I don't understand the first noble truth

[conebeckham]

Well of course I follow basic western ethical principles. I meant giving up on framing it within a Buddhist lens, any attempts at awakening, worship, etc.

FWIW, IMO framing it in a Buddhist lens is far less important than what you do. If you follow good ethics and you have a true longing for liberation, then this will bear fruit. These days, I think it's not unreasonable to think that there are a lot of 'Buddhist teachings' that are actually propagated by, basically, those who don't really know what they're talking about. And as such, if you encounter these 'Buddhist teachings' and find them to be unsatisfactory, then it's reasonable to look elsewhere.

I might... caution you, perhaps, again to consider that this may not be because 'true' Buddhism is flawed, as much as that you haven't actually understood it properly. But regardless, if you test something and find it to be lacking, it is indeed reasonable to look elsewhere.

In my opinion, the fundamental starting point, in general, might be truly committing to a life of non-harm, and from that basis, then not only focusing on non-harm but actually benefit.

In a Buddhist context, on the level of body and speech, there are the lay precepts - not killing, stealing, lying, sexually harming, or becoming intoxicated to the point that you engage in the other 4, basically. But then on the level of mind, there are the brahmaviharas, like metta or loving kindness.

You could consider looking up Sharon Salzberg's book Loving Kindness, or Tulku Thondup's excellent book The Heart of Unconditional Love. These books get towards the level of the mind, not just the prescriptions of body and speech.

If you work through your situation well enough, I think you will find that things open up as is possible.

It's all well and good but also such an argument applies to whichever ethical principles I happen to be fulfilling for other religions. Really, it's not spiritually meaningful for me. By saying this stuff, you are satisfying only yourself.

Well, he’s pointing out something that is a bedrock of Buddhist practice, even if it’s common to other traditions.

Ethics and Morality can be seen to some degree as rules for what not to do….but what I find unique to Buddhism are the methods to actively increase and embrace positive qualities, and not just to avoid negative ones.

Are you familiar with LoJong (Mind Training)? Have you experienced metta practice, or maybe the meditations related to Chenrezig??

[ThreeVows]

It's all well and good but also such an argument applies to whichever ethical principles I happen to be fulfilling for other religions. Really, it's not spiritually meaningful for me. By saying this stuff, you are satisfying only yourself.

Generally speaking any religion that encourages good ethical behavior and a general understanding of karma, in the sense of there being some consequence from our behavior, is a good religion, and it leads in the general direction of liberation, similar to how if you're in NYC and you go west you're going towards the Pacific Ocean. But fair enough, I will stop commenting here and wish you well, if that's what you would like. Take care.

[Johnny Dangerous]

I mean, probably, but also, now I have trust and motivation issues regarding it. Even when I was hungry for Dharma it was hard to find a qualified teacher that I trust, but now I am burnt and broken, it seems nigh on impossible. As you said, maybe I just have to wait, but then I think of what Dogen said: "Life and death are of supreme importance. Time swiftly passes by and opportunity is lost. We should strive to awaken. Awaken! Take heed! Do not squander your life."

Perhaps I should give in and leave it up to "chance", or "fate", or whatever more appropriate language the post you link to uses. Is it right to push it? I'm not sure...again, it's like when I pushed myself running too hard. Maybe in this life I am not a runner, nor a Buddhist, but what am I? It is terrifying when each thing you encounter ends in disaster. Maybe I need to go beyond Buddhism and find a greater truth?

What is your understanding of what 'practicing Buddhism' is?

For example, if you commit to not killing, stealing, harming others, etc, do you consider that to be Buddhist practice? Is that type of thing something you think is worth 'giving up on'?

For what it's worth, IMO if you make some general efforts with moral behavior and you have some longing for liberation, even if this is not necessarily fully within a "Buddhist" context in the fully manifest sense in the world, this is not worthless, and it will bear fruit. For what it's worth, you might consider that right now, in this moment, if you pray to the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas of the three times, it is not unheard or unheeded, and it has an effect. That doesn't mean, necessarily, that some flesh-and-blood teacher will manifest in front of you in the next 20 seconds perhaps, but it is not without consequence. You could even open up, in this very moment, to blessing entering your body and mind, your mindstream. Right now.

Well of course I follow basic western ethical principles. I meant giving up on framing it within a Buddhist lens, any attempts at awakening, worship, etc.

I think lot of people have a hard time separating out what is personal anhedonia, and what is Buddhist philosophy. Not saying it’s you, just generally.

