"purpose of life" +Buddhism

[yrreg]

I entered this phrase, "purpose of life" +Buddhism, into Google and it returned as the first hit the following:

The Purpose of Life According to Buddhism - ReligionFactsExploration of the Buddhist view of the purpose and meaning of life.
www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/beliefs/purpose.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar pages ​

So I looked up this lead and read the purpose of life according to Buddhism:

In Buddhism, the primary purpose of life is to end suffering. The Buddha taught that humans suffer because we continually strive after things that do not give lasting happiness. We desperately try to hold on to things - friends, health, material things - that do not last, and this causes sorrow.

The Buddha did not deny that there are things in life that give joy, but pointed out that none of them last and our attachment to them only causes more suffering. His teachings were focused entirely on this problem and its solution.

This is done by recognizing the impermanence of all things and freeing oneself from attachment to these things. This will lessen suffering and eventually end the cycle of rebirth. These teachings are expressed most concisely in the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path, which together form the foundation of belief for all branches of Buddhism.

http://www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/beliefs/purpose.htm

I feel shortchanged with this idea from Buddhism about the purpose of life.

First of all, because the idea of suffering in Buddhism is based on the presence of desire in man which man wants to satisfy but cannot do so completely and all the time: man thus experiences the unpleasant fact of what we call frustration -- and that is identified in Buddhism as suffering; so in order to not suffer from desire man must get rid of desire or master the attitude of not giving it attention.

There is definitely something distorted in the search for the purpose of life in choosing the kind of reactions we can choose to face the unpleasant fact of life, namely, the frustration of not having our desires satisfied completely and lastingly.

What do you guys say?

What about myself? I think it is escapism, if I may use that term, to seek the purpose of life in flight from what in effect is perceived as a problem, even a challenge to man, instead of studying the problem and working out feasible solutions to the problem.

And what is the problem here? The problem that we have desires which we cannot completely satisfy and for as long as we wish to satisfy them.

Well, what do you guys say?

Yrreg

 

[CplFerro]

Dear yrreg,

I consider Buddhism suspect for emphasising the negation of the negation, rather than any positive subsisting principle of man's nature. I'd like to know if there has ever been a chiefly Buddhist-influenced country that has progressed scientifically to the degree it was Buddhist. I doubt there ever has been such a country.

Buddhism also presents a bit of a paradox at the point of climax: Once we're totally free of desires, we've also lost all meaning in life - which means we, like the original Buddha, will never exist in nirvana but will float down from it and walk the Earth seeking to help others. None of which, of course, exactly helps society progress systemically.

Cpl Ferro

 

[chance]

I think the key wording is “freeing oneself from attachment to these things” i.e. that need not mean giving things up literally, but learning how to deal with them.

 

[CaptainManacles]

I've always found it to be a very "why take a shower when I'm just going to need another one tommorow" kind of attitude. Not the most profound thing I've ever heard.

 

[UserGoogol]

There's a difference between desire and pleasure. A person who has eliminated all desire (either through enlightenment or some sort of scifi neurological procedure or whatever) could still theoretically feel pleasure, and thus could have a rather worthwhile life. They would simply no longer have irrational urges trying to force them towards happiness, and instead would be able to approach the goal of happiness more logically.

Also, it seems misleading to say that Buddhism teaches that the meaning of life is the cessation of desire, but rather that the cessation of desire is a "good idea" and that Buddhism claims to have a path to that goal.

 

[yrreg]

Tibet is an example of Buddhism's obscurantism in science.

Dear yrreg,

I consider Buddhism suspect for emphasising the negation of the negation, rather than any positive subsisting principle of man's nature. I'd like to know if there has ever been a chiefly Buddhist-influenced country that has progressed scientifically to the degree it was Buddhist. I doubt there ever has been such a country.

Buddhism also presents a bit of a paradox at the point of climax: Once we're totally free of desires, we've also lost all meaning in life - which means we, like the original Buddha, will never exist in nirvana but will float down from it and walk the Earth seeking to help others. None of which, of course, exactly helps society progress systemically.

Cpl Ferro

I'd like to know if there has ever been a chiefly Buddhist-influenced country that has progressed scientifically to the degree it was Buddhist. ​

Tibet was a country that was not only officially and exclusively Buddhistic in its Lamaistic version, but was ruled by Buddhist monks headed by the self-exiled Dalai Lama. I think it is one of the most backward and non-technological and most anti-technological country in the world, until the Chinese asserted China's traditional overseer-age over the land.


