and being truly happy exists for anyone, and (4) there is a tried and true path to do this.
Anyone still reading?
Of course, I can fully relate to that. The subject isn't exactly something you can sit down, contemplate and conquer. We all want to be happy, yet most of us are not happy at least some of the time, maybe even most of the time. I'm guessing that the big decisions that most of us make in life are generally driven by the pursuit of happiness, but we tend to struggle with these decisions. It seems that many of my friends have an underlying belief that happiness comes largely as a result of knowing what you want out of life in terms of lifestyle, career, family etc. A lot of my friends don't seem to know exactly what they want, and because of this, many of them already appear to have resigned to a comfortable life of least resistance. Maybe decent money, a nice girlfriend or boyfriend, a tolerable job and good health won't guarantee happiness, but these things certainly can't hurt, right? So many people that I know seem to have decided that this outlook upon things is probably the best way to go, and have run with it for lack of a better alternative.
But even if you do think that you know exactly what you want and have an ideal life course planned out in your head, you're hardly assured of being happy. Maybe your dream job turns out to be less than it was cracked up to be. Maybe you achieve all of your greatest ambitions, but are left with a sense of emptiness and lack of meaning after it's all over. Maybe you find your ideal partner, but he/she dies in a car accident.
Should we be pursuing people, jobs, and money if we want to be happy? Despite so much evidence that suggests otherwise, the discussions during our ethics class suggested that that's what most of my classmates are trying to do. Though my classmates seemed to know intuitively that happiness is very much something that relies upon what's going on inside of you, this line of thinking was clearly pushed into the background. The majority of the people in our class appeared to be basing their lives around the belief that external circumstances play a primary role in our sense of wellbeing. Though the classmates in my tutorial group seemed to agree with my belief that everyone has at least some potential to be happy no matter what their external circumstances are, it did not seem that they seriously acknowledged the implications of this; perhaps we should turn our pursuit of happiness inwards and let this be our life's primary focus? That's not to say that I think that most of my friends aren't in tune with their internal world, and I don't think that we should all turn into hermits and spend our lives meditating alone in snow caves. I still believe that we do generally let our health, relationships and finances have a large influence upon our state of mind, and therefore these things are important and should hardly be neglected. However, I believe that even though these things do affect the state of mind of most of us, this needn't necessarily be the case. Judging from my own experience, I believe the potential to feel happiness is still there even if I'm homeless and in the gutter, or ill and in pain. Coming from this standpoint, I think that my state of mind is therefore the ultimate factor in determining my sense of happiness, and hence the primary means by which I should attempt to achieve happiness should be directed inwards.
Buddhists talk about this stuff quite a bit, and there's a particularly poignant quote from the Dalai Lama, Tibet's exiled spiritual leader, that I think illustrates this concept very well:
Our country can be invaded, our possessions can be destroyed, our friends can be killed, but these are secondary for our mental happiness. The ultimate source of my mental happiness is my peace of mind. Nothing can destroy this except my own anger.
What sort of beliefs drive such an outlook upon life? To better come to terms with my own beliefs concerning happiness, I thought that I'd use this entry to write about my understanding of Buddhism's Four Noble Truths because after a fair bit of introspection, these so-called 'facts of life' have made a lot of sense to me. I should make it clear that I have no religious faith and I don't call myself a Buddhist, so my interpretations of these 'Noble Truths' won't be done from the point of view of a religious zealot. Though a lot of what Buddhism talks about resonates quite strongly with me as a person, and though I have certain beliefs that have largely come through looking at things like Buddhist thought, these beliefs are hardly unshakeable and are always subject to my own questioning. (As a side note, I'd suspect that many people who actually do call themselves 'Buddhist' think in a similar manner.)
I should also make it clear that these are just my own interpretations of these Noble Truths, guided by what others have said and written, but based on my own experiences. I believe that only through genuine self-analysis can you fully decide whether or not these Noble Truths have any sort of legitimacy, so if you're looking for an authority on the subject, kill him!
The Four Noble Truths
(1) We experience suffering
(2) We suffer because we become attached to our desires
(3) The possibility of letting go of these desires and being truly happy exists for anyone
(4) There is a tried and true path to do this.
