Jump to content

Science vs Religion


Recommended Posts

Food was just one example. Dukkha is also linked to how to live. It's a complex notion and I'm not interested enough to sell it or preach it. I'll let a Buddhist do that bit. ;)

I was asking Richard about it and it seems it means roll over and just accept what happens, happens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi.

 

Sorry about that but had some inspiration and had to go offline for a few days to write. On returning the thread had expanded so much and I realised I was being daft as I am not an angry atheist.:)[/Quote]

 

No problem, I didn't mean to appear harsh, please don't take it as such :)

 

Thanks for explaining again but is not what you are suggesting just another way of saying fate? Something that a lot of people also believe in[/Quote]

 

No it's not fate, because in Buddhism we have karma, we are entirely responsible for our, erm, for want of a better word destiny. A story springs to mind of a debate between the Buddha and a religious group called the Niganthas (who are these days known as the Jains) in which the Buddha refutes their claim that we should just accept our past karmic deeds. The Buddha said that Kamma is made up of both past and present action.

 

I'm not sure of the official line in all schools of Buddhism but I have never come accross the suggestion that Buddhism contains the concept of 'fate'.

 

What I mean to say is that it is an essential part of your faith as sin is in the Christian faith.

 

Suffering? Or fate? I'm a bit lost. Suffering is essentially what we are striving against, but it's not like sin. The Christian concept of sin is that of man being made perfectly and then that sin coming upon him, in Buddhism we are told of no starting point for the soul (as far as I'm aware - and I am relatively well read of the Buddhist scriptures) suffering is a by-product of samsara (I'm trying to keep this simple while at the same time expanding - I am happy to go into more detail if you require). Samsara being merely 'wandering'.

 

In short, sin is an aquired state, Dukkha is a 'natural' state, sin is removed (as I understand it) by giving your life to Jesus, Dukkha is overcome by an active 'path' to awakening.

 

I realise I've squeezed quite alot in there and I hope it has made some sense, if not I am happy to expand :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe in the Buddhist concept of Dukkha. It's a bad translation to take the word "suffering" literally. You have to understand what they mean.

 

Dukkha is the concept that all life is suffering. If you are enjoying a meal, you must finish eating at some point. That pleasure cannot be eternal, and thus you will return to hunger again. You will suffer again.

 

It doesn't mean you're in agony all day every day.

 

Where I part from the Buddhist view is that I don't believe meditation and the eight-fold path will take me away from this. I see no reason why Nirvana or rebirth should exist anymore than Heaven and Hell.

 

Yes that's right - but if I may slightly expand on the bold bit (which btw is fine, I'm expanding not disputing).

 

Dukkah not only touches on the 'object' of desire, the bigger problem is the desire itself. Taking the example of food - we build up an image of what the meal we are looking forward to will be like and that is the real problem. The meal is a necessity, but the idea of the meal, and, as you correctly say the finite nature of the food, is what causes dukkha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was asking Richard about it and it seems it means roll over and just accept what happens, happens

 

That's not what I said, you misunderstood.

 

It isn't just 'accepting' - which implies just sitting passively, it is not clinging to events.

 

If I was sat on a beach being passive in the way of a Tsunami I would die.

 

If I was not clinging I would still try to get out of the way of the Tsunami - but I would do so without fear of it - I may still die - but I wouldattempt to get out of it's way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what I said, you misunderstood.

 

It isn't just 'accepting' - which implies just sitting passively, it is not clinging to events.

 

If I was sat on a beach being passive in the way of a Tsunami I would die.

 

If I was not clinging I would still try to get out of the way of the Tsunami - but I would do so without fear of it - I may still die - but I wouldattempt to get out of it's way.

I think anyone would try and get out of the path of a tsunami unless your standing there for a reason

 

What is the selling point of Buddhism then, in your opinion

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right ill put it another way

 

I am thinking of becoming a Buddhist...

 

But I need your advice richard

 

What will I get out of it and what will it do to make me have a better life or feel like I have a better life

 

It can't do anything to give you a better life, you have to do the work.

 

If you go with the attitiude of 'getting something out of it' I fear you would be sorely dissapointed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.