[Buddha-l] Re: The Buddha, an 'emotional weakling'? What are the "joys of living"?

[Stefan Detrez]

2006/6/24, Benito Carral <bcarral at kungzhi.org>:
> Say,  if  personal gratification is so kilesatic, how

> > come you post so many posts to the Buddha-L?
>
>    Someone  has  to  remember that enjoying samsara and
> indulging   in  attachments  has  nothing  to  do  with
> Buddhism.


Maybe as a monk, yes, but the BUddha also said that the monasterial life can
only flouish under the right economic circumstances. I guess some
consumerism is conditio sine qua non the monastery can exist. If everyone
went ascetic, there wouldn't be much left of or for the sangha, would there?
I think you've misunderstood the Dhamma: you can indulge in attachments, but
know (imperative) that they are transient. When you realize that, there's
not much in the way for becoming happy. 'Oh namo tasso bhagavato, my steamed
salmon with garlic and fresh mint is finished: all's well that ends well. It
was good and it might come back. Whatever happens, I enjoyed it'.

   I  find it amazing how the Dharma is degenerating in
> Westerners'  hands.  I  think  that  people  used to be
> humble enough to admit their weaknesses, but we tend to
> be  so proud that glorify our weaknesses and see faults
> in the Dharma.


If you nostalgically think that it used to be better before, I think few, if
any historical sources will confirm that. One major fault I see in a
particular reading of the Dhamma is that you have to become a subliminal
masochist because who knows you might give the impression of being attached
to something. If you play the ascetic convincingly, people will look up to
you for such mastery, and at the same time look down on you for such
compulsive attitude. I guess you find the hungersuffering and
nothingpossessing African sitting in the dessert exemplary for the Buddhist
life. Suppose such a person would say he's a Buddhist. Would you look up to
him/her?

   About "personal gratification," see my next comment.
>
> > It  seems that you somehow experience lust to want to
> > post and get responses.
>
>    As  I  said  you before, you can see a lot of things
> that are not actually present, that's called _illusion_
> and it is something that we Buddhists care about.


So what you are saying is that I live in some illusion because I see beauty
where there is beauty and joy where there is joy? Because I shamelessly
admit that I like to indulge in my primary needs? That the best memories
I've had in my life were all instilled by a certain voluntary 'attachment'?
That non-attachment is the letting go of the human natural fascination for
knowledge and pleasure? You think YOU are free because you've trimmed down
you're whole life and world vision to a convenient scheme that fits the
Buddhist matrix? How tough must it be for you, that something (like sex, for
example) can be fun, yet you're supposed to think that it will cause ruin
and degeneration in the three worlds?
Maybe I don't see what's present in my view, but I can surely say there are
a lot of things absent in yours.

Cheers,

Stefan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20060625/520cb626/attachment.html