Why is Buddhism so attractive to westerners?

[isitme]

My issues with Buddhism:

2. Happiness vs. striving for something better. Buddhism encourages people to be happy with their lot, not to strive. The whole first premise of 'Life is suffering' sets it all up - whatever happens, you will suffer in life, so you might as well be happy about it.'.

The other two points I don't neccesarily agree with but they make sense, but this one, are you saying that it is possible to live a life without suffering?

 

[kyser_soze]

No I don't - indeed, a life lived without suffering is like any life lived without experiencing as much as the mind and world can offer is no life at all to my mind - but to define all life as suffering...nah not something I can subscribe to...

 

[isitme]

That's right and the USSR said nothing at all about communism. Ok, discuss abstract buddhism alone - leave any interconnection with the real world out of it. i'm more interested in buddhism-in-the-world, and more to the point, buddhism can only exist in that real world.

That's different tho. The Soviet model is arguably the only attempt to implement communism that has been tried, the USSR isn't the only attempt at communism, but it seems to be the template that they all used

Buddhism has been practiced for 1000s of years in many different forms, the effect of buddhism on Tibet is completely different to the effect of Buddhism in India, or Japan etc etc

 

[phildwyer]

No I don't - indeed, a life lived without suffering is like any life lived without experiencing as much as the mind and world can offer is no life at all to my mind - but to define all life as suffering...nah not something I can subscribe to...

What about Knowledge of Mortality though? That sort of ruins life a bit don't you think?

 

[butchersapron]

That's different tho. The Soviet model is arguably the only attempt to implement communism that has been tried, the USSR isn't the only attempt at communism, but it seems to be the template that they all used

Buddhism has been practiced for 1000s of years in many different forms, the effect of buddhism on Tibet is completely different to the effect of Buddhism in India, or Japan etc etc

Hence my quite deliberate restriction to "Buddhism as 'practiced' in that county," not buddhism as a whole.

 

[isitme]

No I don't - indeed, a life lived without suffering is like any life lived without experiencing as much as the mind and world can offer is no life at all to my mind - but to define all life as suffering...nah not something I can subscribe to...

I always thought of it as a way of saying that you will suffer no matter what.... I spose it depends how literally you interpret it (like everything lol)

 

[kyser_soze]

What about Knowledge of Mortality though? That sort of ruins life a bit don't you think?

Nah, just gives you a definite time limit on fun stuff to do - adds spice as well. I've read lots of SF about humans with extended lifespans, and much of it comes to looking at it like:

long life, lived at a slower pace, less intensely. Prone to boredom inducing suicide

Short life, lived frenetically, every second counts so make as much of them as you can

Obviously, if you're more inclined toward a 'Look toward the future without hope' approach to life, then knowledge of mortality, indeed life generally, will be more suffering than fun...

 

[phildwyer]

Nah, just gives you a definite time limit on fun stuff to do - adds spice as well.

That's what I meant. Doesn't it just lead to a life of empty hedonism?

 

[isitme]

Hence my quite deliberate restriction to "Buddhism as 'practiced' in that county," not buddhism as a whole.

Maybe I'm missing your point, I was just saying that I think the comparison with the USSR is a bit misleading. Tibet isn't to Buddhism what the USSR is to Communism

 

[kyser_soze]

That's what I meant. Doesn't it just lead to a life of empty hedonism?

Depends on your choices, doesn't it? One could choose to be a hedonist, living as much as possible for the moment; or one could choose a life of bookish solitude and study...or combine the two at different times of life!!

Be a philosopher at 17 and a bon viveur and raconteur at 70!!

 

[Idaho]

Maybe I'm missing your point, I was just saying that I think the comparison with the USSR is a bit misleading. Tibet isn't to Buddhism what the USSR is to Communism

Well quite.

 

[butchersapron]

Who made the comparison?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

It wasn't the Dali Lama that signed the 1951 agreement with China that allowed them to stay on condition they preserved the fedual ruling class for at least the medium term? Surely the Dali Lama's historic endorsement and defence of those fedual relations compared to the current position says something about Buddhism as 'practiced' in that county, its relation to power, the state and so on, and how that then relates to its abstract precepts.

Does it say something about Buddhism, or something about the Dalai Lama?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

I disagree, it does as Butchers said say something about Buddhism as practiced in Tibet.

What does the fact the the Pope was a member of the Hitler Youth say about Catholicism?

 

[butchersapron]

Is that a comparable position?

 

[butchersapron]

Does it say something about Buddhism, or something about the Dalai Lama?

Oh god, here we go. The blitz all over again.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

That's right and the USSR said nothing at all about communism.

You've changed the terms of reference. The discussion has been whether the dalai lama personifies buddhism. Other examples of individuals have been brought up.

That's different from now offering a whole country as an example.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Oh god, here we go. The blitz all over again.

You didn't deal with the issue well, the first time through.

 

[butchersapron]

You've changed the terms of reference. The discussion has been whether the dalai lama personifies buddhism. Other examples of individuals have been brought up.

That's different from now offering a whole country as an example.

No it wasn't. There was no discussion before my post of this, or after.

 

[butchersapron]

You didn't deal with the issue well, the first time through.

What issue?

 

[butchersapron]

*Waits while JC2 actually reads the thread for real.*

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

What issue?

The issue as to whether or not an individual can be the personification of a concept, religion etc.

 

[butchersapron]

Are you on the wrong thread?

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Are you on the wrong thread?

It's the bit about the Dalai Lama signing a treaty back in 1951, and how that is somehow indicative of the nature of buddhism.

 

[butchersapron]

No, it's not.

You mean, like Idaho, the post that says the exact opposite. Well done. Well read.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

No, it's not.

My response is, and who would know that better than me?


p.s. Did you really think that long, and that's what you came up with?

 

[butchersapron]

I suggest that you read again.

 

[butchersapron]

For those struggling

It wasn't the Dali Lama that signed the 1951 agreement with China that allowed them to stay on condition they preserved the fedual ruling class for at least the medium term? Surely the Dali Lama's historic endorsement and defence of those fedual relations compared to the current position says something about Buddhism as 'practiced' in that country, its relation to power, the state and so on, and how that then relates to its abstract precepts.

 

[butchersapron]

Pair of lazy fucking divs.

 

[Idaho]

Typical butchers. Sits on the sidelines taking easy pot shots, and when he accidentally overstretches himself and gives an opinion (or an almost opinion - which is about as far as he goes) that turns out to be nonsensical we get a stream of insults and claims that people misread him