Yrreg

 

[yrreg]

Pleasure impossible without desire.

There's a difference between desire and pleasure. A person who has eliminated all desire (either through enlightenment or some sort of scifi neurological procedure or whatever) could still theoretically feel pleasure, and thus could have a rather worthwhile life. They would simply no longer have irrational urges trying to force them towards happiness, and instead would be able to approach the goal of happiness more logically.

Also, it seems misleading to say that Buddhism teaches that the meaning of life is the cessation of desire, but rather that the cessation of desire is a "good idea" and that Buddhism claims to have a path to that goal.

Is it possible to experience pleasure in things and acts which one does not desire. At least there must be desire when the experience is being felt in order that there will be pleasure.

For example, sometimes I don't have appetite, but friends tell me to eat just the same the foods laid on the table which look and smell delicious; so I start taking a morsel here and there, and the desire to eat more arises in me; and that is pleasure, i.e., the desire to eat and the eating itself, they make up the pleasure.


As soon as the desire for an experience ceases, the pleasure also evaporates.

Consider a couple having good sex and then they hear over the radio something tragic occurring in the neighborhood school, there is a fiery conflagration enveloping the school and children trapped inside. Their two kids attend that school and they are presently in the school.

What happened now? Desire for sex or to continue sex immediately leaves their body and psyche, and with its departure all pleasure in sex.

Maybe a much better distinction is between pleasure and happiness.


About cessation of desire being a good thing, can any human live a normal healthy life with having banished all desires? Besides there are many good things and good behavioral acts that should be desired and attended to with the utmost of dedication; for example, the desire for good health and good life for service to mankind, the desire to be a gentleman, a lady


Yrreg

 

[Dogdoctor]

Hope for the best and expect the worst. There you go! A way to deal with your desires without getting frustrated.

 

[UserGoogol]

As soon as the desire for an experience ceases, the pleasure also evaporates.

But I don't see why this is a neccesary thing, but rather just "how the brain works." It seems quite hypothetically possible to seperate desire from pleasure, to have a pleasure but to feel no "need" to continue it. At the same time, this is kind of why I mentioned "wacky scifi procedures" earlier. I really don't think the eightfold path is a viable path towards eliminating desire, you would need to do some serious neurological rewiring to get the job done properly.

About cessation of desire being a good thing, can any human live a normal healthy life with having banished all desires? Besides there are many good things and good behavioral acts that should be desired and attended to with the utmost of dedication; for example, the desire for good health and good life for service to mankind, the desire to be a gentleman, a lady

That's not how I use the word desire. Desire refers to emotional wants. A person who has had desire eliminated could still say, "You know, I really would prefer having sex with a woman I love to having bamboo shoots shot under the fingernails, I think I'm gonna try to work towards the former." Similarly, you could prefer moral behavior to immorality. You can have rational preferences without having "desire."

But then again, I honestly do not know if this is how Buddhists use the word desire, (I suspect they do, because desire is so often conflated with concepts like "attatchment," but I'm not sure) so maybe I'm discussing my own personal views rather than discussing Buddhism as such.

 

[yrreg]

What is desire in Buddhism?

But then again, I honestly do not know if this is how Buddhists use the word desire, (I suspect they do, because desire is so often conflated with concepts like "attatchment," but I'm not sure) so maybe I'm discussing my own personal views rather than discussing Buddhism as such.

From my readings on Budhism, desire runs the gamut from wish to obsession and addiction.

My impression is that Buddhism emphasizes the abandonment, disavowal, rejection, overthrow, of all deisres, and flight from, not just legitimate ones, like desire for food and good health and socially approved pleasures (for example the pleasure of the body and the mind, like food and sex for the body and working on a puzzle for the mind).

As a compromise in order that Buddhists do not die from starvation by absolutely renouncing the desire for food, and Buddhists do not become an extinct species by abstaining completely from sex, Buddhism also teaches the middle way of avoiding extremes in the use of pleasure.

But for Buddhists who aspire after the ideal, then food should be in the amount minimally needed to sustain life and to engage in meditation, and sex altogether no, no.

In this respect Buddhists who do not lead the life of monks are not pursuing the expected standards or the purist standards of Buddhism in the fight against desires and also in the flight from desires.


As a non-Buddhist but a man of reason and sensibility, I will have all the food I desire and can afford, and only reasons of good health and civilization will convince me to practice moderation. But when it comes to lovemaking with my wife, we will have all the loving we can engage in and as long, and no restraints whatsoever except reasons again of health and civilization.


