Buddhist Contradiction

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by StarOfEight, May 13, 2004.

  1. Hathor Banned Banned

    there is no escape from this paradox of desire

    what then would be the next course of action? (or inaction as the case may really be) cease desiring to be desireless? what do you do when the paradox cannot be resolved? how about simply dropping it as an issue? let it go.

    i do not think there are any paths that lead to nirvana. instead. it is here, within you, present at every instant. the reason why we are unable to comprehend it is because we are too busy analyzing all these buddhist texts, philosophies, theories, and injunctions and paradoxes as if there is some magic bullet contained within that will cause enlightenment

    mind you, literature does have its use.

    sit for at least an hour in meditation. sit until there is stillness of mind. perhaps then one could have a glimpse of what your perceptions are really capable of. keep at it and it turns into a natural state of being.

    rational insight kicks ass! no inducing going on here. no deducing either. just plain and simple, manna from heaven (thank you jeeeesus!)

    what comes after, or if there is an after, i have no idea

    after all that is done, please get your lazy ass back to work.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. StarOfEight A Man of Taste and Decency Registered Senior Member

    But people have various material and sentimental desires. To withdraw from those requires a desire in and of itself, yes?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Hastein Welcome To Kampuchea Registered Senior Member

    Of course, it makes perfect sense to call it a paradox. What I am attempting to do is to look into it further, as a state of being instead of a state of desired being. It's one of those things I can't quite describe, sort of Heidegger-ish.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. lotusworld Registered Member


    Yes, absolutely right. The more accurate description should be "desires are the root of all sufferings". One particular desire may create a particular suffering. In a sense, suffering is a kind of consequence you can not escape. The consequence may be viewed by some to be happiness while others suffering. But ultimately all consequence is not freedom. When you act, whether good or bad, without any consequence, you can get whatever you wish and also the things you wish are neither good or bad, just something selfless. In Buddhism scripts, the Buddha also told his disciples to renounce desires for or attachemnt to wealth, beauty, reputation, food, etc. but to learn how to free oneself from the aforesaid desires and finaly reject the desire for ultimate freedom. If you only have the desire for ultimate freedom, you may be well rewarded in terms of worldly pleasures in the present life or in the next life. it is somewhate a relationship like acting force and reacting force (effect of karma)
    Last edited: May 25, 2004
  8. evolove Registered Senior Member

    Samsara and Nirvana are one/ you can't figure it out, you have to 'know' it or whatever.

    I'll give it a try though, and I'm a lazzy bastard so I didn't read anyother posts apart from the first few.

    Yes, to achive liberation is a desire. ONLY after you've done it are you desireless, and only after that is they're no suffering. There is no life, no non-life, no nothing no something, none of that even, or even that, if you get my drift.

    Buddha ate, he had a desire to eat.

    Damn Western minds, I hate mine! Well, Damn Mind!
  9. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    There is a problem with explaining it in words. What we call desire is a spectrum of feeling, from simple interest to extreme longing. Interest and determination are required for spiritual exploration, but desire can also swallow your mind in whirlpools of delusion, from which, it is a struggle to crawl out. The inherent meaning of Buddhist thought can be only hinted at, poked with short bursts of symbolic language like an x-ray, so the shadows of what it is not reveal our true nature.
  10. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Not a contradiction

    Sort of. For any practical purpose, no. By any metaphysical purpose, yes.

    The easiest way to explain it is to say that there is no contradiction.

    I defer generally to students of Buddhism, but will go so far as to speculate the following:

    The Four Noble Truths

    1. Life means suffering.
    2. The origin of suffering is attachment.
    3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.
    4. The path to the cessation of suffering.

    They're called "noble" truths for a reason; there is a moral assignation in the word "noble," despite the popular trend of assigning Buddhism some mystical neutrality. The Four Noble Truths, however, make no moral claims against which we might cite a contradiction.

    Life implies, indicates, demands, means suffering. The origin of that suffering is attachment (desire).

    If one suffers, as compared to what? The desire for something better is in itself a form of suffering. Rather than being a contradiction, the concept seems to circle in and buttress itself.

    Works Cited:

    • "The Four Noble Truths." See http://www.thebigview.com/buddhism/fourtruths.html

    See Also -

    • Rinpoche, Venerable Thrangu. "The Four Noble Truths." See http://www.rinpoche.com/fornob.html
    • Access to Insight. "The Four Noble Truths." See http://www.accesstoinsight.org/ptf/sacca.html
    Last edited: May 26, 2004

Share This Page