🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂 📙 You can find my new book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
I meditated 2 days mindfully upon compassion and I had a (solid?)moment of clarity how I've been eating animal flesh for over 50 yrs and it broke my heart so to speak and I've decided to never kill or buy animal meat to eat ever again. How can I develop the virtue compassion while animals are put through torture and hell against their will when I can find something of the ground to eat.
Tatiya Assada Sutta: Attractiveness (III) SN 22.28 22.28. Gratification (3) At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, if there were no gratification in form, beings would not become enamoured with it; but because there is gratification in form, beings become enamoured with it. If there were no danger in form, beings would not experience revulsion towards it; but because there is danger in form, beings experience revulsion towards it. If there were no escape from form, beings would not escape from it; but because there is an escape from form, beings escape from it.
As a Marist, I believe "life is joy" is a better philosophy. With that in mind, we can strive to make not only our lives, but the lives of all people more joyful.
Very important clarification. I think one can see it this way: Of course not every second of life is suffering. But even the most blissful moments hold the seeds of dukkha. Because: "But all joy wants eternity- Wants deep, wants deep eternity." - Nietzsche - Also thank you for recommending Bodhipaksa's blog. Quite interesting stuff there. 😁 🙏🏻
I really appreciate u made something on this quote or Matt ig!!? As many people's even my friends who aren't Buddhist or who are Buddhists say this & I desperately wanna know if it's actually true or not!🖐🏻
There are many words in Pali or Magada, no equivalent translation in other languages, Dukka is one of them (also well discussed), then you have Anatta, Anusaya, prapancha, asrava, kelesa, even word like 'kusal' so the list goes on, very very long. So, certain words have no equivalent translation, but need to be understood in native language. This is common to many other languages, as I experienced when I learned Chinese Mandarin in the early 80's. Therefore, if one goes deep into the subject, learning Pali is pre-requisites. Even languages like Sinhalese (spoken in Sri Lanka, my background), which have similar roots to Pali and Sanskrit, suffer from 'translation anomalies' over hundreds of years passed from one generation to the next, Ex- common one is Anatta vs Anathma, and so on. Thank you Doug, for raising these fundamental issues, for greater general awareness for practitioners and non-practitioners alike.
I enjoy "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones as a succinct description of dukkha arising from clinging to aggregates. The events described in the song are only sources of suffering if there is to clinging to preferences that things be a particular way or not be a particular way.
I find the idea of life has suffering in it very different from life is suffering. The second feels very absolute as if there is nothing we can do about it. I noticed people often interpret the quote in that fatalistic way as well.
@@DougsDharma Yes Doug, it's important to see the positive in Buddha's message.. The Buddha arose to help Humans and Gods/Brahmas (Heavenly beings too) to realise and be completely free from Samsara. In Buddha's times there were teachers who had their own delusional views about the Samsaric rebirth of life and death. Those 6 Heretical Teachers. And they taught those views to their followers. One Brahmin claimed that one will naturally escape suffering of life by continuing on this repeated rebirth.. He used the analogy of like throwing a cotton wool ball from the top of a mountain and how that wool ball naturaly untangles as its falling down. Meaning one will escape by continuing on this Samsara. Which was a wrong view. Because the Buddha who was able to see countless of his past lives, and even said the beginning cannot be discerned. Hence Buddha's conclusion as the escape to suffering as only being in the Noble Eightfold Path! Like that Impenetrable Fotress analogy he used, of animals entering and leaving the fotress only through a gate. In the same way, the only way beings from the past and future will/would escape this Samsaric suffering was through the development of the Noble Eightfold Path...
buddha said life is suffering,,also buddha said path to achive nirwana in practical way and end of suffering,Cause of suffering,,,thats the best thing in buddha teaching💖
Suffering is perhaps better defined as "that condition or state of being or action or inaction whereby there is incurring of obligation and a denial of that obligation". Starting a debt which can never be completed. To cause to another what one does not intend to cause or what oneself would like to experience brings about persistence. I just did a video on "Economic Dukka".
