What would you like from Santa?

Question (Unedited)

Hi im in a philosophy class and im learning about bhuddism, and i have a few things that im confused about.

Im somewhat confused on the subject of ridding oneself of all desires.  I understand the pain desire can bring, and the necessity of getting rid of that in order to obtain nirvana, however, its seems that the striving for enlightenment and the perfection of the self is a form of desire.  Can you help me clarify?

If one was able to fulfill every desire that they had, and therefore recieved no suffereing from unquenched desires, would that man be happier, as happy, or less happy then a man who had no desires, and therefore also no suffering from unquenched desires?

A little while ago i was asked posed the following question:  If you were given the oppurtunity to have your brain removed and put into a vat, and through chemical and electrical stimulation, you could have your every wish and fantasy come true, and it would be as real to you as life is today, and you were guarenteed this for the rest of your natural life, would you do it?  I couldnt find a simple answer to this question.  Every rational fiber of my being tells me to say yes, and this seems like the logical answer to this question, however, i think if this situation were actually presented to me, i wouldnt do it.  But i cant think of one reason why.  How would you answer this question, and why?

Thank you very much for giving me your time.

 

My comment :

Hi Ph.......,

Thanks for asking me.

Your first question is a play on semantics.  The "desire" the Buddha was referring to was about sensual desires.  Sensual desires refer to desires of the 5 senses.  These sensual desires are unquenchable.  It is the very nature of physical senses.  Take for example, hunger.  Once the hunger is satisfied with intake of food; the process of depletion starts, and after some time one feels hungry again.  Another aspect of sense desire is the stronger feeling of craving.  One's craving to satisfy one's desire is itself a catalyst to crave for more.  When this craving goes unchecked, one becomes crazy!  So the option is opened to anyone who follows the Buddha's teachings:  to continue feeding these desires with more craving, or to come to one's senses to reduce this crazy cycle of on-going "madness".

As for striving for enlightenment, it is a very different concept.  Here we are talking about one's commitment to reduce one's greed, hatred and delusion until complete eradication.  This is not a life-long process, but countless life-processes.  "Desire" is not an appropriate word to describe this journey towards enlightenment.  Of course anyone can still argue until the cows come home that it is still "desire".  So it is up to you to decide.  No big deal if you still insist that it is "desire".   The important thing is that I have given you my opinion.  See, this is the beauty of Buddhism.

<< If one was able to fulfill every desire that they had, and therefore recieved no sufering from unquenched desires,...........>>

The "If" already answered your question.  "Desire" is unquenchable!  It's just like asking "If you can live forever".  We call this foolish renderings.

As for your last question, ask your questioner what he would like from Santa Clause this Christmas!  

Have fun!

Compassion and forgiveness

Question : (Unedited)

Hi! I don't know much about buddhism but I have read a bit on compassion.  I tend to hold grudges quite often, and it is hard for me to forgive people.  Do you have any suggestions on how I can find compassion towards people who have hurt me, instead of holding these grudges?

Thank you very much! 

My comment:

 Hi L...,

Thank you for asking me.

"Compassion" is a very big word and a tall order.  It is easy to feel compassion for others, while still not lifting a finger to do anything.  The dictionary defines it as "sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it".  Perhaps replacing "practise compassion" with "act with compassion" will send a clearer message.

The degree of compassion one may have will depend on one's spiritual qualities and external circumstances.  

We must be careful not to become "good hearted fools". We have to be pragmatic in conducting our worldly affairs. It is easy to deceive ourselves that we can be really compassionate for all and sundry. If we are not up to the standard, so to say, we just cannot be compassionate to all. We simply don't have all the qualities that enable us to behave as such. So the next practical approach to take is to do our best. We must first of all assess our level of spiritual maturity, and then to practise according to that level. Given time, we may be able to improve ourselves in our spiritual pursuits and hopefully be able to really feel compassionate for more people of all characters. At the same time to act on it.  In the meantime we need not have to take on the role of a "perfect" Buddhist.  In this world of imperfection, we just have to try our best and leave the others which we cannot control.

