BUDDHISM AND THE FOUR NOBLE TRUTHS

If somebody asked me what caused Gautama Buddha to seek wisdom and enlightenment, I would have to say the existence of suffering. It stands as the first noble truth he preached. Rather than seeing life in this world as a combination of good and bad experiences or pleasurable and disagreeable events, he focused on the negative. Then, he went ahead to pinpoint desire as the source of suffering, the second noble truth. Third, Buddha figured that to remove suffering one had to remove the source, namely, desire. Finally, to accomplish that, Buddha taught “the Eightfold Path consisting of: right view; right aspiration; right speech; right action; right livelihood; right effort; right mindfulness; and right meditation” (Abe, 1993, p. 75).

Here, I will not deal with the interpretation of those politically or religiously correct instructions. Suffice it to say, they set up the intellectual and pragmatic framework for those on the path to liberation, known as Nirvāna. Once a person reaches that state, suffering is no more, or so the Buddha says. To get there, the key is to realize that there is no entity who is the subject of desire and, therefore, of suffering.

As maintained by Buddhism, we do not have a soul separate from or included in the parts that make up our bodies. According to them, we do not have a permanent self, but are just a fleeting and temporary succession of forms that trick us into believing we are real. As a result, once we believe in the “I,” we believe in possessions or things that are “mine,” things that would bring suffering if we lost them. We also acquire a desire for things “we” do not own, but “others” have. Not getting them makes us sad, sometimes angry. In summary, once we accept the “I,” looking out for number one is the order of the day. Suffering crops up, when we do not get our way (Abe, 1993, pp.75-76).

I have the same difficulty with Buddhism I have with Absolutistic Hinduism. If we are born to this world, why not experience it to the fullest. Why not embrace the full range of human emotions. Take the good with the bad, rather than choose some form of escapism. When it is time for joy, be joyful. When it is time for sorrow, be sad. Laugh and cry all the way to your grave. Accept your human condition. It is much better than that of other animals.

Suffering exists. Fine, I accept the first noble truth. On examining the second noble truth closely, however, I do not think desire is the cause of all suffering. If there is a toothache, my desire to be healthy does not cause the pain. The source of the pain is a cavity, or some other dental anomaly. It is true, very true, that a good disposition and a positive attitude help in those situations. Better yet, if you can dissociate your-self from the pain. The no-self doctrine comes in handy in those circumstances. However, most people cannot attain that state, whether or not they are in pain. It is an unnatural state of “being,” or should I say non-being. Go to people who are living in intense pain because of cancer or some other terminal condition. Offer them a choice between the Eightfold Path and no-self approach to end suffering, and an effective and efficient supply of drugs. Which do you think most people will choose? Which group do you think will experience less pain?

Buddhism does not believe the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, but I do. Irrespective of whether souls exist and go on to live an afterlife, it is self-evident that a self exists in every human being. The self is the entity that exerts executive control in regards to our mental states. He or she also governs our relationship with the outside world. It is the seat of the will. Our behavior does not just happen or just flows. “Our” behavior is the product of choices “we” make. The self is also the seat of consciousness, what keeps us informed of our internal states. When we feel pain, it is because the pain is real and because we are real. The pain can be located somewhere in our bodies, and we can be located somewhere in the real world.

Another possible Buddhist fallacy is the belief that Nirvāna without death is possible. Many people believe that with death comes the cessation of all suffering. If there is no life after death, that is true; but Buddhists believe death will not do the job. Instead, they believe we are reborn forever unless we attain Nirvāna. Therefore, Nirvāna becomes our salvation from the wheel of life and death. My questions are, “If I reach Nirvāna, where am I, and in what kind of state? Since eternity is at hand, what am I suppose to do with forever?”

If Nirvāna means unconsciousness, it is the same as being dead; but if I am still conscious once I reach Nirvāna, suffering will not cease unless I find myself miraculously in a state of grace. Perhaps existing in a womb-like environment where I feel whole, lacking nothing, and wanting nothing. However, and I must come back to this, would it be a good thing to spend eternity like that? After a while, I would want out of that womb. After a while, I would want out of that prison. Yes, a womb is a comfortable prison, but a prison nevertheless.

Okay, so we are back to this material world. Let me sum up by saying that seeking Nirvāna while alive and conscious is comparable to deadening the senses. It amounts to escaping from the real world, a great skill to use if you find yourself a prisoner of war in Vietnam, or in the hands of terrorists, or in some other hopeless situation. If you cannot escape from your captors and their methods of torture, then escape from the world. Annihilate the self. You have my blessings. Otherwise, experience the world as most people do. Well, maybe not. Learn something from Buddhism, and do not become so attached to material things. Be more spiritual. Cultivate a good conscience. Like Jesus said, “Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.”

In spite of my criticism, I owe Buddha for helping me in my religious journey. After studying Buddhism years ago, those teachings helped me adopt a more serene attitude. My desires became less demanding, and my contentment with what I already had grew accordingly. An interesting observation is that my self did not shrink or disappear. Instead, it grew larger. By that, I do not mean my ego. I did not become more egocentric, on the contrary. My self expanded in the sense that I attained greater identification with the universe, or Universal Soul, if there is one. Instead of feeling like “little me” looking out into the world, I began experiencing a great presence behind me and my two eyes. It was as if the main computer had taken over for a terminal in a network. Whether I owe that change of consciousness to Buddhism or to Absolutistic Hinduism does not really matter. I owe them both for their contribution to my religious education, and I thank them both. May God bless all who seek enlightenment.

Bibliography: Abe, M. (1993). Buddhism. In Arvind Sharma (Ed.), Our Religions (pp. 71-137). New York: Harper Collins Publishers.