The following is a response to kahuna6's comments on "East Meets West"...
Unforunately there are plenty of self-professed "insert any religion here" followers. I would argue that unless they apply the tenets of whatever religion with diligence, discipline and uncorrupted intent as evidenced through their actions, then they are nothing more than hypocritical charlatans. And I would also argue that this encompasses a large percentage of any religion's adherents. (See kahuna6's column on Pat Robertson at the Kahuna International link on this site.)
I disagree on Christianity being a coherent philosophy namely because the first principle on which it is based, faith, is wholly irrational. The foundation of faith crumbles when rigorous analytical thought is brought to bear against it. If Christianity is taken as a philosophy without the requirement of faith in Jesus as the son of God (or the existence of divine miracles as you mention), then I would agree that it has some utility in mitigating the effects of the human condition. But without faith, Christianity loses it means towards its end and thus becomes impotent as a viable spiritual vehicle to end human suffering in the way in which it professes: ascendancy to heaven.
I agree with you that Buddhism is more mystical in some derivations namely Theravada and Tibetan Buddhism, but other traditions are completely devoid of mysticism like Zen Buddhism despite its pop culture reputation for the opposite. It is imperative that we not confuse the human manifestation of the religion through formal rituals and practices with the fundamental premises on which those rituals and practices are based. One is an extension of the other, but they are not the same.
I do agree with you that our desires as humans, due to our suffering, urge us to push the tenets of a religion or philosophy farther than they are meant to go in an effort to end our suffering. This leads to delusion and further suffering when those efforts do not conjure the desired effects exactly because we expect too much from those efforts. A vicious spiral develops accelerating us towards delusion and away from truth, which most people never reverse despite their best efforts in whatever religion to which they adhere.
I disagree that the cause (suffering) is the condition (the human condition). Suffering is a subset of the human condition which consists of two things: the act of suffering and the desire to end suffering. The human condition is the result of the act of suffering leading to the desire to end suffering. It is a self-perpetuating cycle. It follows that if you eliminate the cause you eliminate the condition. Buddhism's focus is the elimination of the cause (through practice of the fourth Noble Truth) thus alleviating the condition (the first three Noble Truths), a classic logical solution provided you we on the first principles as stated in the Four Noble Truths.
The Fourth Noble Truth, as the path presented in Buddhism to overcome the reality of the other three Noble Truths, is certainly up for some debate as I believe that every religion offers their own path leading to the elimination of suffering (to use the vernacular of Buddhism). This is a personal choice based on one's individual assessment criteria as to the validity of the path chosen to reach the conclusion desired. My criteria happen to be reason and truth which are not mutually exclusive. If one chooses a faith based path, I would ask "why?". I have not met one person who could provide a reasoned, persuasive answer other than "I just believe" or "I know it to be true", both of which are just silly and ultimately are given to avoid the intellectual rigour required to answer the question.
5 comments:
I don't actually think we really disagree here even on the points you so clearly delineated. I don't believe that Christianity is a coherent philosophy. I believe that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is. Okay there is some dispute as to whether or not he actually existed but my understanding of the historical evidence leans towards his actual existence as a man. His personal philosophy, minus all the miracles, ascension to heaven, resurrection nonsense, is a very coherent philosophy and moral code that has nothing to do with faith. Have you read the gnostic gospels? Particularly Thomas? Even Mark never considered Christ a God. It was primarily John and Paul who pressed the God issue. Thomas Jefferson actually took scissors to a bible and cut out all the magic stuff and compiled the philosophy of Jesus Christ which in my opinion is the most coherent and moral guide to dealing with your fellow man. Buddhist philosophy is great andn I appreciate it as well (particularly zen) but it tends to self absorption. Adherents can easily fall into the trap of turning a blind eye to suffering believing that each much solve his pain on his own. A cop out but one easily fallen into.
Even zen which reached it's pinnacle in Japan has its mystical component in Shinto, historically. Ever wonder why you clap at the beginning of Aikido class? It's a shinto ritual to acknowledge the spirit of the kamiza. That's hardly logical.
And I don't never meant to say that life itself is the cause of suffering. That would be macabre. I believe the desire to rid life of suffering is the cause of suffering. What's that saying... Misery in mandatory. Suffering is not. It's just been my observation that folks who suffer the most are those who focus on their own pain. This has certainly been true in the dozens of hospitals I've spent time in. For myself, I feel my separation most when I feel distinctive. But at the same time, I could not bear living without distinction. I have no resolution to this.