The Buddha reminded us that "anger" is one of our 3 evil roots. The 3 evil roots are "greed", "hatred", and "delusion". "Anger" is a form of hatred. "Delusion" is our ignorance to comprehend the true nature of our lives and the world. These 3 roots cause us great pain because we react to conditions in the wrong way leading us to greater miseries. Take "anger" for instance. Medical science has proven that when we get angry, our system heats up, all energy wasted to further support this heat wave when we wallow in this cycle of adding fuel to the fire. Our bodies literally burn inside us; consuming us both spiritually and physically. Knowing this fact, do we still want to hurt ourselves by this foolish behaviour?

It is already bad enough that others had hurt us. Do we want to further hurt ourselves? By getting angry, we think that we are getting even with the other party. No. It is like spitting up in the air.

"What does one do about people who have wronged us?"

It is easy to advise that we radiate loving kindness to them. I find this to be too difficult for most people. Why not take the rational approach? First we have to be sure that they are the ones who had wronged us. Many times we may be the culprits. Well, assuming they had hurt us. First, is to take whatever rational approach available, legally or diplomatically. Now come to the spiritual aspect. You have done whatever that needs to be done...that's all. Now you get on with your life. When we start living life in this positive manner, we will have inner peace. Let nature, kamma, or whatever, takes its course. The Buddha reminded us that if we follow the Dhamma, his teachings, the Dhamma protects us. This is the type of confidence that a wise Buddhist will have. Given time, we will find that we can genuinely forgive those who had hurt us. Then we will have complete peace in ourselves.

In the meantime, if thoughts of hatred and unforgiveness crop up, just note that emotion and be mindful that this emotion is negative, unproductive, and detrimental to one's health.  Then let go of the thought.  Given time, you will feel a sense of inner peace.  Time heals.  

Blessing the Buddha Image

Question : (Unedited)

My friend brought me back a beautiful Buddha from Singapore and when talking to one of the members of my Sangha she said i should have our teacher bless it.  I didn't want to feel stupid and ask what that entails.  So can you tell me.  Thanx,

My comment: 

Hi K...,

Thank you for asking me.

It depends on which tradition you are practising.  I shall comment as a Theravada follower.  Blessing the Buddha image, especially a new one for the home is more of a psychological ritual which makes one feel a sense of confidence in the Buddha image.  Whether there is any other benefit is subject to debate.  Very long time ago when I got my first Buddha image for my home, I got it "blessed" by the monk in the temple.  Some temples perform "all-night chanting" during auspicious occasions and devotees would bring along their Buddha images to be blessed throughout the night.  I feel this is a wholesome and meaningful ritual, and followers would definitely gain a psychological confidence.  Strictly (or wisely?) speaking, there is not a need to "bless" the Buddha image.  Come to think of it, does the Buddha image need us (or monks) to bless it?  Quite ironical, isn't it?

In the event if a Theravada monk were to perform the "blessing", what he would do is to recite some suttas while clasping the image and transferring his metta (wholesome vibration) to the image.

Hope this helps.

Smile from justinchoo :-)

The Buddha is simply THE Buddha

Question (Unedited)

dear justinchoo,

    My apology for bothering you again,as you have mention that the buddha do not believe in a creator

God,does that mean he is a evolutionist?

Hi P..,

You are not bothering me.  I enjoy answering your questions.  

You can say that the Buddha was an evolutionist because he revealed that not only our lives evolved but also the whole vast universe.  Before we try to label who the Buddha was, we must first understand that (as I said before) the Buddha is THE Buddha.  The correct description of the Buddha is he was the All-knowing One, the Fully Enlightened One, who knew what needed to be known, and had done what needed to be done.  He was also Omniscient in that he possessed supernatural powers.  He was also the Teacher of gods and men.  

On one occasion, someone saw the vibrant body of the Buddha and asked him whether he was God.  The Buddha replied in the negative.  Then he was asked that he must be an ordinary being.  He again replied negatively.  "Then who are you?" the man asked.  The Buddha replied, "I am the Buddha."

