RAF and Edgar,

Yes, Edgar and I do agree that the Buddhist reference to suffering is mental 
suffering - not physical pain.  You could be suffering because of pain, but 
then only in the sense that you are hosting a 'pity party' and moaning 'Why me? 
 Why do I have to have this pain?  Why not Edgar?'

So, in that sense I wouldn't say 'life is suffering' because it is the 
ATTACHMENTS in life that cause the suffering, not life itself.  I would say 
'attachments bring suffering', but they can be dissolved by realization of 
Buddha Nature.

...Bill!



--- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi RAF,
> 
> One must first clearly define suffering. Bill and I make a distinction 
> between physical pain and mental suffering. It's mostly mental suffering that 
> Buddhism addresses in saying that suffering is due to attachments, desires, 
> and ignorance. Mental suffering can thus largely be released and avoided by 
> proper understanding or realization in the Buddhist sense.
> 
> But it is incorrect that life IS suffering. Life includes a very complex mix 
> of experience including suffering, pain, joy, happiness and a lot of other 
> experiences which are clearly NOT suffering. I'm certainly NOT suffering 
> right now and I'm most certainly alive.
> 
> But physical pain is an intrinsic part of being a flesh based being. Even the 
> most enlightened being is still subject to more or less physical pain. But 
> not to suffering given proper realization. However from an EP perspective 
> suffering responses are rooted in evolutionary adaptations which is why we 
> naturally have them and those must be transcended through realization.
> 
> There is a story about a Chinese monk standing completely blissfully in a 
> group of weeping peasants about to be executed. Seeing the monk the army 
> commander asked him why he wasn't afraid saying "I could kill you without 
> batting an eye." In response the monk replied, "And I could be killed by you 
> without batting an eye." The story goes that the impressed commander then 
> released him.
> 
> Point of the story is that the stressful anticipation of being executed is 
> mental suffering which is unnecessary for someone who realizes the true 
> nature of things. However should the monk be physically harmed he will still 
> experience physical pain...
> 
> So speaking just about mental suffering there is an enormous amount among 
> almost all beings human, and animal. However this is fundamentally all 
> illusion, even though mental suffering is a natural evolutionary response 
> designed to help mobilize personal resources to resolve stressful or 
> dangerous situations.
> 
> So yes there are a multitude of suffering beings. That's the reality of 
> existence. Some of this suffering is best addressed by resolving the causes 
> of suffering in the everyday world of forms, and some via better realization.
> 
> However EXISTENCE IS NOT SUFFERING even though the existence of many beings 
> unnecessarily includes a lot of suffering.
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 27, 2012, at 12:21 PM, R A Fonda wrote:
> 
> > It happens that 'all is unfolding as it must' has recently been a topic of 
> > discussion on a secular science forum, (by analogy to the inevitability of 
> > physical and chemical reactions to proceed according to initial conditions 
> > and experimental protocols) and it is my contention that the human future 
> > is not 'open' at all, but essentially ordained as a result of human actions 
> > in the past and present, albeit 'open', to a conditional degree, in the 
> > longer term, according to the reactions of humanity to the evolving 
> > circumstances in that future. 
> > 
> > Accordingly, one may well say that the past must be considered in order to 
> > understand current existence and future possibilities. Still, how is this:
> > 
> > On 11/27/2012 10:18 AM, Chris Austin-Lane wrote:
> > 
> >> horrific depiction of humanity's depravity ... childhood abuse of a New 
> >> York woman ... The systemic horror of the holocaust or Shoa ... the gifts 
> >> of law, train schedules, chemistry, and cultural varieties to butcher 
> >> millions of precious human lives.  this chopping of the world into us and 
> >> them trapped the perpetrators and the Jewish people into gross evil ... 
> >> divide our glorious reality and hence unleash the brutality that lurks in 
> >> human brains ...
> >> 
> > which I might call 'counting other people's suffering' different from 
> > 'counting other people's treasure', in regard to being here and now? There 
> > is also a personal element
> >> I had some history of abuse as a child.
> >> 
> > that personalizes the statement that:
> >> to blindly say that it is all ok 
> > as if (it seems to me) to say, that to believe in 'unfolding as it must' 
> > denies the sanctity of your suffering and that of the noble martyrs of the 
> > holocaust, who were all blameless victims, thus implicitly denying that 
> > there are antecedents to suffering, even though you write:
> >>  whatever causes it has
> >> 
> > I suggest that 'life is suffering' due to the nature of physical existence, 
> > if for no other reason than that human competition and exploitation is an 
> > essential part of evolution, and is likely to remain so in spite of 
> > (indeed, often because of) efforts to empower governments and institutions 
> > to 'do good', in contrast to personal charity arising out of karmic 
> > relations.
> > 
> > It seems to me that if and when we feel compelled to dwell on suffering 
> > (as, for instance, when it is affecting ourselves and kin) one response 
> > might be to try to understand the contention that, fundamentally, there ARE 
> > NO suffering beings. How can that be so, when we are actually experiencing 
> > the suffering, and the Buddha himself characterized life as suffering?
> > 
> > So, in response to the moderator's request:
> > 
> >   > Please ... begin a thread of discussion. <
> > 
> > I ask, who said that, "fundamentally there ARE NO suffering beings" and how 
> > might that seeming contradiction with "life is suffering" be resolved?
> > 
> > RAF
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>




------------------------------------

Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to