Hi All,
I stumbled upon a video in which Iman Dr. Zakir Naik explains his Muslim auditorium 'What is the exact believe of Buddhists?'
see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0ws36pd-Q0
His argumentation goes roughly :' there is misery , which is due to desire. To get rid of misery you must remove desire , i.e. by following the 8th fold Nobel Path.
That means: to do so you must have desire in order to remove desire , which is contradictory , therefore the 4 Noble Truths cannot stand on its own feet'.
How would you have responded if you had the chance? ( chanda comes into my mind but I have to admit - despite some years of Dhamma study - I miss the punchy brief answer, at least for now) .
with Metta Dieter
Buddhism and Islam
Re: Buddhism and Islam
In Pali, there's two different kinds of desire. There's tanha which is translated as craving and which leads to "misery." Then there's chanda which is a wholesome desire for well-being and which does not lead to misery. So one does need desire (chanda) in order to remove desire (tanha).
Re: Buddhism and Islam
And here's a nice simile:
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=16900
Mike
http://www.dhammawheel.com/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=16900
"Brahman, there is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion. He develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on persistence... concentration founded on intent... concentration founded on discrimination & the fabrications of exertion. This, Brahman, is the path, this is the practice for the abandoning of that desire."
"If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire."
"In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have persistence, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular persistence allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have the intent, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular intent allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"Didn't you first have [an act of] discrimination, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular act of discrimination allayed?"
"Yes, sir."
"So it is with an arahant whose mental effluents are ended, who has reached fulfillment, done the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, totally destroyed the fetter of becoming, and who is released through right gnosis. Whatever desire he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular desire is allayed. Whatever persistence he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular persistence is allayed. Whatever intent he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular intent is allayed. Whatever discrimination he first had for the attainment of arahantship, on attaining arahantship that particular discrimination is allayed. So what do you think, brahman? Is this an endless path, or one with an end?"
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Mike
Re: Buddhism and Islam
It's not possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, nor a dishonest one.Kalama wrote:How would you have responded if you had the chance?
Until he learns what exactly it is that Buddhism teaches and is able to correctly repeat it in discussion, it's like ... talking to a wall ... only worse.
Interestingly, this is the kind of understanding and criticism of Buddhism I have heard also from some Christians and Hindus. And from some people without an apparent religious affiliation. These people work out of this strawman, and even when provided with an explanation (SN 51.15), they have just ignored it, insisting in their strawman. Which would suggest that they are not interested in actually discussing the topic, but in pushing their particular agenda.Kalama wrote:His argumentation goes roughly :' there is misery , which is due to desire. To get rid of misery you must remove desire , i.e. by following the 8th fold Nobel Path.
That means: to do so you must have desire in order to remove desire , which is contradictory , therefore the 4 Noble Truths cannot stand on its own feet'.
Come to think of it, maybe that agenda doesn't even have anything to do with Christianity or Islam, but with something much more general - possibly simply people protecting their desires as such, fearing what it would be like to be desireless. Ordinarily, people seem to equate a state of not desiring anything with misery, not happiness.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Re: Buddhism and Islam
i have often come across people who are such , they however do not realize the two truths ; being desire free is the most difficult task ( people think its a cake walk , but a wasteful way of living ) in the world , secondly it results in real happiness .binocular wrote:It's not possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, nor a dishonest one.Kalama wrote:How would you have responded if you had the chance?
Until he learns what exactly it is that Buddhism teaches and is able to correctly repeat it in discussion, it's like ... talking to a wall ... only worse.
Interestingly, this is the kind of understanding and criticism of Buddhism I have heard also from some Christians and Hindus. And from some people without an apparent religious affiliation. These people work out of this strawman, and even when provided with an explanation (SN 51.15), they have just ignored it, insisting in their strawman. Which would suggest that they are not interested in actually discussing the topic, but in pushing their particular agenda.Kalama wrote:His argumentation goes roughly :' there is misery , which is due to desire. To get rid of misery you must remove desire , i.e. by following the 8th fold Nobel Path.
That means: to do so you must have desire in order to remove desire , which is contradictory , therefore the 4 Noble Truths cannot stand on its own feet'.
