Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site pyuxd.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!pyuxww!pyuxd!rlr From: rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Re: Omnipotence, justice, and suffering Message-ID: <1192@pyuxd.UUCP> Date: Tue, 9-Jul-85 21:56:45 EDT Article-I.D.: pyuxd.1192 Posted: Tue Jul 9 21:56:45 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 11-Jul-85 07:39:26 EDT References: <3207@drutx.UUCP> Organization: Whatever we're calling ourselves this week Lines: 58 > To say that Buddhism follows the statement "...the universe... is > subject to iron laws but not to any purpose" in relation to the > problem of suffering is inaccurate, and very limited. Suffering > is the root of Buddhism. Buddhist thought is based on the Four Noble Truths > which go like this: > > 1. Suffering is present in all of life. There is sickness, > pain, and death. We suffer when we get what we do not want, > and when we do not get what we do want. > 2. Suffering is caused by desire, and by the clinging that this > desire produces. For instance, we desire life, cling to it, > and so suffer when we die. > 3. If we can overcome the desire and clinging, we will not suffer. > 4. The way to overcome desire is by following the Noble Eightfold > Path, sometimes called the Middle Way. > > Everyone probably would agree with the first statement. Many with the > second and third. Only us Buddhists vote for all 4. And that's always been one of my problems with the Buddhist philosophy. Why should I seek to remove *all* suffering from my life? Aren't some of our goals attained and don't we obtain satisfaction from that? And isn't the satisfaction all the greater when contrasted with occasions of failure and suffering? Don't success and satisfaction only have real meaning in contrast to instances of non-success and non-satisfaction? If the way to remove all suffering from my life is to remove all desire (and I agree that the tenet itself is probably quite true!), I'll stick with a little suffering so that I can retain a bit of desire and success and satisfaction. For me, life without desire, without chances and attempts at reaching goals, would make me less than human, less than a living being at all. > Since Buddhists believe that suffering is our own creation, the problem > of whether an outside agency, i.e. a god or gods, can cause this suffering > and still be all-knowing and good does not arise. Good point. > Note that Buddha never said that a god or gods do not exist. > A very good illustration of this is what he said when one of his > followers asked him a series of questions--"Is the universe finite > or infinite? What are the gods like? What happens when we die?" and > so on. His reply went like this: (not a quote from the writings, just > a paraphrase) "You are like a man who is shot with a poison arrow. > He is taken to the doctor, who is about to pull out the arrow so that > the poison cannot further enter his bloodstream. But the man refuses > to have the arrow removed until he knows all about how the arrow came > to be in him. He wants to know the name of the man who shot him, his > caste, his hometown, his mother's maiden name, and what he had for > breakfast. The man will die before he knows these things. Likewise, > you will die before you know the answers to those questions. But you do > know how to remove the arrow of suffering." > This story and its moral have never stopped Buddhists from evolving all > sorts of cosmologies, and using lots of dieties--mostly as meditation aids. > I have one such, myself. I think I'd choose to have the arrow removed at the time, but that wouldn't stop me from going back to the same glade and risking getting shot with a similar arrow again, if the goal was worth attaining.