Dukkha - are we all suffering?

Sören Kierkegaard was a Danish philosopher, born 200 years ago. He was grown up in a depressing environment. His father had a bad temper, and was often in a bad mood. Probably this conditions influenced Sören for the rest of his life.

 But anyways his books are read all over the world: It seems that suffering is known everywhere.

The pali word Dukkha, that Buddha used, cannot just be translated into suffering, It can also mean "stress", "anxiety", or "dissatisfaction". The meaning is quite broad.
For instance; we get dissatisfied when things change, and with time they always will. And we all know what the world "stress" means.

I seems we are we never fully satisfied. Is that true? Was Buddha right or was suffering much more common in his time, about 500 b. c.?

 Perhaps we are satisfied for a short time, but soon the normal life begins. It seem that those of us who are looking for happiness outside of ourselves are in the long run doomed to fail.....

We desire things, sex, fame or pleasure.  But we are not free when we have those desires.

Kierkegaard wrote that of three different levels of morality. To desire pleasure is the esthetic level, the next level is the religious life, but Kierkegaard didn't like priests who said one thing and did another.
The best it so live an ethical life. But then we have to be free and make choices as individuals.

Kierkegaard was one of the first existentialists.

But he had his roots in christianity.

Another philosopher, Schopenhauer, was also raise in a dysfunctional family....

He called the power who moves us forward, makes us want to have a career, to have status and money to buy things for the "will to live".  This Will controls us and leads ús to futile things and to wars.

That looks very Buddhistic to me. Schopenhauer was also influenced by Buddhism and felt related to it. It´s not clear though if he was it when he wrote his central work "Life as Will and representation"

Schopenhauer didn't meditate, but he played a flute, and he wrote that music and art can give us a short break from the "Will to live".

But he was a very pessimistic character. Neither he or Kierkegaard had the method of mindfulness...

Some say that Buddhism is pessimistic too. Other mean that it is realistic.

But it anyway suggests a way to cool down; mindfulness. And not just as a practise, and not just as words or theory, but as a lifestyle. That is also a desire, but a skilful one... Probably dukkha will not leave, but you will have a method to handle it. You then don't have to run away from it by consuming or by drugs....



But remember, you don't have to be a Buddhist to practice mindfulness.
Just do it,  first for your own sake, and see what happens...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Cora Diamond on eating animals - with the help of Wittgenstein´s ideas

Image
Cora Diamond is a new name for me, even if she has worked as a professor in Philosophy in the states for a long time and is still  teaching at the university of Virginia, even she is over 80 years old. She has written a lot about Wittgenstein and that has helped her to express her view of the topic. Although she, like Wittgenstein,  has lived in a hut in Norway - and actually brought Tractatus with hes - she seems to be different and for sure more glad than W. Anyways, its W: s writings that interests her and especially his critics of metaphysics and ethics in philosophy. As it is said in Tractacus  : " Whereof one  cannot speak , thereof one must be silent." And of ethics philosophy should not speak - why? Is it like in Buddhism - its better to sit in silence and let know yourself, than to speculate about what will happen when we die? But for sure there ethical guidelines in Buddhism,  but the behaviors is often named skilful, not good (or bad). Another
Read more

I think, therefore I am NOT

Image
So Descartes was wrong. He said that he could doubt everything about himself except that he was thinking. That proved that he existed. The word "I" is the central point here. What does it mean? Perhaps we are sure that we know the answer. Is it the thoughts? In that case - where are you when you aren't thinking? Is it your job, your title? In that case - what happens if you loose your job or change job? Is it your house, your nation? Under my course to be a mindfulness instructor, the teacher, Ola Schenström, made us ask to each other; "Who are you?" After each answer the question was repeated by the questioner.We soon discovered that there were no end to the answers - or maybe an adequate end could be; "I don't know."Or maybe; "It seems I have no essence." Other thinkers have come to the same conclusions; Buddha, Sartre and more recently Damasio and Parfit. Sartre, for instance, has said that we are the sum of our actions. We ha
Read more

Wittgenstein and Buddha -buddies?

Image
Ludwig Wittgenstein, the famous philosopher, reflected in the posthumously published  book "Philosophical Investigations" about the picture above; Is it a hare or duck?  He meant that we make, or must make, a statement what it is. And I suppose he meant that we often or always has to interpret the world around us. But two different interpretations can both be right! Language and thoughts controls what we see.....   You can compare with the picture of a glass. Half empty or half empty?  Who decides? Yes, it's you... And whatever you say is right.  But you can be aware of what you think. That can say more of yourself than of the glass....  You can be aware of that you always do interpretations of things that happens.  If you have a pessimistic or a naive point of view, you can be aware of the view and your statements.  Buddha and Wittgenstein were both aware of that different persons uses different perspectives.  But Buddha spoke about the "right 
Read more