/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15547581]

>All suffering stems from desire
Is this true?

[Anonymous No.15547606]

>>15547581
What role does desire play in physical and chronic pain?

[Anonymous No.15547614]

>>15547581
>All suffering stems from desire
Such a dumb, meaningless statement. The analytics were right.

[Anonymous No.15547616]

Desire that leads to impermanent contentment, yes.

[Anonymous No.15547624]

>>15547614
lmao the analytics are the STEMcels of philosophy

[Anonymous No.15547631]

[Anonymous No.15547634]

>>15547624
That's right.

[Anonymous No.15547645]

>>15547581
Yes. Suffering is defined by your desires. Of course, suffering is not the same as pain, they are two different things.

[Anonymous No.15547657]

>>15547581
Yes, and everything secondary to that. Such as not knowing what to do about it, or making sense of a web of things

[Anonymous No.15547660]

>>15547606
None.
Pain is physical. Suffering is a mental state in which you desire something which you do not have, in this case the desire for freedom from pain. A fine distinction, but an important one.

[Anonymous No.15547695]

>don’t have any desires
>just be an inanimate object
What a dumb religion.

[Anonymous No.15547771]

>>15547695
it's more about dominating your desires and understanding them for what they are, you must put yourself above them

[Anonymous No.15547785]

>>15547660
But the desire comes after the suffering in that case

[Anonymous No.15547793]

Read this.

https://www.learnreligions.com/life-is-suffering-what-does-that-mean-450094

[Anonymous No.15547803]

>>15547771
>desire to end all desires
Seems like a catch 22

[Anonymous No.15547827]

the end of all wanting is all i’ve been wanting

[Anonymous No.15547868]

>>15547581
All I have is hope and all I do is crush it, I hope for the wrong things, and I don’t ever know when I’m hoping for something that’s right/real. I really don’t know what to do with it, everything I do leaves fingerprints and that includes indecision, it’s all an exercise in soap stains.

[Anonymous No.15547885]

>>15547660
You can only feel pain because you experience yourself as an individual, because you desire to separate yourself from nature. that was easy, have another?

[Anonymous No.15548047]

>>15547634
>implying /sci/ isn't just 50% race-related nature vs nurture debates, 40% squabbling over the importance of IQ and the last 10% undergrads looking for help on their assignments

[Anonymous No.15548054]

>>15547803
It is, in a way. It is sorta like a koan...

[Anonymous No.15548063]

>>15547785
No, the desire comes after the physical pain hits, or if you see it coming you desire to NOT have that pain you see on the way (like having your foot caught while standing on railroad tracks and seeing a train approach.

[Anonymous No.15548142]

>>15547645
>>15547660
I hate you and everyone else who twists around and redefines words to suit their needs.
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/suffer
>to undergo or feel pain or distress
The state of suffering is the state of being in pain. It's not intrinsically connected to your desire to alleviate that pain.

[Anonymous No.15548178]

>>15547581
It at least requires the capacity for it. Imagine a creature that was immune to pleasure. In what manner can it suffer?

>>15548047
>forgetting /x/ posters
it's 48% pol, 48% x, each of which think the other is the "true sci" while the remaining 4% do homework

[Anonymous No.15548475]

Yeah, the Buddha's explanation of this is pretty convincing in my opinion. There's going to be some sperg throwing a fit because of MUH DANIEL DENNET MUH BRAINS AREN'T REAL, but no one gives a shit what retards think.

>>15547803
Enlightenment is no longer feeling, it's no longer being attached. You don't seriously define yourself by your favorite Game of Thrones episodes, which colored S()ylent you prefer, or where you wagecuck, right?

[Anonymous No.15548496]

>>15547606
Buddha said avoiding pain is impossible, but suffering can be overcome

[Anonymous No.15548529]

>>15547614
Yup, it's a tautology. You desire to not suffer

[Anonymous No.15548533]

>>15547581
Yes, but the futility of having such desires now and then are not the same. We have other possibilities to alter lives for the better than they had in Buddha's time.

[Anonymous No.15548542]

>>15548529
No, you desire to only desire those desires that are conducive to ending desire.

[Anonymous No.15548546]

>>15548533
Like?

[Anonymous No.15548574]

>>15547581
>if someone's beating the shit out of you, the only reason you're suffering is because you desire to not be getting the shit beat of you, bro! just enjoy it bro!