Doug, please see in Sutta Pitaka, there are 3 kinds of dukkha: 1. Dukkha-dukkhata (dukkha as pain, sad, bad experience) 2. Viparinama Dukkhata, all changing are dukkha 3. Sankhara Dukkhata, all conditioned phenomena are dukkha. You cling only to the first kind of dukkha. Does your life change? Do your five aggregates change? Conditioned? If your answer yes, then your life, your 5 aggregates are dukkha. All changing and conditioned phenomena are dukkha, it is not depended if you are clinging to it or not. It is all dukkha as reality. But if you cling to your life, you cling to your 5 agregates, then it is CAUSE of dukkha.
The Third Noble Truth is Nirodha. That is extinguishing cause of dukkha, i.e. extinguishing of desire (tanha). If cause of dukkha is extinguished, then there is no more dukkha (no more next rebirth, no more next life). You must see the third noble truth in relation with paticcasamuppada. Desire (tanha) is cause for next rebirth. So, next rebirth (next life) is dukkha. So the context is not as simplistic as you want to get something and then don't get it, then your heart becomes restless and sad, suffering. This example is not wrong, but it is not the essence of dukkha in the four noble truths.
We are all very fond of and attached to the life formations. Maybe what needs to be discussed is why life is dukkha? This is what needs to be penetrated with wisdom.
@@riki10107 Bro, Gautama Buddha preached a dharma or dhamma . Not a religion. True Buddhism is a dharma or dhamma. Not a religion. But the vast majority of Buddhists do not see Buddhism as a dharma . As a religion.
@@Sawo-500 Oops then maybe my bad. But bruh I follow Buddhist as my main religion, I born in Canada but my whole family & me as well are Thailand people's,, maybe I donno about my own religion, (yes I sounds like a dumb, thnx) but people's have reasons & I have to,, have a good day anyways.
(Wednesday 11th. September, 2024) === Suffering is caused by the ignorance. The ignorance will lead to lack of wisdom. Lack of wisdom will lead to misunderstand. For example : We believe that this body is our true self. Because we are misunderstanding. Therefore we attach to everything in this world. I want to know, where can I find our true self? It's just the belief. In realality our true self is just phenomenon.What you see now doesn't mean a human being, doesn't mean an animal or an object. === = Everything in this world is the universal truth. The universal truth is the true nature of reality that has no name in any ficticious language as we belive it. For example : What you see or hear now is universal truth such as...you are universal truth,I'm universal truth. Therefore we are not a human being.We are just the phenomenon. Therefore no one suffers. No one is happy. (Please bare in mind). ===
Sooooo many people say to me, "how do you believe life is suffering and accept that to be true?" I simply say to look into the first two noble truths. The first does indeed say say life is suffering, however the second explains how we can understand the first.
That's not the first noble truth, I'm afraid. The first noble truth is that, there IS dukkha; that there is unsatisfactory-ness resulting from clinging. Because you cling to impermenant states of being, there is suffering from 'an itch that can not be scratched' or a thirst that can never be truly quenched. There is no mention of life 'being' this way or 'is' this way, as that would contradict many doctrines on Sunyata, which implies that all phenomenon have no inherent nature. If life 'was' that, it could not be anything else. But because we can observe the world being things other than that, we see that it is not 'just' that.
@@dravenwag when you break it down in layman's terms, when you "cling" to something, you can create a attachment. Anything you become attached to you can fear losing. Fear of losing creates personal "suffering's". Simply put even moreso, we suffer through our attachments. You are almost exactly explaining my breakdown.
Today is Ashok Dhamma Vijayadashami. In India, it is celebrated with great pomp, on which day Emperor Ashoka left the policy of war and adopted the policy of Dhamma. 🙏☸️ Namo Buddhay 🙏
From my experience you can calm the mind to the point that any mental activity has some degree of tension to it - even if it’s subtle. Then your mind finds the subtlest wave of formation of mental activity undesirable. As far as I know Dukkah goes all the way down (through the mind, I haven’t gone beyond as yet).