A starting place is that -feelings- of anhedonia are just that. The Buddha did not say to not be conventionally happy and in fact there all kinds of advice in Buddhism on how to be conventionally happy.

I don't have anhedonia at all btw. That is not a problem for me.

It sounds like you simply disagree with the Buddhas assessment and have found it contrary to your experience. I still think the issue is that you seem to misunderstand pervasive suffering, but maybe not.

Bottom line, if you are not bothered by the vicissitudes of samsara, Buddhism may not be your gig. There is no fault in this, and I hope you find your path.

There is also just having doubts as a practitioner, and this is part of the path.

[bowsamic]

I guess really the fundamental tell is that when I hear people speak the Dharma, I don't feel joy inside, I instead cringe almost in pain, like a vampire in the sunlight. Perhaps the sunlight is good for some creatures. I cringe both from the earnestness of it, my genuine distain for other beings, and also how it reminds me of how much I am opposed to it.

Really this has turned into a rant about myself, but in the end it is weirdly painful when you realise you want to be the bad guy, and that you hate good. I'm surprised I have not met more people with this relationship to the Dharma. I have felt quite alone in this.

[Johnny Dangerous]

I guess really the fundamental tell is that when I hear people speak the Dharma, I don't feel joy inside, I instead cringe almost in pain, like a vampire in the sunlight. Perhaps the sunlight is good for some creatures. I cringe both from the earnestness of it, my genuine distain for other beings, and also how it reminds me of how much I am opposed to it.

Really this has turned into a rant about myself, but in the end it is weirdly painful when you realise you want to be the bad guy, and that you hate good. I'm surprised I have not met more people with this relationship to the Dharma. I have felt quite alone in this.

I’ve had my struggles and doubts, but I can’t quite get a bead on what you’re feeling.

What helped me with a lot of these questions is examine the repeated patterns of negativity in my life under the Buddhist lens. I found Buddhism to have the most compelling explanation of why I was unhappy as an adult even though my life was full of things that conventionally should have me jumping for joy. I went through bad stuff as a kid, but I didn’t buy that that stuff was enough to create the kind of stupid repeating thought processes I have. I could see that I was always pinning my hopes reflexively on this or that thing to bring me lasting happiness..”it’ll all be ok if this happens” “I can finally be happy when x is taken care of” or even “it’ll all be ok once my mental health is better” type stuff. All been proven wrong by time and circumstance.

I did the therapy gig, but as an adult the only decent therapist I’ve had were Buddhist. I had one good one as a kid, but he was good mainly just because he actually embodied unconditional positive regard and didn’t boss me around.

I definitely tend towards nihilism and was actually studying existentialism when I first came across Buddhism 30 years or so ago. It can be tough and I hope you find some peace no matter what decisions you make about Buddhism.

[bowsamic]

I guess really the fundamental tell is that when I hear people speak the Dharma, I don't feel joy inside, I instead cringe almost in pain, like a vampire in the sunlight. Perhaps the sunlight is good for some creatures. I cringe both from the earnestness of it, my genuine distain for other beings, and also how it reminds me of how much I am opposed to it.

Really this has turned into a rant about myself, but in the end it is weirdly painful when you realise you want to be the bad guy, and that you hate good. I'm surprised I have not met more people with this relationship to the Dharma. I have felt quite alone in this.

I’ve had my struggles and doubts, but I can’t quite get a bead on what you’re feeling.

What helped me with a lot of these questions is examine the repeated patterns of negativity in my life under the Buddhist lens. I found Buddhism to have the most compelling explanation of why I was unhappy as an adult even though my life was full of things that conventionally should have me jumping for joy. I went through bad stuff as a kid, but I didn’t buy that that stuff was enough to create the kind of stupid repeating thought processes I have. I could see that I was always pinning my hopes reflexively on this or that thing to bring me lasting happiness..”it’ll all be ok if this happens” “I can finally be happy when x is taken care of” or even “it’ll all be ok once my mental health is better” type stuff. All been proven wrong by time and circumstance.

I did the therapy gig, but as an adult the only decent therapist I’ve had were Buddhist. I had one good one as a kid, but he was good mainly just because he actually embodied unconditional positive regard and didn’t boss me around.

I definitely tend towards nihilism and was actually studying existentialism when I first came across Buddhism 30 years or so ago. It can be tough and I hope you find some peace no matter what decisions you make about Buddhism.

