Thread: Buddhism - Is It Only Partly Right?

I have been studying Buddhism for the last 4 years to some degree or another.

The things that make a lot of sense to me include:
Following the 8 Fold Path to become a better person
The lack of an all powerful creator that humans are based upon,
The truth of the impermance of all living creatures (including mankind)
The understanding of how the breath can control many aspects of your life

However, one aspect that seems very non-intuitive is the goal of removing the "good" emotions along with the "bad" emotions.
Perhaps, I mis-understand, but I would think learning to control your emotions so that you vary from deep contentment to ecstatic joy would be a more worthy goal, (provided you still maintained the precepts).

Any thoughts on that from someone with more experience, training, or understanding?

Thanks.

RickThai

yes . some beliefs within Buddhism cause pain n death but as long as the belief is there its ok.. not me it was Buddha !

It's a bit rich you bad mouthing the lack of logic in Christianity then preaching the virtues of Buddhism 5 minutes later.

One is only slightly more logical than the other IMO.

Buddhism is fine by me but I don't view it as a religion, rather a philosophy.

Originally Posted by sabang

Buddhism is fine by me but I don't view it as a religion, rather a philosophy.

It's for that reason I say it's slightly less illogical than Christianity, but you still can't deny it's illogical.

Leaving fruit on a shelf, burning incense, lining the pockets of lazy ass monks so they can live in gold houses, reciting rituals etc etc, will not make the slightest bit of difference to anybodies life unless they decide they want it to, which they could have just decided without doing all that stuff.

If it makes people better people than I guess it's hard to fault it, but logical it most certainly aint.

I already know I am unworthy and for any organised religion to make me feel guilty for that is a good reason to banish all of them.

Originally Posted by EggSandwich

Originally Posted by sabang

Buddhism is fine by me but I don't view it as a religion, rather a philosophy.

It's for that reason I say it's slightly less illogical than Christianity, but you still can't deny it's illogical.

Leaving fruit on a shelf, burning incense, lining the pockets of lazy ass monks so they can live in gold houses, reciting rituals etc etc, will not make the slightest bit of difference to anybodies life unless they decide they want it to, which they could have just decided without doing all that stuff.

If it makes people better people than I guess it's hard to fault it, but logical it most certainly aint.

Buddhism, like any philosophy/religion is modified by the culture it adopts. Pure Buddhist doctrine teaches that Buddha is nothing more than a teacher who discovered some natural laws, and that by understanding them you can become a better person able to deal with hardship and so forth.

As I stated in my post, I follow Buddhism because I find its 5 precepts and 8-fold Noble Path to be a common-sense way for me to become a better person. As to finding Nibbana and re-birth, those are elements that I question.

Offering food to monks is a way to show respect for those people who have given up much of their life's comforts and desires in order to better understand and teach people the Buddha's lessons (dhamma). Like all people, some are more worthy of respect then others.

Many Thais make offerings of fruits and incense to spirits and ask Buddha for favors. This is not Buddhist dhamma, but rather the cultural influence of the Thai people as they adopted Buddhism.

I hope I explained this apparent "illogicality" in a logical and understandable manner.

Santi

It's just another crutch mate. If you need it to make you a better person then that's fine. You can have a Buddhist that fiddles with kids or you can have a non Buddhist that doesn't, so logically the Buddhism itself isn't the cause of a person being good.

Buddhism didn't make you a better person, you did. Buddhism was just the crutch you used to give you the sense of purpose you needed to make it happen.

Good luck to you. If your good people, then you're alright by me.

Buddhism is useful for keeping the peasants subdued and making them less demanding.

The thing I find hard to understand about Buddhism is the reincarnation thing. Well not the actual reincarnation that well..maybe... the bit I find it hard to stomach is the " I came back rich so I must have been a good person in a former lifetime: BS.

Originally Posted by EggSandwich

Leaving fruit on a shelf, burning incense, lining the pockets of lazy ass monks so they can live in gold houses, reciting rituals etc etc,

These things you describe are more relics of Hinduism and Animism, and really have nothing to do with Buddhism. Just because they are entrenched in Thai culture does not mean the Buddha himself commanded such to be so.

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by VocalNeal

I came back rich so I must have been a good person in a former lifetime

That's a bit of a distortion used for political advantage, as happens with every religion. By the same token, "I came back a peasant so I must have been bad in a past life, and therefore must accept my place in society". I don't think this is what re-incarnation is really about as taught by the Buddha.

Originally Posted by chassamui

Buddhism is useful for keeping the peasants subdued and making them less demanding.

Actually re-incarnation is not a Buddhist concept (or belief), but is rather a belief of Hinduism.

