Ok, well, I should clarify myself. I don't know all of the Buddha's teachings so I can't say he was wrong on everything. At least, not quite yet....
Anyways, my argument centers around the notion that "life is suffering." The Buddha proclaimed this as fact after observing the four encounters on the road. This idea that "life is suffering" comes from firsthand experience of the Buddha in the everyday world. The acceptance of this tenet of Buddhism is easy to believe in because there is so much suffering in the world and it can be seen at all levels and at all times.
However, I think that saying "life is suffering" is a very myopic view of the world. Such a large blanket statement is no way to interpret the world. Surely life is not always pain or misery. There is ample evidence to the contrary. Even the Buddha did not always suffer during his life. Many people do suffer in life, but they do not always suffer. There are always degrees and intensity to suffering as well as joy. Life is not one or the other. Even in extreme suffering there can be joy as well as the opposite, in extreme joy there can be suffering.
So, my solution to this dilemma? A blanket statement. Before you criticize me, bear with my logic. blanket statements do not usually work for the simple reason that they are too specific. My blanket statement about life is hopefully more vague and therefore more widely applicable to various situations. The statement is this: life is mortal. When I use the statement "life is mortal" I mean that life is many things. It is suffering, it is pleasure, it is joy and pain. It is limited, it is transient, it is short. It is encapsulated by death on all sides. The human life is mortal.
(more on the " life is encapsulated by death" in later posts)
-END TRANSMISSION-
No comments:
Post a Comment