Currently I am in psychoanalysis which is of course quite different from Buddhism, in that it seems to find the subconscious root cause for your current behaviour. I guess the problem is that it is working and I do think it works, and I have more faith in it than in Buddhism. Also, my Buddhist teachers always told me that Buddhism does not replace western mental health treatment anyway.

Basically, the problem is that the repeated patterns of negativity in my life were not adequately explained by a Buddhist lens, other than the very basic and general "it's that you want". My questions weren't answered, my life was still bad, and I didn't understand why. After practising Buddhism for a couple of years I moved to Germany for a new job, and my mental health collapsed. There was really no Buddhist explanation for it, but there were many very clear and compelling psychoanalytic ones that Buddhism would not have arrived at.

Buddhism can often seem more like a form of cognitive behavioural therapy, in that unless you go all the way to enlightenment, it treats the symptoms, not the root causes. Psychoanalysis, at least for me personally, seems to treat the root cause.

I guess the question is, do I want to live a life where I learn to accept my life as it is, or do I actually want to change my personality so that I can enjoy life more and get a better life? Buddhism has offered me the former before, but I never experienced the latter with it. That said, metta and the like never worked for me. There is simply too much pain and trauma for my crappy (though unfortunately still very earnest) attempts at Buddhism to dissolve. It needs something heavier and more brutal.

Perhaps I can return when I have overcome the traumas that paralyse me in my life. I am 29 and I have never really been mentally well enough to apply myself to my work in my life of my own accord. Trying to work alone reminds me of a very deep pain. I haven't been in the office for months, but my boss has not even noticed. I am basically getting paid a lot of money by government research agencies to do nothing. Again, Buddhism did not help with that pain, and I think if I tried Buddhism on that pain I would come to the conclusion that I should just accept the pain, rather than actually treat it, (of course I went all the way to enlightenment, which I am not capable of) That said, if my life feels actualised, why would I want to practise Buddhism? It's a great dilemma

Sometimes I think the only thing keeping me involved with Buddhism is orientalism. That is a disgusting feeling.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Just as an aside on Western pysch, Abraham Maslow placed self-transcendence above self-actualization on the hierarchy of needs in Farther Reaches of Human Nature. I personally think there is a parallel to be found there between mundane benefits from Dharma practice and the supramundane goal.

[PadmaVonSamba]

I guess since Buddhism has only caused pain my life so far, it is a sign that I should abandon it.

Buddhism simply points to the truth.
If your understanding of what Buddhism teachings has caused you pain, then you should definitely abandon what you think Buddhism teaches.

[PadmaVonSamba]

I guess the question is, do I want to live a life where I learn to accept my life as it is, or do I actually want to change my personality so that I can enjoy life more and get a better life? Buddhism has offered me the former before, but I never experienced the latter with it. That said, metta and the like never worked for me. There is simply too much pain and trauma for my crappy (though unfortunately still very earnest) attempts at Buddhism to dissolve. It needs something heavier and more brutal.

Sounds way more complicated than it needs to be.

[bowsamic]

I guess the question is, do I want to live a life where I learn to accept my life as it is, or do I actually want to change my personality so that I can enjoy life more and get a better life? Buddhism has offered me the former before, but I never experienced the latter with it. That said, metta and the like never worked for me. There is simply too much pain and trauma for my crappy (though unfortunately still very earnest) attempts at Buddhism to dissolve. It needs something heavier and more brutal.

Sounds way more complicated than it needs to be.

I haven’t found a simpler way, but I don’t expect there to be one

If you can think of a simpler way that allows me to work and make a living without pain I’d be very grateful

[Johnny Dangerous]

I guess the question is, do I want to live a life where I learn to accept my life as it is, or do I actually want to change my personality so that I can enjoy life more and get a better life? Buddhism has offered me the former before, but I never experienced the latter with it. That said, metta and the like never worked for me. There is simply too much pain and trauma for my crappy (though unfortunately still very earnest) attempts at Buddhism to dissolve. It needs something heavier and more brutal.

Sounds way more complicated than it needs to be.

I haven’t found a simpler way, but I don’t expect there to be one

If you can think of a simpler way that allows me to work and make a living without pain I’d be very grateful

Heh, as we’ve discussed, from the Buddhist perspective pain is a given. We can find less painful setups, but none which are free of it. No simpler way, suffering in samsara can be managed, some situations are vastly preferable to others, but according to Buddhism, it’s only entirely removed through Dharma.