Come to think of it, maybe that agenda doesn't even have anything to do with Christianity or Islam, but with something much more general - possibly simply people protecting their desires as such, fearing what it would be like to be desireless. Ordinarily, people seem to equate a state of not desiring anything with misery, not happiness.
sanjay
The Path of Dhamma
The path of Dhamma is no picnic . It is a strenuous march steeply up the hill . If all the comrades desert you , Walk alone ! Walk alone ! with all the Thrill !!
U S.N. Goenka
The path of Dhamma is no picnic . It is a strenuous march steeply up the hill . If all the comrades desert you , Walk alone ! Walk alone ! with all the Thrill !!
U S.N. Goenka
Re: Buddhism and Islam
Tanhā is literally translated as thirst. It's not the same thing as desire. I'd say desire is wanting to do something and craving is to be impelled towards doing something.
-source, page 7Ven. Analayo wrote:The term tanhā literally stands for "thirst", a meaning echoed also in its near synonym tasinā. Tanhā − as a figurative type of thirst that demands the satisfaction of desires − manifests as a sense of lack or want, and has its root in dissatisfaction. Various aspects of craving are reflected in the use of a range of imageries and similes in the discourses.
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Re: Buddhism and Islam
A person is far above the ground clinging to a rope. Clinging to a rope is stressful but letting go will mean falling to death. Some one tells that person to cling a bit lower on the rope and move downward a bit.....and then cling yet again lower on the rope and move downward again.......eventually you will reach the ground and you can relinquish your clinging to the rope. Another person says that it is impossible to eliminate clinging to a rope by clinging to a rope so it will not work.
who is right?
chownah
who is right?
chownah
Re: Buddhism and Islam
chownah wrote:A person is far above the ground clinging to a rope. Clinging to a rope is stressful but letting go will mean falling to death. Some one tells that person to cling a bit lower on the rope and move downward a bit.....and then cling yet again lower on the rope and move downward again.......eventually you will reach the ground and you can relinquish your clinging to the rope. Another person says that it is impossible to eliminate clinging to a rope by clinging to a rope so it will not work.
who is right?
chownah
Really nice Chownah , excellent , makes so much of sense .
sanjay
PS:
The three exhortations in Pali viz. ( the syntax and exact english spelling is wrong though , but the meaning conveys what was conveyed in the earlier post that you had come across , sometime ago),
Kalam agmaiye
Aukhit chako
bhath mataniyo
are well and truly from the Pali language , and does not in any way trouble the sanctity of the Triple Gem . i cross checked with VRI ( Vipassana Research Institute ) , and a scholar in the Pali wing of the academy , replied endorsing the same .
The Path of Dhamma
The path of Dhamma is no picnic . It is a strenuous march steeply up the hill . If all the comrades desert you , Walk alone ! Walk alone ! with all the Thrill !!
U S.N. Goenka
The path of Dhamma is no picnic . It is a strenuous march steeply up the hill . If all the comrades desert you , Walk alone ! Walk alone ! with all the Thrill !!
U S.N. Goenka
Re: Buddhism and Islam
I have had the pleasure of coming across many such philosophers/'intellectuals' and I have learnt my lesson. I would not respond to this at all. Some people are simply not ripe enough to understand Dhamma, they expend tremendous amount of energy and find all kind of theoretical "faults" in Dhamma just so they do not have to meditate. They cling to wrong views. When even the Buddha could not guide every single person during his time towards liberation what chance do we have in today's world. Trying to reason with such coarse people and show them the path is a waste of time.Kalama wrote:
His argumentation goes roughly :' there is misery , which is due to desire. To get rid of misery you must remove desire , i.e. by following the 8th fold Nobel Path.
That means: to do so you must have desire in order to remove desire , which is contradictory , therefore the 4 Noble Truths cannot stand on its own feet'.
How would you have responded if you had the chance?
Re: Buddhism and Islam
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Re: Buddhism and Islam
Yes, it can appear somewhat contradictory, especially to people not as familiar with Buddhism. Part of the issue is that people often conflate desire (chanda) and craving (tahna), and this is partially the fault of translators, but desire and craving are actually two different but closely related aspects of our psychology. Desire is a neutral term, and one generally has to have the desire to achieve a goal in order to achieve it, even nibbana (SN 51.15); whereas the Pali word for craving, tahna (literally 'thirst'), is something that's directly tied to suffering.