Each human being is thrown into an arena where we are programmed to attach to each other as well as our selves and our lives - only to not only face death but to know that each and every one of our loved ones will die. Noble beasts that we are, we choose to love anyway. To suggest that scenario isn’t one of suffering I think is disingenuous and waters down the power of our real situation. Ostensibly, there is no happy ending but in reality, this scenario is illusory. That’s what we need to realize.
@@DougsDharma The reason I mention this is because I believe the impulse to turn away or to sugar coat our suffering is a matter of turning down a valuable gift with ugly wrapping. At the same time I take your point - that life should be celebrated and enjoyed and that life is good. I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth.
Dukkha is pervasive. There is occasional dukkha: birth, decay, disease, death. Then there is frequent dukkha: united, separated, not getting what one wants. Finally there is continuous dukkha: the five grasped-at aggregates. And existence will go on indefinitely and in our perpetual wandering in samsara we would have shed enough tears/blood to the four oceans. The sensitive soul would look at this with horror and the fact that life is dukkha is a fake quote is not of a consolation.
My view is there is a spectrum to suffering.From unease,unsatisfactory to suffering.From the standpoint of suffering,it can be felt when we lose our love ones ,fortunes or health.Those people who never contemplate on lifes suffering may resort to suicide.
The basic premise truth often referred to as 4 noble truths and it is further qualified in detail in Satara Satipattana sutta under Dhammanupassana Bhawana Five aggregates are the pun-skanda Mama Rupa sunchnga sanjana and vignana Strangely patichch samuppada described as dependendent origination is the foundation of analysis ...very few would agree with me if propose that paticca-samuppada is a dialectical process Thank you for your brief discourse on suffering
Yes Doug, we cling to the varrying topics, views and ideologies etc from this world. We cling to the varying famous people in the public, political parties etc. And we form this identity of ourselves. Which we cling to, that are the 5 aggregates.. And in the moment of death, this identity we cling to cannot be let go of. I admit I cling to Heavy Metal music, while I see some others who cling to Popular music. And yes because of my clinging I may develop hate for those who only like Popular music. But I do my best and put effort to not to let that happen. Because I used to listen to Popular music back in the day too. And I know that the defilment of Aversion is in me and so I cultivate compassion and loving kindness instead to counter the defilement of (aversion) So the defilement (aversion) could be developed because? Because of my clinging to that type of Music. And yes, they are definitely people that cling to heavy Metal (in the Heavy Metal community) whom hates those who listen to Popular music. Vice Versa! Now let's look at clinging to a view about Allah/God..This is just an example of Islam. Yet this would occur in all the other religions. Even among Buddhists it will occur, people follow certain delusional views, as not every Buddhist are well educated about the teachings of Buddha. And because of the 3 defilements they occur! For example those Terrorists cling to a view from the Quran and in them arise the defilement (aversion) and (delusion) to oppress the non believers and terrorise them etc. Or defend their ideolgy. So in this way the defilement (hate/aversion) has arisen due to clinging to that view. Evil intentions arises within them, and those terrorists act on those evil intentions. But that ultimately leads to their own suffering. And also clinging to sensual pleasures, say someone is clinging to the pleasure of sexual satisfaction through harming others. Then that person acts on those evil intentions due to clinging to that pleasure of sexual satisfaction. And hence the defilement of (Lust) is so developed, that their mind is able to do evil. Just to satisfy their craving for that sexual satisfaction. Hence we see rapists and serial killers in this world who are able to do evil just for few moments of sexual satsfaction/sensual satisfaction. And they also don't have a moral compass. Such as Psychopaths and Sociopaths, are unable to feel remorse/empathy or guilt etc. This could be due to their defilments of aversion, delusion and lust being so strong, or physical damage on the brain etc. And so they are unable to satify that craving/lust, as they are immensely clinging to sensual pleasures. I recently watched the Netflix series called House Of Secrets. That was about a couple/family who was clinging to a rites and ritual that would apparently save them and help them to obtain salvation etc. Now because of that clinging to rites and ritual, they created an unfortunate circumstance that got their family killed. That was clinging to rites and rituals, the defilment (Delusion) arose in them and cultivated. They were unable to see the real nature of what they were doing, would actually get them killed! So in this way we can see all this happening within us and others too! Hence Life is Suffering..