Coming back to your label "evolutionist", the Buddha revealed that everything in existence was subject to change and impermanence.  Everything evolved; formation, evolution, dissolution, and destruction. Then the cycle starts all over again.  Take the example of living beings.  We can clearly see this cycle.  Scientists have also discovered that somewhere at any point in time planets are being formed, evolved, dissolved and destroyed.  The whole universe is ever changing, evolving, in perpetual cycles in clockwork precision.  If a person is wise enough to realize this truth of impermanence, then he will take steps to reduce his greed, hatred and delusion.  He is just a very insignificant and minute speck existing only for the duration of a blink of the eye in this vast universe with infinite time and space.  His ego is not worth a grain of salt.  Then he will know how to live in peace with himself and with others.

Smile from justinchoo :-)

Agganna Sutta

Question : (Unedited)

Dear justinchoo,

    hello,its me again,I have just read the agganna sutta

and personally I don't think it shouid be taken literally.I

would like to know what is the orthodox view regarding the sutta.thanks!

Hi P...,

Actually, the different tenses used have baffled me.  This sutta is usually quoted to explain the evolution of the world and how beings first appeared and evolved through a very very long period of time.  The orthodox view, I suppose, is to interpret it in a broader perspective while retaining the evolution thesis.  (This is my personal opinion.)

I always have difficulties in reading and understanding the suttas.  The continual repetitions and difficult terms make it a very tedious exercise.  Personally, I make it very simple by just practising the Buddha's simple advice, that is, avoid doing evil, do good, and purify the mind.  Very simple instruction in very simple English.

Smile from justinchoo :-)

What is violence?

Question: (Unedited)

I read your answer to the non-violence question. What is the Buddhist definition of violence? Does violence also relate to harmful verbal communications, actions, and self-mentalities? I have to interview a Buddhist for my Philosophy class. I appreciate your help. Thanks. (You'll probably come across other questions of mine...)

Hi D...,

We don't need a Buddhist definition of "violence".  We need a common-sense definition.  Buddhism is for all to practise.  It is very universal.  So what is violence?  We are fearful of others hurting us.  Actions that hurt others can be considered "violence", in various degrees.  I would consider anything that hurts us and others as "violence".  On the extreme, of course violence means killing people.  On the lower end of the continuum, speech and thought that are hurtful are a sort of "violence".  It's just semantic.  Take your choice.  

Calling an orange, "orange"

Question : (Unedited)

Following the concept of emptiness -an orange is an orange, merely a label that our minds give to the orange. It is the mind that gives attribute of good or bad to the item, and so on, whch bring about fear/paranoia/self-doubt.

My question is, is having an imagination (something essential to being an author), contradicting the view on emptiness and thus, also in a way breaking inner peace? I mean, to let your imagination run wild, in order to write a story, isn't that in itself, not seeing an orange as an orange?

I hope you understand my question :) Thank you.

My comment:

Hi L....,

Thank you for asking me.

It will solve your problem if you consider two aspects of your life.  One is the mundane, and the other is the spiritual.  You have to maintain a reasonable balance in this dichotomy of our existence as a lay person.  It is very difficult to always follow strictly the correct spiritual path and interpretation taught by the Buddha, while still living a worldly life.  A lot of our worldly activities and thinking, stands in the way of our spiritual progress.  That was why the Buddha encouraged his serious followers to become monks and concentrate only on the spiritual path, leaving behind the mundane activities of the world.      

I am sure by now your apparent contradictions are resolved.  Your first paragraph is on the spiritual aspect.  Wisdom is attained when you can see through the hallucination of concepts as interpreted by our deluded mind.  We label an orange as "orange" because of our accepted convention to call it such. This is what we called "conventional truth", which we use to communicate with our fellow beings. In reality it is not an "orange".  As an "ultimate truth", it is not an "orange".  Most often we need to express in conventional truths (terms) so as to conduct our lives smoothly and practically.  We cannot insist on sticking to ultimate truths (terms) and become impractical and a nuisance to society.

Now coming to your second paragraph, you are now using your mental faculty and human intelligence to produce an intellectual creation for the conventional world.  This is an intellectual contribution to the world, although spiritually there is nothing beneficial.   

Strike a balance; this is the middle way, the way of moderation, leading to tolerance, understanding, happiness and wisdom.