JUNQUE

The Four Noble Truths (Part III on Buddhism)

 The very core of the Buddha’s teaching rests in what is known as the Four Noble Truths. I am going to list them and explain them one at a time. However, keep in mind, you could spend the rest of your life contemplating the four noble truths, so sorry if I forget something essential when discussing them. I’m only editing these once before posting. 

1. The first Noble Truth is life is dukkha. Dukkha is often translated as suffering which gives the impression that Buddhism is a negative philosophy or maybe even nihilistic. However, this is not so. More recently I have heard a more accurate translation of dukkha would be “unsatisfactory.” While many people can think of ways in which life is gratifying at times, they would hardly dismiss it totally suffering all the time. It’s important to know that the Buddha wasn’t being dismissive of life or it’s complexities. This Truth is referring to the fact that everything material is in flux and has an ephemeral nature; clinging to these things that will inevitably change, shift, morph, or die will ultimate leave one dissatisfied to say the least. It’s important to understand that the Buddha did not mean we are to deny ourselves pleasure, but he meant for us to have realistic expectations of life and so we can enjoy a moment for the time it lasts and not suffer by trying to make a good thing last longer than is natural. 

2. And that takes us to the second Noble Truth: the cause, or root, of dukkha is craving, clinging, or desire. If we desire something and then don’t get it, we’re left with a feeling of being unsatisfied. An example is hunger. However, it also works the opposite way too, if we want something to not happen and it does happen, then we’re left unhappy. Such as a loved one dying. This insight into our suffering allows us to live life in a more thoughtful way and ,as I said before, with realistic expectations. We don’t have to be apathetic, careless, or loveless in life though. It’s a delicate balance which we are to strive for; what is known as the Middle Way. I will discuss this later in more detail.

3. The third Noble Truth is that suffering ceases when craving ceases. If we do not desire after certain circumstances then we sever the ties which hold us to this world of delusions and the cycle of samsara. If we take the raw experience and live through it without trying to extend or prevent something from occurring, then we are living life in a healthier way. Also, it is worth mentioning that this does not mean you are going to be passive in life or a push-over; actually it’s the opposite, it takes a lot of inner courage and strength to live according the the fourth noble truth…

4. The fourth Noble Truth is that the Noble Eightfold Path is the way which leads away from dukkha; away from suffering and the unsatisfactory nature of this world. The Noble Eightfold Path is right view, right intention, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration.  The Noble Eightfold Path is also known as the Middle Way. There will be a more about what the Noble Eightfold Path means in a separate post.  

This is most definitely not thorough as it could be. The difficultly with writing about the four noble truths is that they are simple enough, but you could meditate on them for a lifetime. I appreciate questions. However, hold off on the questions about the Noble Eightfold Path. That’s a huge discussion in itself. 

31 Days of Terror

This month has my birthday and to celebrate a friend and I are going to watch a horror flick for each day of the month! :) Last night we watched “It’s Alive!” from 1973. Anyway, wish me luck on making it to the end of the month by watching all these films! Happy Birthday to me! :)

Philosophical Concepts (Part I): Solipsism

This is a fairly easy concept to grasp on the surface, but looking deeper it can cause some real dilemmas. 

Dictionary.com defines solopsism (within a philosophical context) as the theory that only the self exists or only the self’s existence can be proved. Throughout the history of philosophy in the West this has been an extreme belief help by few people. In the west, the origins of this thinking starts where most thinking does, with the Ancient Greeks.

A famous, Ancient Greek solipsist was Gorgias; Plato wrote a dialogue between Socrates and Gorgias which explores some of Gorgias’ assumptions of life. The three, philosophical problems which Gorgias placed before mankind to this day are among the most difficult and challenging for a philosopher to explore. He proposed that:

1) Nothing exists.

2) If something exists, it cannot be known.

3) If something exists and it can be known, it cannot be communicated. 

Basically this lays out the basic problems of metaphysics, epistemology, and philosophy of language all struggle with.

Gorgias believed in his own existence and nothing else. With most people, a red flag goes up in their mind somewhere and they go, “what the fuck? how does that work?” I hope anyone reading this has this problem. I do believe that all three qualms that Gorgias raised are to be taken seriously, however, let’s go with the assumption that you believe you are really the only thing which exists. Why then should I even finish writing this blog entry? It’s so real a problem because it poses practical difficulties, not something abstract. Think about this: if you believed truly and fully that you were the only person who existed, how would you live your life? How would you treat others; who, though we don’t know what they are, we know what they are not and what they are not is real. The whole branch of philosophy dedicated to ethics seems to crumble into meaningless ramblings (not that that would be new. haha). 

Since, Gorgias’ time we’ve had many extreme skeptics come our way such as Descartes with his famous cogito ergo sum and that great Scotsman Hume. Hume (heavily influenced by John Locke and Bishop Berkeley, two empiricists) would spend hours in his study “doing philosophy” and like Gorgias he thought people took too much for granted when it comes to what exists and what are reliable means of discovering what is real. He criticized pure reason and the experience of the senses as being not definitive enough or bring us closer to certainty on their own. However, Hume did separate “doing philosophy” with living a normal life; he would go play sports and eat just like anyone else. He was considered a hypocrite by some for denying that humans can directly know anything exists and yet would live his life the same as most. A last note on Hume, he isn’t considered to be a solipsist techinically I think, but he has plenty in common with them, so I tossed him in this blog. 

Personally, I can see both sides. Let’s say you’re a solipsist or extreme skeptic of some sort and you believe on you exist. Ok, you’ve made that decision… now what? Honestly, nothing would practically change. Any change that would come about would have to be you choosing to change how you live. However, if you are content with life as it is and you come to adopt a solipsist perspective, compartmentilizing your life seems like the only thing you can do to live a normal life. Nothing really changes if you adopt a solipsist perspective because no matter what you do in the world, you don’t believe in it’s existence and you cannot dislodge yourself from the illusionary world we are a part of. So, I can see where someone in pursuit of truth may end up a solipsist, but there is no real point to changing anything about yourself if you’re comfortable. 

Closing notes: 

There are very few solipsists or skeptics (in the philosophical sense) in the world. Just consider how many people are religious; even though the number of non-religious persons is growing, that group is definitely a minority. However…

Solipsism is a perspective that does not have much allure, but will always shake the very foundations of philosophy.