Buddhists dhamma teaches the idea of re-birth which is more closely related to recycling of the energy that makes you alive. This re-birth is considered just another cause-and-effect law of nature (and happens to mesh nicely with physics where energy is never created or destroyed, just transformed.

As to the method of kamma (which can be thought of as cause-and-effect) influencing what form the energy (not the correct term) will take, that is certainly dogma.


For the record, in Buddhism, people do not have souls and are accepted as being just another form of an animal.

Originally Posted by 9999

Originally Posted by VocalNeal

I came back rich so I must have been a good person in a former lifetime

That's a bit of a distortion used for political advantage, as happens with every religion. By the same token, "I came back a peasant so I must have been bad in a past life, and therefore must accept my place in society". I don't think this is what re-incarnation is really about as taught by the Buddha.

Originally Posted by chassamui

Buddhism is useful for keeping the peasants subdued and making them less demanding.

Actually Buddhism came about during a time of great religous questioning and searching for the ultimate "truth" and is more about a method of giving the peasants hope, self esteem, and contentment no matter how miserable their daily lives may be.

Buddism is counter-productive for most societies because rich people get rich and stay rich by tricking the masses into buying something that they (the rich) control. Getting rid of desires and cravings hurts the rich people more than it hurts the poor people. If you have made a fortune selling TVs and Radios and good Buddhists decide they owning these things will only make them less happy, then poof,"let the rich eat TV's and Radios".

Kind of an ironic beauty when you look at it from that perspective.

I know I find myself wanting less and less everyday, and inversely, have become more and more satisfied with myself and my life everyday.

If some people believe that is a "crutch", then so be it.

Religion is the opium of the masses. [ Poor Sods ].....

Originally Posted by RickThai

Buddhists dhamma teaches the idea of re-birth which is more closely related to recycling of the energy that makes you alive. This re-birth is considered just another cause-and-effect law of nature (and happens to mesh nicely with physics where energy is never created or destroyed, just transformed.

Nicely put. Re-incarnation was a bad term, and indeed also comes from Hinduism. I'm starting to think Thai culture is based more on Hinduism than Buddhism.

Originally Posted by RickThai

I know I find myself wanting less and less everyday, and inversely, have become more and more satisfied with myself and my life everyday.

Yeah, well, as Bob Dylan put it, 'when you aint got nothing, you aint got nothing to lose'.

emotions are part of the old brain.

Originally Posted by billy the kid

emotions are part of the old brain.

Very aptly put. Emotions/feelings as taught by Buddha, are nothing more than creations of the mind; thus they are impermanant and not "real". However, they can be the most powerful influence of a person's actions (good or bad), hence the role of meditation in learning to control the breath, which controls the body, which, hopefully, can let you control your emotions.

One ajarn (Buddhist teacher) taught me that by focusing on the emotion itself (as opposed to what triggered the emotion) is a good way to defuse potentially, harmful emotions that might cause you untold grief if you acted upon them.

The trick is to remember to study the emotion when in the heat of passion/anger, etc.

Santi

Originally Posted by RickThai

focusing on the emotion itself

Originally Posted by RickThai

trick is to remember to study the emotion when in the heat of passion/anger, etc.

but can you do it without thought, ie, the past.
takes a quiet mind not a noisy one
to observe, to watch it only.

Originally Posted by RickThai

However, one aspect that seems very non-intuitive is the goal of removing the "good" emotions along with the "bad" emotions.
i

Is the point that the good emotions are transient, and that once the cause is torn away (eg death of a loved one), then one is back in the depths of despair.

So by practising detachment, one can appreciate the good emotions, but can then stand back - not feel suffering when they are lost.

To sum up - 'enjoy it while it lasts'.

Isn't what you are describing just self kidology? Brainwashing yourself to make yourself happier and get yourself through the day?

Originally Posted by RickThai

As I stated in my post, I follow Buddhism because I find its 5 precepts and 8-fold Noble Path to be a common-sense way for me to become a better person. As to finding Nibbana and re-birth, those are elements that I question.

Sounds like you and I share the same ground on that score.

One of the things I like about Buddha's teaching is that it is up to you to practice it and see if it works for yourself...don't take Buddha's word for it. This was a great release for an Episcopal boy who liked good old Jesus but didn't accept the hocus pocus around it. It was a leap of faith that I could not make.

But as it turns out Buddhism has it's own elements of faith. Belief that Buddha was enlightened, belief in Kamma, in the Triple Gem... enlightenment itself. All must be accepted in-faith for a devout buddhist. There are a couple of other elements of faith, but I can't find the reference off hand.

^Amen to that.

Morals, manners, decency, humanity, and logic are the kinds of thing people need in their heads. Nobody needs a religion to posses those things and it is just as likely that a follower of a religion doesn't posses those attributes, as it is that he does. Thus making the religion itself redundant.