End of suffering

[joelibrahim]

BTW I don't accept the Buddhist idea that there is an end to suffering in this world.What many Buddhists do is disconnect from the suffering.If you look for example at many of those Theravadan heroes-Ajahn Chah and Mahadasi Sayadaw you can see the suffering etched on their faces.But they are disconnected from it.The fMRI evdence supports this conclusion as Buddhist meditators under pain conditions have lighted up amygdalas(pain center) but only weakly affected pre-frontal cortex(thinking area of the pain).So they are in pain/suffering but are unaware of it.The unconscious is recording it nevertheless. and I have regularly been able to see it on their faces. The end result is someone who is dehumanized.Maybe that's why the Buddha didn't react to the suicides.PS I still value highly Buddhist meditation procedures but I think more is needed to preserve our humanity.( I wasn't sure where to place this posting but it consider it very important and if you can find a place that is more visible please put it there.)Salaams and thanks again for providing the space to have these important discussions)

[Jhanananda]

BTW I don't accept the Buddhist idea that there is an end to suffering in this world.What many Buddhists do is disconnect from the suffering.If you look for example at many of those Theravadan heroes-Ajahn Chah and Mahadasi Sayadaw you can see the suffering etched on their faces.But they are disconnected from it.The fMRI evdence supports this conclusion as Buddhist meditators under pain conditions have lighted up amygdalas(pain center) but only weakly affected pre-frontal cortex(thinking area of the pain).So they are in pain/suffering but are unaware of it.The unconscious is recording it nevertheless. and I have regularly been able to see it on their faces. The end result is someone who is dehumanized.Maybe that's why the Buddha didn't react to the suicides.

First of all, the fact that ever translation of early Buddhist literature is grossly mistranslated, then we have to conclude the most Buddhists are clueless as to what Siddhartha Gautama actually taught.

Secondly, the Magadhi language that the Pali Canon was written in, is a primitive language with only about 5,000 terms to describe the entire philosophical system of Siddhartha Gautama; thus, terms like 'dhukkha' do not always have a direct translation, and will often times be used widely within the original text of the Pali Canon.  This means the terms 'dhukkha' refers to everything unpleasant, from: sickness, injuries, old age, and death, as well as not being loved, etc.; to the mental reaction to those unpleasant experiences.

Therefore, the point of the Four Noble Truths is not that if you take a lobotomy for a belief system that you will never feel pain again; but if you lead a fruitful contemplative life, which is what the Noble Eightfold Path attempts to describe; then, while you will continue to experience physical pain, you will not feel the emotional response to that pain.

Now, what Buddhist monks experience under an fMRI is meaningless, because none of them have demonstrated that they lead a fruitful contemplative life by acquiring skill with deep meditation.

Just as there are probably few, if any, Imams in Islam who follow the Koran properly to fruition.

PS I still value highly Buddhist meditation procedures but I think more is needed to preserve our humanity.

Well, I disagree.  I find there is plenty in the religious literature of the world such as: Bible, Gospels, Koran, Pali Canon, Vedas, etc. to direct a seeker to relief from mental suffering (aka liberation); however, one has to realize that every translation of that religious literature of the world that I listed above has been grossly mistranslated, and misinterpreted since the death of the progenitor who uttered those sacred words.

( I wasn't sure where to place this posting but it consider it very important and if you can find a place that is more visible please put it there.)Salaams and thanks again for providing the space to have these important discussions)

Unpacking religions seems to me to be the perfect place for discussing reification.  If you disagree, then please suggest a better place for this thread to be posted.

Last night I found myself reflecting upon this topic.  It occurred to me that the miracle stories in every religion are a classic example of reification.  People tend to take the miracle stories in every religion literally, and even emphasize them over the: doctrine, philosophy, ethics, and lifestyle that the religious literature is attempting to instill in its followers through the metaphor of miracle stories.

[Michel]

BTW I don't accept the Buddhist idea that there is an end to suffering in this world.What many Buddhists do is disconnect from the suffering.

Sutta on detaching from suffering:

Sallatha Sutta: The Dart - translated from the Pali by Nyanaponika Thera

"An untaught worldling, O monks, experiences pleasant feelings, he experiences painful feelings and he experiences neutral feelings. A well-taught noble disciple likewise experiences pleasant, painful and neutral feelings. Now what is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists herein between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling?

"When an untaught worldling is touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. He thus experiences two kinds of feelings, a bodily and a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart and, following the first piercing, he is hit by a second dart. So that person will experience feelings caused by two darts. It is similar with an untaught worldling: when touched by a painful (bodily) feeling, he worries and grieves, he laments, beats his breast, weeps and is distraught. So he experiences two kinds of feeling: a bodily and a mental feeling.

"Having been touched by that painful feeling, he resists (and resents) it. Then in him who so resists (and resents) that painful feeling, an underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he then proceeds to enjoy sensual happiness. And why does he do so? An untaught worldling, O monks, does not know of any other escape from painful feelings except the enjoyment of sensual happiness. Then in him who enjoys sensual happiness, an underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He does not know, according to facts, the arising and ending of these feelings, nor the gratification, the danger and the escape, connected with these feelings. In him who lacks that knowledge, an underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called an untaught worldling who is fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is fettered by suffering, this I declare.

"But in the case of a well-taught noble disciple, O monks, when he is touched by a painful feeling, he will not worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. It is one kind of feeling he experiences, a bodily one, but not a mental feeling. It is as if a man were pierced by a dart, but was not hit by a second dart following the first one. So this person experiences feelings caused by a single dart only. It is similar with a well-taught noble disciple: when touched by a painful feeling, he will no worry nor grieve and lament, he will not beat his breast and weep, nor will he be distraught. He experiences one single feeling, a bodily one.

"Having been touched by that painful feeling, he does not resist (and resent) it. Hence, in him no underlying tendency of resistance against that painful feeling comes to underlie (his mind). Under the impact of that painful feeling he does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness. And why not? As a well-taught noble disciple he knows of an escape from painful feelings other than by enjoying sensual happiness. Then in him who does not proceed to enjoy sensual happiness, no underlying tendency to lust for pleasant feelings comes to underlie (his mind). He knows, according to facts, the arising and ending of those feelings, and the gratification, the danger and the escape connected with these feelings. In him who knows thus, no underlying tendency to ignorance as to neutral feelings comes to underlie (his mind). When he experiences a pleasant feeling, a painful feeling or a neutral feeling, he feels it as one who is not fettered by it. Such a one, O monks, is called a well-taught noble disciple who is not fettered by birth, by old age, by death, by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair. He is not fettered to suffering, this I declare.

"This, O monks, is the distinction, the diversity, the difference that exists between a well-taught noble disciple and an untaught worldling."

[joelibrahim]

Correction of Physiology-That's the Anterior Cingulate Cortex not the amygdala that becomes activated and thicker not the amydala under pain conditions..The amygdala is another story related to stress and Jon Kabat Zinn's work.