[Anonymous No.15548576]

>>15547660
No. Mental pain is very similar to physical pain, but it tends to be less intense at any one moment but more long-lasting.

[Anonymous No.15548587]

>>15547885
You don't have to desire to feel. That was easy. Next.

[Anonymous No.15548603]

>>15547606
In Buddhism? Pain and suffering are two different things. "Dukkha" gets translated as suffering, but I think that's a little extreme. Dukkha is the unpleasantness caused by impermanence. Physical pain, in the sense of bodily damage (chronic pain being persistent bodily damage), is part of this by association with impermanence (your legs are impermanent, so they can break, that hurts) but it's ultimately just part of Dukkha.

So how does this relate to suffering? You suffer when you're in pain (Buddha's and enlightened beings feel pain) because you want to, ultimately. At some level, it feels good. That desire to feel good from your pain leads you to suffer. This sounds odd when we talk about physical pain (you obviously don't want to break your leg), but the next time you feel bad, focus on what you're feeling. Really look at yourself. Wallowing in your own misery feels good even though it hurts. You don't have to. Those bad feelings are Empty, just like all things, and that means that they go away, and that means that you can choose when they do.

There's plenty of attestation of people doing this with physical, even chronic, pain. The physical pain, like all things, is Empty, so end it. But what if just knowing that doesn't fix it? Then you meditate. Meditation can do many things, even make pain go away. If you want a blunt example, look at Wim Hof, who uses Meditation to swim in ice cold water and has set world records for doing so. Part of the reason that Boomer hippy dippy Eastern cults got traction is because Meditation can make pain, even chronic pain, go away. The Buddha said to investigate his teachings, and try them for yourself, so why not give it a shot?

>>15548533
Brain surgery, lobotomies, and drugs don't stop suffering. Dukkha is intrinsic to existence in a world where there is impermanence. If you dope someone up, they still suffer because the drugs are impermanent, the high doesn't last. No high ever will.

[Anonymous No.15548605]

>>15548475
>I'll define not desiring into existence. That oughta do it!

[Anonymous No.15548614]

>>15548574
When you realize that pain is Empty, you realize that you can make it stop. That means stopping someone from hitting you. You don't have to let them hit you.

>but buddhism is pacifisticalist!
There is no prohibition on violence in Buddhism. Violence =/= killing

[Anonymous No.15548628]

All suffering stems from expectations. You expect a life without pain and you suffer. You expect happiness and you’ll be disappointed at some level. Don’t expect anything at all and you will never be disappointed aka suffer.

[Anonymous No.15548632]

>>15548605
That's not what I said. At all. Existence has nothing to do with desiring, impermanence does.

[Anonymous No.15548815]

>>15548546
Democracy offers far more possibilities than the politics Buddha decried in his time. Social hierarcy is a lot weaker and less oppressive than the Hindu casts of his India. We have far more means of dealing with the possibility of sudden premature deaths. We have far better venues of far better education. We have far more ability to improve our own lives, as well as the lives of others. We have far more to say regarding whether we'll be pulled into war or not, and our leaders need far more justification, and we're far likely to shit ourselves to death. We simply have far more power over our surroundings and lives, and the value of that needs to be weighted against the teachings of Buddhism, which arose in answer to conditions we have no real ability to understand given how different they are from our reality, which is utterly different from anything Buddha could ever have imagined. There's value in the teachings, but potentially less now than there used to be.
Consider that most people nowadays will never put much thought into Buddhism, same as then. Lives can still be improved through modern means, in ways which were not possible in Buddha's time. The question then is: is it better to give up on modern benefits, or is it better to work with the tools we've invented since? Of course, a Buddhist doesn't say "don't use modern vaccines." But a Buddhist wouldn't invent a modern vaccine either.
>>15548603
We're not all pill popping and depressed. And in Buddha's time, there wouldn't have been any therapy, pills, any studies into the neurology of depression, while we're pretty much sure to solve the problem of depression at some point. As for Buddhism, there is still very little chance of a practitioner to cease suffering altogether, since very few will ever be Arahant. A lighter version of Buddhism to deal with the worst excesses is probably very useful, but the benefits of progress are much greater now than they were. I don't have a definite answer, but it should be worth considering.

[Anonymous No.15548825]

>>15548815
>shit ourselves to death *in a military campaign.

[Anonymous No.15548866]

>>15548815
>there wouldn't have been any therapy, pills, any studies into the neurology of depression
None of those stop suffering, at best they do nothing and at worst they only increase it.

