Buddhism: Individual Commitment - Essay Example

Buddhism: Individual Commitment Introduction The Buddha, also known in his time as Siddhatta Gotama, is unique in the religious and spiritual world for several reasons. First, the Buddha represents an ideal rather than a deity. More specifically, Buddhists seek to emulate the Buddha's life in certain respects and do not view him as an omniscient God. Second, the Buddha represents a type of self-enlightment as opposed to divine enlightenment. The power to "awaken" is controlled by the individual and does not require approval from a higher authority. Finally, Buddhism is a view of the individual and of life instead of a story of creation or an ultimate fate. It is true that Buddhists seek enlightenment, but the immediate philosophical and spiritual concerns are short-term rather than long term. In order to better understand the unique place held by Buddhism in the spiritual world, this essay will examine how the Buddha characterized the meaning of life, how his characterization was practiced at the individual level, and how Buddha's characterization of life has been misinterpreted by others. The World According to the Buddha As an initial matter, the Buddha was not particularly impressed with the physical world in which he existed. Although he has been reported to have lived a privileged life he was also keenly aware of the suffering of the less fortunate. As noted by Karen Armstrong, a leading religious scholar, "When he looked at human life, Gotama could see only the grim cycle of suffering, which began with the trauma of birth and proceeded inexorably to aging, illness, death, sorrow and corruption only to start again with the next life cycle" (2006: 274). His broad characterization of the meaning of life, therefore, was constructed of three main theoretical assumptions. The first assumption was that birth was a traumatic event, that these traumas persisted throughout life, and that the ultimate trauma was death. Life, as characterized in this manner, was an unhappy affair. The second assumption was that suffering was a varied and nuanced concept; more particularly, the Buddha saw suffering as a product of basic needs (such as food and shelter) as well as the product of human desires for such non-necessary things as excessive food, fame, and excessive wealth. Suffering, in this way, was defined differently by the Buddha than the concept is commonly understood in Western societies. This is because the Buddha linked notions of pain and longings or desires intimately and considered both to be types of suffering. The final assumption was that this life cycle was repetitive. The aforementioned suffering throughout a life was bound to be repeated over and over again unless someone found a way out. This was the Buddha's quest, to find a way for the individual to transcend the suffering, and it consumed the majority of his adult life. The Buddha attempted to transcend the suffering by positing that "these painful states must have their counterparts" (qtd. in Armstrong: 2006: 274) and elaborating by suggesting that "supposeI start looking for the unborn, unaging, deathless, sorrowless, incorrupt, and supreme freedom from all this bondage" (qtd. in Armstrong: 2006: 274). What began as a series of observations, about suffering and the human life cycle, developed into a full-blown thesis ripe for experimentation. The Buddha's thesis was that suffering could not exist in isolation, that it must result from some other underlying cause or causes, and that the counterpoints to pain and suffering must exist. A main theoretical obstacle was how to discover these counterparts; the Buddha solved this theoretical obstacle by relying of what to him was known as Nibbana or Nirvana. Translated literally, Nirvana means a "blowing out." For the Buddha, this meant the "blowing out" of the passions and the desires that led to suffering. This belief by the Buddha, that passions and desires caused suffering, was the next step in his characterization of life. It can thus be argued that the Buddha was most concerned with a practical approach at the individual level that could be employed to eliminate passions and desires in order to minimize or to eliminate suffering. This was not simply a belief system but a way of living life. It was highly individualistic, it was a permanent approach to life as a whole rather than abstract ideas or temporary lifestyle changes, and these goals could only be attained through affirmative action rather than passive belief. How the Buddha practiced or led his life is illustrative of Buddhism as understood by the Buddha himself. Buddhism as an Individual Lifestyle Although many people admire the principles espoused by or attributed to the Buddha, the manner by which he effected his spiritual quest seems sometimes harsh; more specifically, his ability to sever his own life and his own fate from that of his parents might strike one as cold and selfish. At twenty-nine years of age he left his parents, his