The First Noble Truth
Buddhists call this first fact of life the truth of dukkha. Dukkha seems to frequently be translated as 'suffering', though I've read that the literal meanings of dukkha are 'hard to bear', 'dissatisfactory', 'off the mark', 'frustrating' and 'hollow'. My understanding of this first Noble Truth is that as living beings, we do experience suffering. We all have our ups and downs no matter who we are. I don't think that anyone would deny this as being a fact of life.
It has been said that the Buddha broke dukkha down into three different categories. I don't think that these categories are necessarily completely distinct from one another, and they were probably formulated so that we can gain a better understanding of the nature of individual suffering.
i/ The first category of dukkha can be looked at as the everyday problems that we all face. All of us have experienced physical and emotional pain. We don't always get what we think we want, we all experience disapointments. We all grieve, experience loss, feel mistreated, have felt mentally traumatised by ourselves and others, and suffer through injuries and illness. This is the nature of reality (a reality which still has wonderful potential for joy and fulfillment), and if we can't somehow come to terms with this flawed nature of everyday life, we'll be hurt time and again.
ii/ The second category is the dukkha of changing circumstances. Everything about our world is impermanent. We can see this at a purely physical level; some day the house you grew up in will be knocked down, some day our sun will burn out, our bodies are a ceaseless flux of matter, matter is a dynamic dance of energy patterns. On a more human level, the most beautiful moments in our lives are fleeting. Have you ever shared a terrific conversation with your best friends over dinner? As a child, did you ever spend time playing with a loving grandparent? Have you ever felt perfectly content walking in a park as the sun sets? Beautiful sunsets turn into cold nights. We lose touch of old friends. Loved ones pass away. We feel nostalgia, loss and disappointment.
iii/ The third category is the dukkha caused by the flawed nature of conditioned existence. This category's a little more esoteric, though no less intuitive. When you look at yourself and wonder who you are, what do you conclude? Do you identify yourself with your body? What about your taste in music, your taste in art, your taste in people? Do you identify with the intentions that you have as a person? What about your thoughts and feelings, or the fact that you are conscious? Do these things help give you a sense of identity?
After looking at this on a personal level, my understanding of this third category of dukkha is that our conditioned existence is inherently unsatisfying because we are forever grasping at an unreliable and tenuous sense of self. Our bodies will not last forever, in fact our bodies are changing all the time. Our tastes in music, art and people are certainly capable of changing over time, as are our intentions. The thoughts and feelings that we have don't last. What about our consciousness, will that last forever if nothing else about you does? This third category of dukkha suggests that one of the reasons that we experience frustrations as living beings is because we strongly cling to a sense of self that is intrinsically impermanent.
Even though these three suggested categories of suffering are just an attempt to classify how we suffer, it can be seen that by trying to understand these categorisations we can already begin to take guesses at why we experience suffering...
The Second Noble Truth
The first Noble Truth tells us that as living beings, we experience suffering. The second Noble Truth tells us that there is a cause for this suffering, and this cause is tanha, which can be translated to 'craving' or 'desire'. To decide whether or not this makes any sense, perhaps it'd be useful to better understand what Buddhists mean by craving. As with dukkha, attempts have also been made to categorise tanha. Once again, these classifications should not be considered entirely distinct from one another but they do serve as a useful means to understand the nature of desire.
i/ Kama tanha is the desire for sensual pleasures. We could want to sense pleasure through the body... not too hard to accept the truth of that. Some Buddhists also see the mind as a sense, so I'd guess that this category of tanha would also include pleasures of the mind. For instance, we may desire to love and to feel loved. We may crave peace of mind, or we may crave the feeling that you get after listening to a great piece of music. We could desire the comfort associated with a firm sense of self, or we could desire the comfort associated with feeling accepted by others.
ii/ Bhava tanha is the desire we experience when we want to become something. Maybe we want to become a qualified professional of some sort, or maybe we want to become a parent. Maybe we crave wealth. Maybe we want to become someone who can change the world for the better. Maybe we want to become someone who is happy, or someone who is wise. Maybe we desire to be enlightened, or to become someone who is closer to God. These are all desires to become something; bhava tanha.
iii/ Vibhava tanha is the desire to get rid of things. We may crave to get rid of mental or physical pain, to get rid of anger, jealousy, grey moods, hatred or anxiety. Perhaps we want to get rid of our greediness, our self-centredness or our ego. We could even crave to get rid of our cravings.