We are talking about physical desires; there are also moral desires like recognition in society and also satisfaction in leadership roles. In my own case I also cultivate such desires; but I keep myself from losing my peace of mind and peace with neighbors in the cultivation of such desires -- just enough to feel important, that should keep me happy, a factor to my happiness in life.


My readings on Buddhism on desires advocate principles opposite to mine; but I believe my views and attitudes and practices on desires are better for mankind, than the teachings from Buddhism on desires.


Yrreg

 

[Dancing David]

If I have understood the many readings on tanha or desire, I think that craving or want seem to capture the spirit of the word desire.

But life can and does have meaning outside of desire. There are many interpretations of the buddha's teachings, nirvana does not mean the end of pleasure to some, to others it does.

I have a very american interpretation of the buddha's teachings, influenced by Thich Naht Hahn, he teaches that nirvana does not mean the end of joy at all. It is more a state of free mindful action somewhat like being able to live life as it is without the worries of the intellect.

 

[Dancing David]

From an unscientific survey:
I enetered purpose of life "buddhism" into google and copied the snippets from the search pages that seemed to make sense: they are as follows:

--the purpose of life is to be happy
-purpose of life is the attainment of Enlightenment
-that the purpose of life is not just spiritual
-the purpose of life is happiness
-There is no specific purpose of scheme of things to which life has to conform
-purpose of life is to attain Buddhahood in this lifetime
-purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living
-purpose of life is what we personally give to our own lives
-purpose of life and Buddhism is not merely to create “enjoyable” circumstances. Rather it is to create within ourselves the ability to enjoy all of life
-purpose of life is to develop compassion for all living beings

 

[ruach1]

I entered this phrase, "purpose of life" +Buddhism, into Google and it returned as the first hit the following:

The Purpose of Life According to Buddhism - ReligionFactsExploration of the Buddhist view of the purpose and meaning of life.
www.religionfacts.com/buddhism/beliefs/purpose.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar pages ​

So I looked up this lead and read the purpose of life according to Buddhism:



I feel shortchanged with this idea from Buddhism about the purpose of life.

First of all, because the idea of suffering in Buddhism is based on the presence of desire in man which man wants to satisfy but cannot do so completely and all the time: man thus experiences the unpleasant fact of what we call frustration -- and that is identified in Buddhism as suffering; so in order to not suffer from desire man must get rid of desire or master the attitude of not giving it attention.

There is definitely something distorted in the search for the purpose of life in choosing the kind of reactions we can choose to face the unpleasant fact of life, namely, the frustration of not having our desires satisfied completely and lastingly.

What do you guys say?

What about myself? I think it is escapism, if I may use that term, to seek the purpose of life in flight from what in effect is perceived as a problem, even a challenge to man, instead of studying the problem and working out feasible solutions to the problem.

And what is the problem here? The problem that we have desires which we cannot completely satisfy and for as long as we wish to satisfy them.

Well, what do you guys say?

Yrreg

I say you have an axe to grind with Buddhism.

Ever wonder why?

 

[Elind]

I feel shortchanged with this idea from Buddhism about the purpose of life.

What do you guys say?

I would take a wild guess that Buddhism evolved in a time and place when coming to terms with what one could never have was a daily fact of life. Buddhism is the answer that puts it all in perspective, just like most other religions.

Why are you shortchanged? There are plenty of more "modern" so called religions focusing on the acquisition of wealth, or donating it. Pick one of those instead. It's channel 2 where I live.

 

[Ryokan]

I'd like to know if there has ever been a chiefly Buddhist-influenced country that has progressed scientifically to the degree it was Buddhist. I doubt there ever has been such a country.

I'm not 100% sure I understand that sentence, but how about Japan?

ETA : And, better yet, since Japan is more Shinto than Buddhist, what about South Korea?

 

[Ryokan]

I say you have an axe to grind with Buddhism.

Ever wonder why?

Yrreg has been all over the web, digging for crap on Buddhism and constructing strawmen to attack Buddhism.

Anyway, if there is a purpose to Buddhism, it's to be happy. But that's just my answer, ask someone else and he might answer differently. And chances are, we'll both be just as right.

The original topic sounds like Yrreg is somehow forced to take up Buddhism. If Buddhism bothers you so much, Yrreg, why don't you just let it go? Let all thoughts of Buddhism disappear from your mind. If you don't know how to do that, might I suggest reading up on the Four Noble Truths?

