I have lately been thinking about where I stand on certain aspects of theology and philosophy. It occurred to me that there are contradictions within the Buddha Dharma that I hadn't noticed before. The other day I was confronted, by a fellow follower of the Buddhist path, about how despite my beliefs I continue to eat meat. Typically, the common conception regarding Buddhism is that the main bullet point is not to do harm to other living things. Because of this, vegan-ism and pacifism have become interchangeable with Buddhism, and those features have become commonly placed over Buddhism's true meaning. I'm not saying anything is wrong vegans and vegetarians for not consuming flesh. If anything I believe most of our health problems root from relying on getting our protein from big companies' production of hormone riddled, freeze dried, re-fried, meat byproducts. But one of the points my friend made, was that typically the enlightened ones have been grouped into two different eating groups: the ascetics, who eat whatever they can beg and scrounge for; and the Monks, who can afford a rich vegetarian lifestyle. I tried to point out that this was possible because of the plays they go on tour to do, but my train of thought went out the window trying to explain what the plays were about. Digressing though, my first contradiction begs the question: If I am given or buy meat, how is that any different if I were to kill the animal myself? You can argue that a beggar can't be a chooser, but the fact of the matter remains that a creature died to nourish his body. And further more, vegetables and fruits are living things as well. And the process in which they are harvested kills lots of rabbits, squirrels, and other small animals. Is supporting the production which destroys so much life not just as much a violation of the first of the Five Precepts (pañca-sikkhādapa) as killing a cow?
I touched on "Buddhism's true meaning" above, and I'd like to clarify and elaborate. Buddhism's focal point is not turning the other cheek and abstaining from sexual activity. These are principles left behind from Siddhartha and other Buddhas that found that keeping away from certain emotions and temptations helped them on their journey. Dutchman, Herman Hesse wrote a novella about an individual's path of enlightenment titled "Siddhartha". The story begins with the main character's revocation of his birthright, followed by time spent with humble holy men called ascetics. This time is spent jumping around from teacher to teacher, unsatisfied with their inability to quench his thirst for knowledge. In a desperate attempt to achieve enlightenment through self-mortification he almost starves himself to death. It's at this point in the traditional story that he sits under the famous pipal tree and after meditating for forty nine days and becomes enlightened, but Hesse twists it away for a different approach. In the book, after almost dying, Siddhartha meets with a man identical to the idealized figure of Buddha. The man offers to teach him what he knows, but Siddhartha realizes that what he craves cannot be taught. From there he travels to a village, takes a lover and becomes a very wealthy business man. After a time he decides this self made wealth, as his birth given wealth, does not bring him happiness. However neither did his time spent begging with and learning from the ascetics. In this moment of confusion he decides to through himself into a river to end his suffering, but is stopped by the river rower. He takes up shelter with the rower and helps him with his duties. While tolling the hard but calm life of a river rower, he understands that what he has been searching for. If none of this makes sense to you, than you probably have a misconception about what "the Path to Enlightenment" is about and what is expected of the end result. The enlightenment that Buddhist followers talk about is understanding of life and the suffering that it brings naturally. The quest spawns from simply not having a tangible presence to explain why we have famine, illness, and death. This is not a question I can answer, yet, but I'm working on it. My point is that the only way to answer the question that all Buddhists strive to one day understand, is to walk your own path and find your own answers. Experience, is what Hesse says is the answer to enlightenment. Experience in love, loss, luck, and of course life. Hesse's Siddhartha lives full circle from wealth, to beggar, to luxury, to modesty. And without fully being explained, the reader sees that he achieved his goal through experience. Old texts of every religion that encourage the absorption of higher learning have always warned against immodest luxury and satisfying curiosities of more carnal natures. This is where I find my second contradiction. If life lessons are what help us understand the greater plan, than abstinence is just as constricting. Creating a war between your brain and your body because of an ancient manuscript that tells you not to drink and have sex, is only going to hold you back from a higher understanding if those are things you want to do.
My third contradiction is the expectation of a worldly Nirvana being the reward of enlightenment and the over all goal of the Buddhist Path. The Buddha Dharma's goal is, and always has been, enlightenment. The misguided media and some misinformed authors have described the enlightenment of a Buddha to be a joyous, life affirming feeling of love and faith. A feeling of being filled with white light and bliss. Well let me be the first to let you know, that while I have never felt more complete within this faith, bliss is not a feeling I am very familiar with. Enlightenment is by definition "knowledge". The feeling of comprehension can go towards either side on the Richter Scale. The gasp one receives in their heart when they work out a conundrum or when something suddenly just makes sense is exalting, but the pinch they would feel if they learned a truth they leaned on was incorrect or if they had been lied to by someone they trust can be crushing. For you see, bliss by definition means "complete happiness". Knowledge cannot be relied upon to cash that check every time it's written.