The second noble truth states that the origination of suffering is "the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming" (SN 56.11). As Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains in Wings to Awakening:
The second noble truth states that the origination of suffering is "the craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming" (SN 56.11). As Thanissaro Bhikkhu explains in Wings to Awakening:
- Craving for sensuality, here, means the desire for sensual objects. Craving for becoming means the desire for the formation of states or realms of being that are not currently happening, while craving for non-becoming means the desire for the destruction or halting of any that are. "Passion and delight," here, is apparently a synonym for the "desire and passion" for the five aggregates that constitutes clinging/sustenance [III/H/ii].
- There is the case where a monk develops the base of power endowed with concentration founded on desire & the fabrications of exertion, thinking, 'This desire of mine will be neither overly sluggish nor overly active, neither inwardly restricted nor outwardly scattered.' (Similarly with concentration founded on persistence, intent, and discrimination.)
- He earlier had the desire for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding desire subsided. He earlier had aroused energy for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding energy subsided. He earlier had made up his mind to attain arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding resolution subsided. He earlier had made an investigation for the attainment of arahantship, and when he attained arahantship, the corresponding investigation subsided. (Bodhi)
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).
leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
Re: Buddhism and Islam
Hi all,
thanks for the responses. Sorry for missing that the issue has been treated in a similar way by lojong1, on March 14 already. I am a newbie on this forum, though not
with Buddhist lists activities. ( Briefly: German with long experience in S.E.Asia , living in Hamburg now , retired , my refuge is the Triple Gem.)
My question , the same lojong1 raised , was not only the interest in a punchy response but as well to say hello and possibly looking forward to joining the discussions of Dhamma related topics. I am not yet sure how to use proper editing acc. to the choices on top , respectively about the style .. eventually will learn it in time , .
Directly to the messages :
kirk5a » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:02 pm
In college, a philosophy professor expressed exactly the same objection to me. Too bad I didn't know how to respond at the time. I knew it was fishy reasoning, but I couldn't put my finger on why.
D: that's what I meant as well: why is that why seemingly so difficult to express?
David N. Snyder » Thu Mar 14, 2013 9:17 pm
Sylvester wrote:
Aah. The Unnabha Paradox. See SN 51.15.
That is a great Sutta. The issue comes up somewhat often at Dhamma centers where someone will state that all desire is bad, that even 'desire' for enlightenment is bad and having that desire will prevent it from happening. This is not true and when I get the chance I tell them about chanda, the wholesome desire. Ananda explains it much better in this Sutta.
D: the sutta is of course useful for contemplation.. quoting:
"If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire."
"In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?"
The brahman's statement made an answer a bit easier than Kirk5a's professor by refering to an endless path , as the Brahmana Sutta doesn't treat the more general background ' why to take a path which seemingly needs to replace one evil with another'.
y kmath » Thu Dec 19, 2013 6:09 pm
In Pali, there's two different kinds of desire. There's tanha which is translated as craving and which leads to "misery." Then there's chanda which is a wholesome desire for well-being and which does not lead to misery. So one does need desire (chanda) in order to remove desire (tanha).
D: I think the matter of chanda and tanha has been discussed quite often. Common understanding seems to me wholesome and unwholesome desire.
I wonder however whether the use of desire as a term covering both is suitable. Chanda in respect to the Noble Path is related to ' quest for (ultimate) truth' , whereas tanha refers to wordly desire. Kim seems to have a similar idea:
Kim OHara » Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:33 am
Sylvester wrote:
Aah. The Unnabha Paradox. See SN 51.15.
An alternative (and I am not claiming it is a better one ) is to distinguish between desire/craving/greed and intention.
I can intend to follow the path which leads to my workplace tomorrow morning but that isn't really the same thing as desiring to do so.
binocular » Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:03 pm
Kalama wrote:
How would you have responded if you had the chance?
It's not possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, nor a dishonest one.
Until he learns what exactly it is that Buddhism teaches and is able to correctly repeat it in discussion, it's like ... talking to a wall ... only worse.
