[Buddha-l] buddhism and brain studies

[Jamie Hubbard]

Jackhat1 at aol.com wrote:
> a message dated 11/12/2008 2:22:05 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
> jhubbard at email.smith.edu writes:
>  
> .Why should I let somebody convince me that, contrary to my  
> (incontrovertible) feeling, I really am suffering most of the time?  
> Besides you in opposition to your own "experience" of things (reputable  
> the best source of knowledge, according to the Buddhist camp) *and*  
> putting you on that slippery slope to the monastic life, it just seems  
> like a lot of hard work for relatively little return, especially if  
> things are pretty good for you already<
> --------
> That's a good question. The Dalai Lama gave one answer as, if things are  
> good for you, keep doing what you are doing and forget Buddhism.
>   
This makes good sense, except that I see no need to "forget Buddhism." I 
even hanker after the monastic life sometimes, and the rest of the 
package is sublime as well. You don't need to be suffering or 
dis-satisfied to enjoy sitting quietly up in Barre or down in Nilambe. 
And the art, philosophy, food, rituals, manuscripts, and crazy folks are 
all way more enjoyable than most other things one could do. . . hard to 
believe they pay me to do this. . .
>  
> Two other answers. First, a daily meditation practice dealing with minor  
> problems such as the pain in your knee teaches you to deal with the bigger  
> problems we all have such as illness, death of a loved one, etc. Part of  dealing 
> with these minor problems involve recognizing them and delving into  them. 
>   
Of course recognizing problems is the first step to solving them. So I 
would suggest that sitting in a chair (if you must sit) would be kinda 
an obvious solution to the minor problem, but I don't see much of a 
connection between solving lots of minor problems and being able to 
handle the really big ones, at least in terms of "training."
> Second, most of us have instances of minor suffering everyday that  causes us a 
> problem but that we don't recognize as suffering. For instance,  someone cuts in 
> line in front of us at the grocery store; the phone rings  while we are 
> eating dinner; we have had a disagreement with a relative that  has been in the 
> background for years. It is like our having  a medical problem such as a low 
> grade tooth infection or some vitamin  deficiency. We don't recognize we have it 
> and also don't recognize what a  healthy life feels like. 
>   
Well, unless the low-grade annoyances really drive you nuts, I would 
suggest that replacing the occasional annoyance at the grocery store 
with a huge meditation practice schedule is a bit overkill. Again, this 
is just anecdotal but I don't know too many people who get too overly 
bothered by the sorts of things you mention. Returning to the set-point 
theory, even the big disasters that befall folks usually don't make 'em 
crazy. I mean-- haven't you known innumerable people that have lost a 
loved one or gotten terminally ill yet came back and continued on? Among 
my family and friends, birth, old age, and sickness is an entirely 
normal sequence, and only the idiot would think that either a) they 
should get upset (suffer) about it, and b) only a bigger idiot would 
think that they could beat the rap. . . if you are born, the sentence is 
old age, sickness, and death. Live with it :)

Jamie