Lastly, I'd just like to say that faith isn't exactly easy. Take martial arts. When I'm teaching, there's a period of time, my students are just going to have to trust and have faith in me. I'm quite sure that in the beginning, before they can see the framework, my students wonder if I'm talking out of my ass. It's only through that faith can we begin to build the skills that can later but combined into something coherent. Even then, they won' treally know if it works unless they've been in a few fights. Not one, but a few. But it's also man's tendency to believe. Look at all the garbage being taught out there and how many people fervently believe. The reality is sometimes faith is hard and sometimes it's easy.
It's not that people cop out when they choose faith. And it's not that faith can't coexist with intellectual rigor. Buddhist hardly has a intellectually rigorous tradition. In fact, such rigor is simply not native to Asian thought. Was it Proust who said that faith is the beginning of reason? Man chooses what is easy. It could be faith. It could be skepticism. But that's why magic is popular. It takes the result out of an individual's hands.
I have not read the gnostic gospels though I do know their extraordinary history...to me this history proves the worst with regard to the Christian church as an entity. And I agree, as I stated in the post, you must separate the church from the philosophy, (CS Lewis' Mere Christianity for example) but even when you do, I do not find much of value in it other than "treat others as you would have them treat you". As I think you would agree, we live in a Hobbesian world with little use for altruistic philosophies and I believe Chrisitianity is just too unrealisitic to have much value.
Have you ever watched Joel O'Steen the TV preacher based in Houston? His presentation of the Christian philosophy is about as coherent as I have ever found until he starts the "praise God" thing. Check him out...he also has a book out, something like "Your Best Life Now".
An aside here...The only Aikido class I have ever clapped in had an American as a sensei. The two other senseis I have trained with (Oki and Tampa) were both Japanese and did not clap at the beginning of class. I have never thought about that before....
With your martial arts example I think a difference needs to be drawn between faith and confidence. I think your example is one of building confidence through continual practice/application. Whereas the faith I believe to be silly is faith that continues even in the face of reasoned anaysis.
You are right...Buddhism certainly does not have a rigourous intellectual tradition, but, in my opinion, its first principles stand up to rigourous intellectual analysis unlike traditional Christianity.
You are right that man, in general, certainly does choose what's easy, but that certainly does not make it the right thing to do.
I think it's safe to say that 9 out of 10 times, the easy way is probably the wrong way.
I do think that you might discount the weight of the "golden rule." Our whole sense of professionalism is based on this ideal. Our markets function for this very simple rule of behavior. No other religious tradition emphasizes this as strongly. Much of the good in our culture is based on this idea. As far as a single rule to live by, I think it's a pretty good one.
I have no use for the Church either but I think it's folly tothrow the baby out with the bathwater if you will. This isn't altruistic. Hobbesian, no doubt, but the only way for man to combat nature condition of his life is to band together with others. Once this happens, a rule set needs to be introduced to govern that interaction. Along with the boy scout rule for sharing, the golden rule provides a pretty god starting point.
I not familiar with Joel O'Steen but I'll check him out. I agree with you regarding the "praise God" bit. It seems to be that if God indeed is so great, he would not behave like a high maintenance girlfriend. Strange that he would require so much attention.
Faith, I maintain, is a big part of MA training and it's not for the good. For the most part, I think the current incarnation of MCMAP is garbage. It contains some good techniques but the training method is bogus and too routed in Japanese tradition. Yet people still have faith in it. Young Marines believe it works because somebody tells them it does. That's faith. I'm not talking about faith or confidence in one's own abilities. I'm talking about trusting your instructor's method and believing it will give you victory. You need faith to gain proficiency because you cannot get there with rote practice. And until you are proficient, it will make no sense. Once you get there, it seems obvious.
But to get there requires faith in your instructor quite separate from something I can logically describe. I'll write something about this in my blog.
Well done!
[url=http://fvwgogrd.com/ukaa/mfaw.html]My homepage[/url] | [url=http://fowqepnw.com/stpa/kjcv.html]Cool site[/url]
Nice site!
http://fvwgogrd.com/ukaa/mfaw.html | http://dksqqoeb.com/opxy/marb.html
Post a Comment