D: I do not know Dr. Naik and so not his ability to be open enough of a religious dialogue , more of interest to me is the auditorium he addressed and the likely bias
he implanted.
binocular:Interestingly, this is the kind of understanding and criticism of Buddhism I have heard also from some Christians and Hindus. And from some people without an apparent religious affiliation. These people work out of this strawman, and even when provided with an explanation (SN 51.15), they have just ignored it, insisting in their strawman. Which would suggest that they are not interested in actually discussing the topic, but in pushing their particular agenda.
Come to think of it, maybe that agenda doesn't even have anything to do with Christianity or Islam, but with something much more general - possibly simply people protecting their desires as such, fearing what it would be like to be desireless. Ordinarily, people seem to equate a state of not desiring anything with misery, not happiness.
D: we live in a society of consumerism ..but I believe Jon and Jane Doe may get an understanding when it is properly explained..
sanjay wrote:i have often come across people who are such , they however do not realize the two truths ; being desire free is the most difficult task ( people think its a cake walk , but a wasteful way of living ) in the world , secondly it results in real happiness .
D: possibly a bit more explanation needed to get an understanding by those
Mkoll » Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:24 am
Tanhā is literally translated as thirst. It's not the same thing as desire. I'd say desire is wanting to do something and craving is to be impelled towards doing something.
Ven. Analayo wrote:
The term tanhā literally stands for "thirst", a meaning echoed also in its near synonym tasinā. Tanhā − as a figurative type of thirst that demands the satisfaction of desires − manifests as a sense of lack or want, and has its root in dissatisfaction. Various aspects of craving are reflected in the use of a range of imageries and similes in the discourses.
D: yes.. the term tanha, thirst , serving as a metaphor for the urge of : I -moha, want- lobha , do not want-dosa , one may consider whether term desire is really fitting.
y chownah » Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:12 am
A person is far above the ground clinging to a rope. Clinging to a rope is stressful but letting go will mean falling to death. Some one tells that person to cling a bit lower on the rope and move downward a bit.....and then cling yet again lower on the rope and move downward again.......eventually you will reach the ground and you can relinquish your clinging to the rope. Another person says that it is impossible to eliminate clinging to a rope by clinging to a rope so it will not work.
who is right? chownah
D:the idiom to 'pulls oneself up by one's own bootstraps ' is fitting here, similar to the self who is supposed to work towards anatta
(greetings to the Thai farmers )
so far .. I intend to write shorter messages in future
with Metta Dieter
thanks for the responses. Sorry for missing that the issue has been treated in a similar way by lojong1, on March 14 already. I am a newbie on this forum, though not
with Buddhist lists activities. ( Briefly: German with long experience in S.E.Asia , living in Hamburg now , retired , my refuge is the Triple Gem.)
My question , the same lojong1 raised , was not only the interest in a punchy response but as well to say hello and possibly looking forward to joining the discussions of Dhamma related topics. I am not yet sure how to use proper editing acc. to the choices on top , respectively about the style .. eventually will learn it in time , .
Directly to the messages :
kirk5a » Thu Mar 14, 2013 2:02 pm
In college, a philosophy professor expressed exactly the same objection to me. Too bad I didn't know how to respond at the time. I knew it was fishy reasoning, but I couldn't put my finger on why.
D: that's what I meant as well: why is that why seemingly so difficult to express?
David N. Snyder » Thu Mar 14, 2013 9:17 pm
Sylvester wrote:
Aah. The Unnabha Paradox. See SN 51.15.
That is a great Sutta. The issue comes up somewhat often at Dhamma centers where someone will state that all desire is bad, that even 'desire' for enlightenment is bad and having that desire will prevent it from happening. This is not true and when I get the chance I tell them about chanda, the wholesome desire. Ananda explains it much better in this Sutta.
D: the sutta is of course useful for contemplation.. quoting:
"If that's so, Master Ananda, then it's an endless path, and not one with an end, for it's impossible that one could abandon desire by means of desire."
"In that case, brahman, let me question you on this matter. Answer as you see fit. What do you think: Didn't you first have desire, thinking, 'I'll go to the park,' and then when you reached the park, wasn't that particular desire allayed?"