So what's so bad about these desires, why should they cause us suffering? What's so bad about wanting to be closer to God, what's so bad about wanting to be a happier person, wanting to be free of trauma? If we get rid of our desires, doesn't that mean we won't be able to love or to live with passion?
Buddhists say that it's not the things that we desire which are the problem, it's our attachment with and identification to these things that are the problem. Our wants and desires are an issue because they take hold of our lives, and cloud our view of reality. When this happens, we get caught up in the web of our conditioned existence, samsara. That's not to say that samsara is constant misery, devoid of joy and filled with suffering. However, Buddhists feel that to find true, lasting happiness and the complete cessation of all suffering, we must remove the veils of delusion that entangle us in samsara.
Let's think about this concept of samsara a bit more. What happens when we spend the majority of our lives consumed by our attachment to and identification with material possessions, people, thoughts, feelings, memories, sensations, moods, careers, goals, a sense of self... anything? Do we see the world as it is, do we keep in touch with reality - of the relativism and changing nature of everything around us? Is it possible that our attachments to these things and the 'desires' associated with them create a world of everyday hopes, wants and worries? Would it be possible that this clouds an innate, radiant spiritual nature that we all have? Buddhists believe that to realise true happiness, this innate spiritual nature, we have to learn to let go of our desires. We can contemplate our desires, and we can listen to them. We can set them aside and let them be as they are, without letting them take hold of us.
The Third Noble Truth
If you're like me, you may think that most of the above is logically acceptable up until the 'innate, radiant spiritual nature' bit. Sure, we do seem to have all of these attachments and desires, and yeah, it's not too hard to see how all of these different desires play a huge role in our lives. But do our attachments to these desires really muddy up our world, are they really the root cause of all of our suffering as the Second Noble Truth says? The answer to that would appear to be a distinct 'yes' if you believe that you have something that is often referred to as Buddha nature. According to Buddhists, we all have a perfect, inherently wise, warm, free and complete core. Our attachments cause us to suffer because they cause us to become consumed by our everyday conditioned existence, and our Buddha nature becomes lost in delusion. The Third Noble Truth says that by letting go of our cravings and desires, by removing our attachments, we no longer become consumed by our delusions. Nirvana is the inconceivable inner peace attained after the cessation of craving and clinging. It is the complete realization of our Buddha nature, and this possibility of liberation from difficulties exists for everyone.
On the surface, it would appear that accepting the above to be true would require a large element of religious faith, something that certainly does not appeal to me. What if we don't really have Buddha nature? What if we let go of our desires and nirvana doesn't exist? Fortunately, Buddhists tell you not to trust what you hear from others. Find things out for yourself. This is something that I find really attractive about Buddhism; it does not rely upon faith. I don't have to believe that I have a Buddha nature that is being obscured by my attachments. I can test this out for myself, and see if it is compatible with my experience of the world. If my own experiences do indeed prove to be compatible with this idea that my delusions are obscuring my innate Buddha nature, I can accept that this hypothesis is a possibility and can even use this hypothesis as a framework for further self-analysis. By doing this, I may begin to form certain beliefs, but these beliefs are constantly subject to scrutiny and must be compatible with further experiences. In this regard, I find the approach that you have to take with Buddhism a lot like applying the scientific method to self-analysis.