>while we're pretty much sure to solve the problem of depression at some point
No, we won't. At best you'll just stop some neurological phenomenon and another will crop up.

>A lighter version of Buddhism to deal with the worst excesses is probably very useful
Yes, it's called being a Layman, this was invented 2.5k years ago.

>progress
Doesn't exist. At best you're making more complicated machines to not solve human problems, at worst you're just making more human problems.

You cannot solve the problems that arrive from impermanence through impermanent means. You cannot solve human problems with technological solutions, at best you can do nothing to change the situation and at worst you just cause more problems. Avoiding solving human problems just leads to more human problems.

[Anonymous No.15548872]

>>15548815
The buddha was responding to an ontological problem that can't be solved by secular forms of government, or any form of government for that matter.

[Anonymous No.15549113]

>>15548866
>None of those stop suffering, at best they do nothing and at worst they only increase it.
Utter nonsense. Suffering arises in response to the changing conditions of the world, and we have more power, both individually and collectively, to control many of those changes now. For some, the amount of control we expect to wield has also increased accordingly, and they can suffer just as much from less serious undesirable conditions than what Buddha faced, but that's far from a universal truth.
>No, we won't. At best you'll just stop some neurological phenomenon and another will crop up.
Depression is a neurological phenomenon, and there's no reason to think there's some kind of cosmic balance that will invent new ways for us to feel bad if he solve one way of feelig bad. That's like saying that we've found new and equal ways to experience physical pain after inventing painkillers.
>Doesn't exist
Au contraire. Modern science progresses in ways which weren't possible in Buddha's days, which is why the practical value of Buddhism needs to be re-examined.
>You cannot solve the problems that arrive from impermanence through impermanent means
Buddhism is rarely a solution either, and for most people, going to a hospital to be cured through modern procedures is better than meditating on their imminent and painful demise, and they had virtually no such option in Buddha's time. Meditating on our inevitable death is still valuable, but we have less reason to fear that we'll die prematurely.
>>15548872
As far as I'm concerned, ontogical problems are worthless thought experiments if divorced from the conditions we live in.

[Anonymous No.15549356]

>>15547581
Yeah. Suffering of Pain is desire to not feel it.

[Anonymous No.15549454]

>>15548603
>Brain surgery, lobotomies, and drugs don't stop suffering. Dukkha is intrinsic to existence in a world where there is impermanence. If you dope someone up, they still suffer because the drugs are impermanent, the high doesn't last. No high ever will.
It could theoretically, except that the person will eventually die.

[Anonymous No.15550018]

>>15549454
Mass suicide doesn't fix suffering. Ignoring reincarnation, the world continues after you kill yourself, so it doesn't even solve the problem, you just abdicate having to take part in the process.

>>15549113
You're still missing the point: You cannot use technology to stop suffering, because suffering comes from impermanence. No matter how many bandages you stack on, you can still get hurt. All you end up doing is creating more intricate ways of suffering. This doesn't mean technology is bad, it means that using it as a means to try and run away from your problems just introduces new ones. The invention of the firearm didn't end war, it just means that people can now die by gunfire.

Even if you upload your brain to the iCloud or whatever and live in perpetual coked out techno-bliss, the problem is still there because everything is impermanent. Eventually the sun will go out, or an asteroid will hit your iCloud datacenter, or aliens will come by and raid you for parts, or whatever. Impermanence is, therefore suffering will be.

[Anonymous No.15550714]

"Attachment" is a better word than "desire"

[Anonymous No.15551414]

I have suffered because of people judging me for not desiring the things they desire themselves.

[Anonymous No.15551424]

>>15549113
>As far as I'm concerned, ontogical problems are worthless thought experiments if divorced from the conditions we live in.

There's nothing closer to experience than the experience of impermanence and the eternal arising and passing-away of phenomena, which is the principle of attachment and suffering.

[Anonymous No.15551432]

>>15549113
>Au contraire. Modern science progresses in ways which weren't possible in Buddha's days, which is why the practical value of Buddhism needs to be re-examined.

No, democracy can't cure the inherent emptiness of all phenomena, your understanding of Buddhism is half-baked.

[Anonymous No.15551835]

Desire will induce suffering only insofar as the thing desired is temporal, mutable, or impermanent. True happiness and contentment is found in the Eternal, and desire for that will never end in suffering.
>But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

>I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.