A friend of mine said recently-ish that Buddhism is a religion/philosophy/whatever that is characterised by doubt (as can be contrasted to a religion/philosophy/whatever where we are expected to believe certain things so as to be accepted as an adherent).
I think there's a lot of truth in this, at least there is a potential for truth. The nature of that doubt though has to be a lot more thorough than mere indulgence in the philosophical/intellectual laziness of blanket negation (the 'shunyata sickness'), or the adoption of doubt as merely another glum and cynical way of dismissing a rather unpleasant world full of unpleasant happenings by way of our rather unpleasant selves: The Buddha might have started out as a depressed and disenchanted teenager-type, but he hit on a type of effort that seen him through the malaise (if the stories have any truth in them at all... and I actually think a lot of teenagers are a lot more savvy than I was/ still am sometimes, so no offence intended).
It seems that this 'everything is empty' creed is very attractive to my own lost generation (and previous lost generations) who need easy answers to difficult and complex questions: And what else has religion always done but provide simple, graspable and vaguely believable solutions to console those in pain? That's why, by my estimation, religion is about 98% pure, Grade-A bullshit, including much of Buddhism. And it is clearly overtly dangerous in so many ways in its more extreme, delusional forms.
One thing that may redeem Buddhism (and my enquiries are ongoing) is this matter of real doubt, experiential doubt, that clarifies, among other things, the nature of the suffering self and the nature of the suffering itself. The main object that Buddhism deals with then is the self, or, more accurately (from the point of view of actually DOING buddha-dharma... not just rehashing Buddh-ISM), the bundle of stuff (emotions, sensations, thoughts etc etc) that we usually designate 'my self'. What happens when we start to dissolve the mesh of associations between thoughts, emotions and physical sensations is that we may see that this self is not really as we thought it was, it's rather a bit more inclusive and indistinct... although it is not a not-thing; nor a fiction; nor some fluffy philosophical nether region, and so Master Dogen could contextualise this self avoiding extremes such as blanket, philosophical negation, and the reification of some innate, enduring psychological 'self' in well constructed phrases such as "to learn Buddhism is to learn the self; to learn the self is to forget the self; to forget the self is to be actualised by the many things"... Clever that.
And this actualised 'self' is not a glum, dank, black hole not-existing in a void; it is a real 'self' albeit it quite transformed in experience and range: 'The whole universe in ten directions is just one human body'.
So, with a little effort, Buddhism need not be a squalid refuge for philosophically-geared miserable bastards... like me! I will continue to check it out.
DISCLAIMER: Do bear in mind, however, that, until we clarify it for ourselves directly, anything I or anyone else says on the matter may as well be part of the 98% bullshit. So, happy wading!
Regards,
Harry.
I think there's a lot of truth in this, at least there is a potential for truth. The nature of that doubt though has to be a lot more thorough than mere indulgence in the philosophical/intellectual laziness of blanket negation (the 'shunyata sickness'), or the adoption of doubt as merely another glum and cynical way of dismissing a rather unpleasant world full of unpleasant happenings by way of our rather unpleasant selves: The Buddha might have started out as a depressed and disenchanted teenager-type, but he hit on a type of effort that seen him through the malaise (if the stories have any truth in them at all... and I actually think a lot of teenagers are a lot more savvy than I was/ still am sometimes, so no offence intended).
It seems that this 'everything is empty' creed is very attractive to my own lost generation (and previous lost generations) who need easy answers to difficult and complex questions: And what else has religion always done but provide simple, graspable and vaguely believable solutions to console those in pain? That's why, by my estimation, religion is about 98% pure, Grade-A bullshit, including much of Buddhism. And it is clearly overtly dangerous in so many ways in its more extreme, delusional forms.
One thing that may redeem Buddhism (and my enquiries are ongoing) is this matter of real doubt, experiential doubt, that clarifies, among other things, the nature of the suffering self and the nature of the suffering itself. The main object that Buddhism deals with then is the self, or, more accurately (from the point of view of actually DOING buddha-dharma... not just rehashing Buddh-ISM), the bundle of stuff (emotions, sensations, thoughts etc etc) that we usually designate 'my self'. What happens when we start to dissolve the mesh of associations between thoughts, emotions and physical sensations is that we may see that this self is not really as we thought it was, it's rather a bit more inclusive and indistinct... although it is not a not-thing; nor a fiction; nor some fluffy philosophical nether region, and so Master Dogen could contextualise this self avoiding extremes such as blanket, philosophical negation, and the reification of some innate, enduring psychological 'self' in well constructed phrases such as "to learn Buddhism is to learn the self; to learn the self is to forget the self; to forget the self is to be actualised by the many things"... Clever that.
And this actualised 'self' is not a glum, dank, black hole not-existing in a void; it is a real 'self' albeit it quite transformed in experience and range: 'The whole universe in ten directions is just one human body'.
So, with a little effort, Buddhism need not be a squalid refuge for philosophically-geared miserable bastards... like me! I will continue to check it out.
DISCLAIMER: Do bear in mind, however, that, until we clarify it for ourselves directly, anything I or anyone else says on the matter may as well be part of the 98% bullshit. So, happy wading!
Regards,
Harry.
6 comments:
hey harry, you are going to be written into "the koans of the 7th patriarch" as the fall guy : o )
Cool! A gig's a gig, Baby.
Harry -
Some time back you placed a link to a video on Brad's blog of an old Irish man singing very soulfully about his life. Could you please connect me to that song again? I'll be forever in your debt.
Stay actualized and Thanks!
Flibbert,
That would be the great Irish poet Patrick Kavanagh...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OggjRZaOU74
All the best,
H.
"Buddhism is a religion/philosophy/whatever that is characterised by doubt (as can be contrasted to a religion/philosophy/whatever where we are expected to believe certain things so as to be accepted as an adherent)."
You can start by doubting the reliability of your own mind, as Charles Darwin did.
I think i will have my own presentation on this, and i think that buddhism, is just an open door for the life where we should be. Positivness and goodwill is just a way of understanding it better..
Post a Comment