So, there are no ideal conditions.

[PadmaVonSamba]

I guess the question is, do I want to live a life where I learn to accept my life as it is, or do I actually want to change my personality so that I can enjoy life more and get a better life? Buddhism has offered me the former before, but I never experienced the latter with it. That said, metta and the like never worked for me. There is simply too much pain and trauma for my crappy (though unfortunately still very earnest) attempts at Buddhism to dissolve. It needs something heavier and more brutal.

Sounds way more complicated than it needs to be.

I haven’t found a simpler way, but I don’t expect there to be one

If you can think of a simpler way that allows me to work and make a living without pain I’d be very grateful

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought this was about understanding the first noble truth.
Was this really about finding meaningful employment?

Your life is what you do with it.

[Johnny Dangerous]

While not a Dharma teaching, I always Viktor Frankls advice on the meaning of life very practical:

What was really needed was a fundamental change in our attitude toward life. We had to learn ourselves and, furthermore, we had to teach the despairing men, that it did not really matter what we expected from life, but rather what life expected from us. We needed to stop asking about the meaning of life, and instead to think of ourselves as those who were being questioned by life — daily and hourly. Our answer must consist, not in talk and meditation, but in right action and in right conduct.

This only addresses day to day reality of course, but in that respect I find it to be a great approach to “finding meaning”. IMO not enough Western Dharma teaching addresses this of existential malaise with job situations, etc. In the Mahayana there is a job to do, and part of is approaching situations with altruism, especially the crappy ones. It’s really up to us to give meaning to life situations, it can’t work the other way.

While this is simple advice about conventional life, when conjoined with a Bodhicitta - like motivation it is well, meaningful in terms of creating the conditions for liberation and/or simply reducing the suffering of sentient beings.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Here is a relevant teaching by Ajahn Sona:



He mentions attachment/aversion here as an emotional valence. It is not an opinion about phenomena, a philosophical position, etc. He gives an experiment here on experiencing desire or lack of it in oneself while walking through a mall.

And yes, this absolutely applies to the Mahayana, less so in Vajrayana or Dzogchen where there are very specific methods for transforming the impulse to sensuality, dealing with lung, etc. but on the Mahayana level I have received teachings very similar to this.

[bowsamic]

I realised in my therapy session today that the crux of it is the following.

In my life, I have felt like I struggled to enjoy things as much as people around me. They seem carefree, able to get lost in their activities and do not seem to complain as much. They do not constantly judge themselves or their relationships, and do not constantly doubt. Are not constantly wanting. That is how it seems to me.

Now there are two possible explanations, a horrible one, and a hopeful one.

Horrible: it's secretly like that for everyone, everyone is constantly confused, feeling like they're missing something, dissatisfied, just like I am, and this is what I think of as "the first noble truth". Therefore, it isn't that I am alone and other people enjoy life more easily than me, it's that I have some insight into the dissatisfaction of all beings.

Hopeful: it really is just me.

I can't bear to think that it's this way for everyone, because that means there's no hope that I can escape it, without some weird eastern religion that I don't know how to follow and feel totally alienated from.

However, I also do not think it is, because I look at them and their actions, and they genuinely do seem to be able to handle life better than I. If I was really not different from everyone else, why do I feel so different?

[Queequeg]

Ethical behavior is a means to purify your mind, making it more pliable and conducive to awakening. A scheming con artist who resorts to murder will not have a settled mind, will not have the calm necessary to undertake subtle practices. When we abide in conduct that causes no harm, we are calm and content, worry free. We are ready to sit and observe the mind.

[Natan]

Something that I understand less and less the longer I've spent practising Buddhism or having it as a part of my life is the primacy of suffering as a part of Buddhist doctrine.

First I should say, immediately I feel excluded from the Theravada due to this. I understand that in the Theravada, suffering is taken to be primary, and the suffering life is known as samsara, which is to be ended. My problem with this is that samsara according to such teachings is the only life that any of us have ever known, which easily brings us to allegations of pessimism and Buddhism being a "death cult". For me personally it is simply not a healthy attitude to view the life we know so far as scary and to be escaped. For others it may be healthy, but not for me.