It's all well and good that Buddhism encourages a very appealing approach towards dealing with spiritual matters, but what about the actual hypotheses on offer? Do we have something that we could call Buddha nature? Will we achieve something that we could call nirvana if we let go of our desires? From my own experiences, this does seem possible, if not likely. The above Noble Truths do indeed provide a fantastic framework for my own experiences of the world. I love drawing. When I sit down and draw something, if all goes well and I don't become too distracted, I become immersed into the present moment and just draw. No thoughts jabber around in my head, I don't care about what I did in the morning or what I'll be doing later on. I let go of everything, the world consists of nothing more than the present moment, and I couldn't be happier. When that happens, it does feel as though walls of delusion fall down, and some beautiful part of being alive, something that's always present in me shines through. The same sort of thing happens when I'm soaking up the sun on the beach during a beautiful summer's day, letting drops of seawater evaporate off my skin, immersed in the here and now. I get a similar feeling when I see a dried autumn leaf finally dislodge from a tree branch and twirl it's way to the ground. Doesn't the world feel so whole, rich and amazing when something like this happens? In fact, I find that these moments peek through all over the place if my head's screwed on right and I'm not utterly consumed with things like uni work, basketball, deciding what I'm going to do with myself next year, or anything else that you could easily associate with my 'attachments'. You could say that these little experiences do occur when I'm not being caught in a web of attachments, when my mind is free and un-muddied. I know that these experiences always have the potential to shine through, no matter where I am or what I'm doing. Perhaps you could call these moments little glimpses of an innate Buddha nature, little glimpses of enlightenment.
The Fourth Noble Truth
The Fourth Noble Truth says that there is a tried and true path towards the cessation of cravings known as nirvana, towards a full realization of our Buddha nature. This middle-way of the Noble Eight-Fold Path to Enlightenment involves leading a compassionate life of virtue, wisdom and meditation.
I won't go into the details of this Noble Eight-Fold Path not only because it would extend this blog entry into the realms of the Tassie trip entry in terms of length, but more importantly, because my writing about it would predominantly involve regurgitating the words of others with only a very limited amount of understanding based on my own experiences. There are plenty of good websites around that describe this path in a whole lot of detail.
So in summary, once again: (1) We experience suffering, (2) we suffer because we become attached to our desires, (3) the possibility of letting go of these desires and being truly happy exists for anyone, and (4) there is a tried and true path to do this.
Anyone still reading?
posted by Gene at 3:23 pm
You should read 'Persons from Porlock' by A.D. Hope (I think). It's about a poet battling to describe their visions, while being weighed down with day to day life.
It is not ideal to hear such comments on the material origins of happiness, but I wouldn't advise the snow cave option (except during thermo lectures).
I am always happiest when I write, when I have time to think about feeling, reason and other people. For this reason, I suppose, shutting myself in a room and typing away becomes pointless. What would I have to write about? I wouldn't be that sad, I suppose, but then again, I wouldn't call it happiness either. How would I know one from the other? I wouldn't be able to understand or communicate even part of the spectrum of human emotion. I would be unable to communicate anything to anyone, unable to empathise. This would be unhappiness.
I think everyone finds it difficult to come to terms with the subject - it's just that everyone does it in a different way. Just as you said about your drawings, you'll hear musicians, physicists and metal turners talk the same way about some part of what they do.
For people inclined to the practical side of things, work is going to be messy, dangerous and morally dicey at times, but perhaps will do some good for someone, or even a whole lot of people. I think the trick will be having to work surrounded by material issues, and not (further) loosing ourselves in them.
I'll go away now and give you your blog back. :)
Hey Emma (I'm guessing it's you, since I don't know anyone else who does thermo lectures and also associates writing with being happy), glad someone read that thing all the way through without falling asleep.
That book you mentioned sounds nice and depressing. I'll see if I can find it, unless you have a copy you're willing to lend me?
Speaking of books, snow caves, Buddhism and trying to empathise with people despite being shut in a room, ever heard of someone called Tenzin Palmo? I saw a documentary about her, and she's obviously someone that has a more than adequate understanding of human needs, despite (or due to) having spent 12 years alone in a cave. In fact, she has a book called "Cave in the Snow". I haven't read it, but I've heard good things. Want to borrow it if I ever end up with a copy in my hands?
Not that I'm advocating this snow cave option... but I don't think that it'd turn you into a monster devoid of human empathy. If you were stuck alone in a cave, you'd still have one human to look at, and I think that that'd be perfectly adequate to be able to empathise with others.
I think I have heard of Tenzin Palmo, and I'd welcome any offers of book lending, though I may not be finishing it for awhile! Speaking of books, all my ethics textbooks are suddenly being recalled ~ I think something must be due shortly!
Persons from Porlock is actually a poem - unfortunately I don't have a copy with me. Fiction and poetry is a little thin on the ground at the moment where I am!
Post a Comment
<< Home