The brahman's statement made an answer a bit easier than Kirk5a's professor by refering to an endless path , as the Brahmana Sutta doesn't treat the more general background ' why to take a path which seemingly needs to replace one evil with another'.
y kmath » Thu Dec 19, 2013 6:09 pm
In Pali, there's two different kinds of desire. There's tanha which is translated as craving and which leads to "misery." Then there's chanda which is a wholesome desire for well-being and which does not lead to misery. So one does need desire (chanda) in order to remove desire (tanha).
D: I think the matter of chanda and tanha has been discussed quite often. Common understanding seems to me wholesome and unwholesome desire.
I wonder however whether the use of desire as a term covering both is suitable. Chanda in respect to the Noble Path is related to ' quest for (ultimate) truth' , whereas tanha refers to wordly desire. Kim seems to have a similar idea:
Kim OHara » Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:33 am
Sylvester wrote:
Aah. The Unnabha Paradox. See SN 51.15.
An alternative (and I am not claiming it is a better one ) is to distinguish between desire/craving/greed and intention.
I can intend to follow the path which leads to my workplace tomorrow morning but that isn't really the same thing as desiring to do so.
binocular » Thu Dec 19, 2013 10:03 pm
Kalama wrote:
How would you have responded if you had the chance?
It's not possible to defeat an ignorant man in argument, nor a dishonest one.
Until he learns what exactly it is that Buddhism teaches and is able to correctly repeat it in discussion, it's like ... talking to a wall ... only worse.
D: I do not know Dr. Naik and so not his ability to be open enough of a religious dialogue , more of interest to me is the auditorium he addressed and the likely bias
he implanted.
binocular:Interestingly, this is the kind of understanding and criticism of Buddhism I have heard also from some Christians and Hindus. And from some people without an apparent religious affiliation. These people work out of this strawman, and even when provided with an explanation (SN 51.15), they have just ignored it, insisting in their strawman. Which would suggest that they are not interested in actually discussing the topic, but in pushing their particular agenda.
Come to think of it, maybe that agenda doesn't even have anything to do with Christianity or Islam, but with something much more general - possibly simply people protecting their desires as such, fearing what it would be like to be desireless. Ordinarily, people seem to equate a state of not desiring anything with misery, not happiness.
D: we live in a society of consumerism ..but I believe Jon and Jane Doe may get an understanding when it is properly explained..
sanjay wrote:i have often come across people who are such , they however do not realize the two truths ; being desire free is the most difficult task ( people think its a cake walk , but a wasteful way of living ) in the world , secondly it results in real happiness .
D: possibly a bit more explanation needed to get an understanding by those
Mkoll » Fri Dec 20, 2013 4:24 am
Tanhā is literally translated as thirst. It's not the same thing as desire. I'd say desire is wanting to do something and craving is to be impelled towards doing something.
Ven. Analayo wrote:
The term tanhā literally stands for "thirst", a meaning echoed also in its near synonym tasinā. Tanhā − as a figurative type of thirst that demands the satisfaction of desires − manifests as a sense of lack or want, and has its root in dissatisfaction. Various aspects of craving are reflected in the use of a range of imageries and similes in the discourses.
D: yes.. the term tanha, thirst , serving as a metaphor for the urge of : I -moha, want- lobha , do not want-dosa , one may consider whether term desire is really fitting.
y chownah » Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:12 am
A person is far above the ground clinging to a rope. Clinging to a rope is stressful but letting go will mean falling to death. Some one tells that person to cling a bit lower on the rope and move downward a bit.....and then cling yet again lower on the rope and move downward again.......eventually you will reach the ground and you can relinquish your clinging to the rope. Another person says that it is impossible to eliminate clinging to a rope by clinging to a rope so it will not work.
who is right? chownah
D:the idiom to 'pulls oneself up by one's own bootstraps ' is fitting here, similar to the self who is supposed to work towards anatta
(greetings to the Thai farmers )
so far .. I intend to write shorter messages in future
with Metta Dieter
Re: Buddhism and Islam
Thanks Mike. Great article by Ven. Thanissaro.mikenz66 wrote:Here's an essay on the subject: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/auth ... imits.html
Mike
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato samma sambuddhassa