Buddhist Philosophy' is an oxymoron. Like the The Theory of Walking , it won't get you very far. Actually, the word 'Buddhism' itself is an oxymoron. The Buddha was a master communicator, and what has passed for Buddhist teaching is an exquisite chameleon, adapting to meet the needs of many people, cultures, and eras. It's really one of the last things that deserves to be turned into an 'ism'. But there it is. Like 'human nature' itself.
The teachings were not intended, so far as I can tell, to be a fixed metaphysical, or metaphorical, system. The practices ( meditation , prayer, chanting, monasticism, ritual, ethical constraints) were not intended to be a drug - neither a sedative nor a stimulant. The underlying goal was, and remains, to be happy, aware, and internally congruent; and by so doing to lead others through example.
What's all this about 'non-self'!
The Buddha's refutation of the contemporary ideal of Atman has very little to do with what we now call 'soul', or 'self'; and referred to a specific construct in the religious and cultural milieu of his time.
This is not to say that a separate abstract entity called 'me' either exists or doesn't exist. It would perhaps depend on how you define 'me'. The Buddha did point to inherent existential paradox all those centuries ago in a remarkably sophisticated way. My only concern is that the idea of 'not me' has become an excuse for would-be Buddhists to avoid dealing with some of the realities and responsibilities of their life.
I don't like myself!
If you don't like yourself very much, and imagine that if you learn and practice an ideal of non-self long enough maybe you'll no longer actually exist! How great that would be!(or not) Perhaps you can decide, "If I become fully 'enlightened' I'll wake up and no longer recognize that awful person that used to be me!"
I am not saying that anyone consciously thinks it though in this way. But the implication of such thinking is evident.
Can I get it onto the back of a truck?
I had been leading retreats for many years, and doing my best to refute the assumption that the Buddha taught that there is 'no-self'. The 'self' is a construct, an arbitrary distinction in an interconnected holographic universe. Korzybski would call it a nominalization. A nominalization is something that you can't put in your pocket or on the back of a truck. Our lives are full of them. If something is a nominalization it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. It probably exists as a function of some sort. To say that 'self' doesn't exist is to give it more weight than it deserves, and to miss the point. It functions. It's real.
It seems however, that in the popular representation of Buddhism, there is this persistent idea that the 'self' doesn't exist, and that if it does, that it's a bad thing. This dichotomous absurdity causes a far greater confusion than if you just accepted yourself, and got on with your life.
You must admit that to deny that something exists, and then insist that you must get rid of it, is the kind of double-speak that is worthy of Absurdists like Ionesco or Jarry. To then equate mastery of some sort over this 'no-self' with gaining ground in the wisdom game, adds pathos and tragedy to the mix. Throw in a mistranslation of Freud's German terminology - ego - and you have a recipe for an altogether unprecedented sort of theater of the absurd. Confusing in the extreme!
Resignation is NOT faith .
I'd like to say all this with kindness. I have encountered many western students and teachers of Buddhism who seem to be uncomfortable enough with life in the 20th and 21st centuries to welcome this idea of 'no-self' in order to immunize themselves from their own disquiet. Rather than resolve their discomfort creatively, their choice has been to resign to this notion of no-self, and then to use the teachings of the Buddha's First Noble Truth to justify continuing to feel bad about themselves.
Needless to say, this does not correspond to faith . It is instead mere resignation, an unconscious capitulation.
It is significant that the Buddha warned against this sort of resignation. The word he used is rendered into English as nihilism.
Buddhist meditation and mindfulness practices as they are often taught are effective remedies for stress. However, meditation is not a strong enough sedative to address the depression that resignation implies. It can help manage depression . But the long-term cost is to exacerbates it, reinforcing a fatalistic world view, resigned and passive.
This sort of joyless depression and the resignation it springs from needs stronger medicine. And I'm not talking about drugs!
Have you ever felt that you had more to offer? Get your free e-book "Change Your Mind at http://www.manzanitavillage.org
Caitriona Reed has taught Zen Meditation and Buddhism for more than 20 years She is a seminar leader, and a facilitator for creative change.
Have you ever felt that you had more to offer? Get your free e-book "Change Your Mind at www.manzanitavillage.org
Caitriona Reed has taught Zen Meditation and Buddhism for more than 20 years She is a seminar leader, and a facilitator for creative change.