wife, and his infant son. Looking back on this severing of familial relationships and bonds, as described by Armstrong, "he recalled that his parents wept bitterly when he left home. We are also told that before leaving he stole into his wife's bedroom while she was asleep to take one last look at her and their newborn son, as though he did not trust his resolve should she beg him to stay" (2006: 274). The Buddha thus practiced what he believed. As an individual he severed his most sacred and intimate relationships and this severance was final. He would not return, he would seek answers within himself, and any enlightenment attained would be attained from the self rather than from any external sources. As the Buddha traveled and reflected he developed a theory today referred to as the Middle Path; the Middle Path was a way in which to live that led to the elimination of suffering. Most fundamentally, the Middle Path is about a spiritual balance the guides all actions, thoughts, and the living of one's life. This balance rejects any form of extremism, whether of a positive or a negative nature. The extremes the Buddha used as references were extreme forms of self-indulgence and extreme forms of self-moderation. To take a simpler view, the Buddha was tuning his mind and his behavior to seek little but enough. The Middle Path also rejected what is today sometimes referred to as relativism; more specifically, the Buddha believed that certain things either existed or did not exist. He believed, in short, in absolute truths. He was therefore wary of such things as delusions because these delusions caused desires and passions which inevitably led to suffering. Finally, he believed that at some point, when the mind and the body found this perfect balance, that an awakening would occur, that all of the aforementioned counterparts would merge harmoniously, and that Nirvana would result. In sum, the goal was enlightenment, the pursuit of enlightenment was an individual endeavor, and great personal sacrifices were required; in the end, the Buddha was said to have achieved Nirvana. Interestingly, despite the fact that the Buddha's views are fairly well-known and fairly well-established, there remain contrary views that, in effect, pervert Buddha's deepest convictions. Contrary Views: Perversions of Buddha's Views As noted by Armstrong, "the Buddha is a challenge, because he is more radical than most of us. There is a creeping new orthodoxy in modern society that is sometimes called positive thinking" (2002: xxv). The problem to which Armstrong refers is that many scholars and laypersons attempt top reconcile Buddhism with such things as modern families, modern economic systems, and so-called enlightened notions of medicine and psychology. Millions around the world, such as people in Thailand and Sri Lanka, designate themselves as devout Buddhists while sharing almost nothing in common with the Buddha. The Thais, for instance, take pride in extended families, in family businesses, and in medications to cure physical and emotional ills. The Buddha would have had nothing to do with these things; quite, the contrary, as pointed out by Armstrong, his radical nature portrayed a lifestyle change and enduring commitment unmatched by modern-day scholars and ostensible adherhants. How can one know unless one lives it himself That is the crux of the problem, the theoretical and practical essence of the problem of modernist positive thinking as it pertains to the purest form of Buddhism, and we cannot experience Buddhism absent a severance. Severance is absent from modern-day Buddhism and it functions more as a cultural affiliation than a means to an end. Enlightment is not only elusive under such circumstances but impossible to attain. Conclusion In the final analysis, the Buddha was intellectually profound, radically committed to his quest for enlightenment, and concerned more with thoughts and actions at the individual level than a more generalized approach to life itself. It is doubtful, in a modern world wrought with can-do positivist thinking and relativism, whether the true essence of Buddhism can be practiced by more than a few people. The world is increasingly dependent, individuals are increasingly reliant and ambitious, and these structural realities are completely at odds with the theories and practices espoused by the Buddha. Were he alive today he would probably not be pleased with attempts to reconcile his beliefs with those of capitalism, social mobility, or pride and dignity in one's accomplishments. The Buddha would be a homeless man, perhaps deemed mentally unstable, and a blight upon civilized societies. The irony is painfully indicative of our own follies and misplaced values. True Buddhism is more illusion than reality in today's world. Works Cited Armstrong, K. (2002). Buddha. Orion Books, Ltd.: Phoenix. Armstrong, K. (2006). The Great Transformation: The World in the Time of Buddha, Socrates, Confucius, and Jeremiah. Atlantic Books: London Read More