That brings me onto my confusion, why emphasise suffering at all? It is slightly less clear to me what its role is in the Mahayana. Of course, ultimately we say that suffering and non-suffering are emptiness, but what is our conventional understanding of it? For me, my conventional understanding still places no primacy on suffering. Suffering and happiness are quite symmetric to each other, both are impermanent, both are conditioned, so why should I fill my head with a desire to escape one, which the Buddha said was okay, without a corresponding desire to attain the other? Why end it all rather than seek infinite joy?

The reason I am careful here is because I have found an increase in my own suffering before from framing my life only with regards to suffering, and in fact it led me to abandon Buddhism for a while. Also, I have carefully investigated the situation and found it to not be true. Now I have returned with a condition: I can only follow a Buddhist path with the condition that I do not frame all of my life in terms of suffering.

That brings me to a question: in the Mahayana, what are the various views on the first noble truth, and on suffering? Is the Mahayana still really all about how sentient beings are all suffering and bodhicitta is arising the mind to want to save them all from their suffering? Or does it take a different view, perhaps more neutral and flexible?

Good questions, dude. Less words please, it gives me suffering of headache.

Buddha is saying birth, old age, sickness and death are suffering and he lays out why and how to avert it. You're right, there's impermanent happiness and impermanent suffering, but on balance the chase to acquire the desired is miserable and ends in agony. So it's grasping at future concerns that is just a thorn in the side. Nirvana is not the end of life. It's beyond that and it's eternal happiness basically.

The difference in Theravada and Mahayana is bodhicitta. Theravada one is only working on one's own liberation. In Mahayana they picked up on confusion being the real root of samsara and understood it's really not that big of a deal to uproot so why not bring everyone along? That's the Bodhisattva's insight. And they understood samsara and nirvana are nondual so why not stick around and be happy around everyone?

Read the Heart Sūtra, the Diamond Sūtra and the Virmalakirti Sūtra. I think you will enjoy.

Nirvana is a very interesting subject. Spoiler alert!!! It's immortality. But it's not a desire for that that gets there, it's a samadhi bliss born of nongrasping

[bowsamic]

Ethical behavior is a means to purify your mind, making it more pliable and conducive to awakening. A scheming con artist who resorts to murder will not have a settled mind, will not have the calm necessary to undertake subtle practices. When we abide in conduct that causes no harm, we are calm and content, worry free. We are ready to sit and observe the mind.

I have behaved ethically, yet my mind is not worry free. I still have many worries in life, because there are many worries in life that have nothing to do with ethics.

I'm genuinely not sure if you're trolling with what you just said here, because it's so obviously wrong. Obviously not everyone that has anxiety or fear is doing so because of bad conduct that causes harm, do you really believe that is so? I know many very innocent and ethically virtuous people who suffer from great anxiety.

[Natan]

Ethical behavior is a means to purify your mind, making it more pliable and conducive to awakening. A scheming con artist who resorts to murder will not have a settled mind, will not have the calm necessary to undertake subtle practices. When we abide in conduct that causes no harm, we are calm and content, worry free. We are ready to sit and observe the mind.

I have behaved ethically, yet my mind is not worry free. I still have many worries in life, because there are many worries in life that have nothing to do with ethics.

I'm genuinely not sure if you're trolling with what you just said here, because it's so obviously wrong. Obviously not everyone that has anxiety or fear is doing so because of bad conduct that causes harm, do you really believe that is so? I know many very innocent and ethically virtuous people who suffer from great anxiety.

What is anxiety? It's worry about the future. The future is never now. So it's a suffering born of confusion. That's the bad karma, entertaining a fallacy. It's grows as it becomes habitual. If we learn to relax in the present tense and just do the task at hand calmly, the future and the present become happy places.

[Queequeg]

I have behaved ethically, yet my mind is not worry free. I still have many worries in life, because there are many worries in life that have nothing to do with ethics.

I'm genuinely not sure if you're trolling with what you just said here, because it's so obviously wrong. Obviously not everyone that has anxiety or fear is doing so because of bad conduct that causes harm, do you really believe that is so? I know many very innocent and ethically virtuous people who suffer from great anxiety.

I suppose I did overstate the case in suggesting ethical behavior leads to a calm mind. "When we abide in conduct that causes no harm, we are calm and content, worry free." There obviously are other factors, but I stand by the assertion that it is one indispensable factor to a calm mind and integral to Buddhist training. As I wrote, "Ethical behavior is a means to purify your mind, making it more pliable and conducive to awakening." (emphasis added) This was meant to frame what followed. I assume you are aware of the 8fold path and that ethical behavior is one of the factors.