When one typically thinks of religion, one thinks of the joy and happiness it brings to and individual. In my humble opinion, religious bliss comes from the release of higher responsibilities. Responsibilities such as solving your own problems or admitting a mistake. In mainstream religious, these responsibilities have been taken on by the higher power. Each and every person has the right to follow their own path and discover their own key to happiness, but I find it odd (particularly with the Buddhists that fancy Siddhartha a god) when a person sees ignorance as a means to an end. Basically, "God has a plan" will take the place of "I will figure this out". Blind faith taking the place of responsibility is not something I could accept even before my fall from grace.
I touched on "Buddhism's true meaning" above, and I'd like to clarify and elaborate. Buddhism's focal point is not turning the other cheek and abstaining from sexual activity. These are principles left behind from Siddhartha and other Buddhas that found that keeping away from certain emotions and temptations helped them on their journey. Dutchman, Herman Hesse wrote a novella about an individual's path of enlightenment titled "Siddhartha". The story begins with the main character's revocation of his birthright, followed by time spent with humble holy men called ascetics. This time is spent jumping around from teacher to teacher, unsatisfied with their inability to quench his thirst for knowledge. In a desperate attempt to achieve enlightenment through self-mortification he almost starves himself to death. It's at this point in the traditional story that he sits under the famous pipal tree and after meditating for forty nine days and becomes enlightened, but Hesse twists it away for a different approach. In the book, after almost dying, Siddhartha meets with a man identical to the idealized figure of Buddha. The man offers to teach him what he knows, but Siddhartha realizes that what he craves cannot be taught. From there he travels to a village, takes a lover and becomes a very wealthy business man. After a time he decides this self made wealth, as his birth given wealth, does not bring him happiness. However neither did his time spent begging with and learning from the ascetics. In this moment of confusion he decides to through himself into a river to end his suffering, but is stopped by the river rower. He takes up shelter with the rower and helps him with his duties. While tolling the hard but calm life of a river rower, he understands that what he has been searching for. If none of this makes sense to you, than you probably have a misconception about what "the Path to Enlightenment" is about and what is expected of the end result. The enlightenment that Buddhist followers talk about is understanding of life and the suffering that it brings naturally. The quest spawns from simply not having a tangible presence to explain why we have famine, illness, and death. This is not a question I can answer, yet, but I'm working on it. My point is that the only way to answer the question that all Buddhists strive to one day understand, is to walk your own path and find your own answers. Experience, is what Hesse says is the answer to enlightenment. Experience in love, loss, luck, and of course life. Hesse's Siddhartha lives full circle from wealth, to beggar, to luxury, to modesty. And without fully being explained, the reader sees that he achieved his goal through experience. Old texts of every religion that encourage the absorption of higher learning have always warned against immodest luxury and satisfying curiosities of more carnal natures. This is where I find my second contradiction. If life lessons are what help us understand the greater plan, than abstinence is just as constricting. Creating a war between your brain and your body because of an ancient manuscript that tells you not to drink and have sex, is only going to hold you back from a higher understanding if those are things you want to do.
My third contradiction is the expectation of a worldly Nirvana being the reward of enlightenment and the over all goal of the Buddhist Path. The Buddha Dharma's goal is, and always has been, enlightenment. The misguided media and some misinformed authors have described the enlightenment of a Buddha to be a joyous, life affirming feeling of love and faith. A feeling of being filled with white light and bliss. Well let me be the first to let you know, that while I have never felt more complete within this faith, bliss is not a feeling I am very familiar with. Enlightenment is by definition "knowledge". The feeling of comprehension can go towards either side on the Richter Scale. The gasp one receives in their heart when they work out a conundrum or when something suddenly just makes sense is exalting, but the pinch they would feel if they learned a truth they leaned on was incorrect or if they had been lied to by someone they trust can be crushing. For you see, bliss by definition means "complete happiness". Knowledge cannot be relied upon to cash that check every time it's written.
When one typically thinks of religion, one thinks of the joy and happiness it brings to and individual. In my humble opinion, religious bliss comes from the release of higher responsibilities. Responsibilities such as solving your own problems or admitting a mistake. In mainstream religious, these responsibilities have been taken on by the higher power. Each and every person has the right to follow their own path and discover their own key to happiness, but I find it odd (particularly with the Buddhists that fancy Siddhartha a god) when a person sees ignorance as a means to an end. Basically, "God has a plan" will take the place of "I will figure this out". Blind faith taking the place of responsibility is not something I could accept even before my fall from grace.
No comments:
Post a Comment