 

[yrreg]

From moral and intellelctual honesty and self-knowledge.

Yrreg has been all over the web, digging for crap on Buddhism and constructing strawmen to attack Buddhism.

Anyway, if there is a purpose to Buddhism, it's to be happy. But that's just my answer, ask someone else and he might answer differently. And chances are, we'll both be just as right.

The original topic sounds like Yrreg is somehow forced to take up Buddhism. If Buddhism bothers you so much, Yrreg, why don't you just let it go? Let all thoughts of Buddhism disappear from your mind. If you don't know how to do that, might I suggest reading up on the Four Noble Truths?

I should take up critique of say Baha'i; but Baha'i to me does not seem to enjoy the patronage of so-called Western intellectuals.

So, for intellectual exercise and also self-examination of my moral values and humanistic attachments | take up the critique of Buddhism.

Nothing personal against Buddhism but just pure academic interest, like maybe study of ancient Egyptian embalming methods and objectives -- but that is too distant for me, while Buddhism as a modern or current religion of a visible number of Western so-called intellectuals is a very intriguing and at the same time convenient easily accessible subject for inquisition.


Yrreg

 

[Ryokan]

I should take up critique of say Baha'i; but Baha'i to me does not seem to enjoy the patronage of so-called Western intellectuals.

And why does this bother you so much?

 

[yrreg]

What I expect of an intellectual...

Originally Posted by yrreg:
I should take up critique of say Baha'i; but Baha'i to me does not seem to enjoy the patronage of so-called Western intellectuals. ​

And why does this bother you so much?

I have this idea and this expectation of intellectualism, namely, independence and freedom of the mind, will, and heart in everything.

That is why I find it deserving of examination why people who should otherwise be independent, free, and self-reliant and self-resourceful in fashioning a philosophy of life and the universe for themselves, should take up Buddhism which is to my evaluation fraught with myths and gratuitous premises.

There is something of this life and of this earthly world that otherwise intellectuals supposedly are in quest of, in embracing Buddhism, which is to my suspicion has very little if nothing to do with the final, ultimate, and beyond which nothing further to journey to, whatever that is taught in Buddhism, like what I understand to be Nirvana.

It could be the trend or the vogue or the longing for 'uniquity', to stand out from what has been common and traditional in one's inherited culture and society of Christendom.

Or the plain explanation is the hunger for what I call the 'anchoring in the universe'; but why choose Buddhism? why not make your own self-architected and self-engineered anchoring in the universe?


Why don't I just leave Buddhism and Western Buddhists alone? For the same reason that I have not given up looking for the small screw I dropped on the floor which up to the present I have not found, unless and until I go all over the floor with a vacuum cleaner and carefully comb the whole floor, every nook and edge for that screw.

You know, just for humor, I think there are imps on the floor which grab any small object, not more than 1/4 square inch in surface area, falling on the floor; and they kick these objects to the most unexpected and unsuspected spots of the floor which defy your easy detection and recovery.

Hahaha. I would tell my wife that those imps have grabbed another nut or screw or pin from my table; and she would tell me, "Don't be silly, just get another one; I will sweep the floor soon and throw to the dustbin everything turned up by the broom." No, she is not my kind of temperament, a perspicacity to search and search until I either land into what I am looking for, or more important matters bring my mind away from the quest.

That is why I find Buddhism so absorbing, like a tiny nut pulled by gravity to the floor and I could not find it: neither under my chair, nor under the table, and not even when I pore my eye sight level on the floor to discern any so much as a protrusion on the floor surface indicating some object resting on the floor which the eye cannot see easily from directly above looking downward.


Perhaps one day you will find the nut of Buddhism and then you will no longer be enthused with it, and probably that will be your enlightenment.

Hahaha.

Yrreg

 

[Ryokan]

I have this idea and this expectation of intellectualism, namely, independence and freedom of the mind, will, and heart in everything.

That is why I find it deserving of examination why people who should otherwise be independent, free, and self-reliant and self-resourceful in fashioning a philosophy of life and the universe for themselves, should take up Buddhism which is to my evaluation fraught with myths and gratuitous premises.

Can you point to one of these individuals?

Is there a chance that your evaluations might be wrong? That people who have studied Buddhism sees more truth in it than one who refuses to even read Buddhist texts?

Perhaps one day you will find the nut of Buddhism and then you will no longer be enthused with it, and probably that will be your enlightenment.

As the Zen Buddhists say, before you can reach enlightenment, you must kill the Buddha