Hey Doug, I find most of your videos really good, but I think you've given a limited definition of the word dukkha here by focussing on that last sentence "five aggregates subject to clinging". It sort of comes across to me as if you are saying that life becomes "satisfactory" if there is no clinging to the aggregates. The Buddha would reject this (positive) view too, just as he would reject the average (negative) interpretation of "life is suffering". If we have a look at the 12 links in dependent origination, it should be apparent that he also considered clinging to birth as suffering. He called any form of becoming as dukkha. Repeatedly in the maha-parinibbana sutta for example, freedom from the craving of existence is mentioned. With a limited definition of dukkha, our definition of nibbana also becomes limited and subject to the (false) views of satisfactory non-existence or satisfactory existence. With an expanded definition of dukkha, our definition of nibbana becomes expanded and not subject to views of existence/non-existence.
Well the life of the arahant is a satisfactory life. What makes it satisfactory though is that there is no clinging to that life, no clinging to existence, and hence no particular desire for rebirth. This is the essence of the Third Noble Truth, which is the truth of the cessation of dukkha.
@@DougsDharma Thanks for the reply! I think it depends what you mean by „life“..? I assume that you mean the experience as through the 5 aggregates? I don‘t see what can be satisfactory about that which is continually disintegrating. The third Noble truth is about freedom from suffering, not finding satisfaction in the aggregates that you once clung to. Finding satisfaction in the 5 aggregates and the view that all conditioned things are impermanent are contradictory views.
buddha talked about truth about suffering, the cause of suffering, and how to end suffering...dukhalayam means world of suffering. suffering comes from the mind. the soul is trap in the mind and yoga is to help free the soul from this entrapment.
Additionally, there is the phrase "Bhavanirodho nibbānaṁ" in the early discourses meaning "the cessation of existence is nibbana." Since nibbana in some way is the opposite of dukkha could we rephrase that as: existence is dukkha? And Bhikkhu Bodhi explains bhava as explicitly meaning "sentient existence" which is life.
@@DougsDharma As you mentioned in your video on the 2nd truth, it is the craving that leads to new existence. So the dukkha here is the new existence. What do you think?
It is a misunderstanding in confusion between the truth of suffering and a sensation of suffering. Indeed, life is not only dukkha vedana; a feeling of suffering. It is dukkha ariya sacca; the truth of suffering that exists.
Seriously, what if the Buddhist teaching is only ideology, built around some truisms, which really do not explain much, just like Murphy´s Law: "Nothing is always, and everything depends!"?
Well one of the central tenets of the Buddhist dharma is that of non-self. I don't think it's a truism. That said, his positions were subtle and complex. A thinker trying to conceive of a system of practice without considering what depends upon what will not be successful. Everything does depend.
@@DougsDharma well, thank you very much for your reply. Still I have problems with the whole "Buddha-Shop" (a bit like the May-Fourth Movement had with the "Confucius-Shop"). Let me put two arguments forward, as examples: (1) Historical sciences have it that we don´t really know much about the life and work of the historic Buddha, Gautama Siddharta, the Muni from the Shakya-clan. There are not many hard facts---according to current scientific standards---available. Moreover, people still today hotly debate what the "non-self"-doctrine(s), which developed over many generations of Buddhist learners/teachers, really mean(s)---here, only to mention Stephan Batchelor, who recently did, i.m.o., some interesting hermeneutical exegesis on this topic. And, looking into human history, nearly all known belief-systems developed some kind of anthropological, or even universal e g o l o g y, so the Buddhist approach does not seem to me that unique---and some of the others may even have explored and/or explained some aspects more accurate, not to mention diverse modern scientific disciplines; but that would be a subject for further, most probably quite controverisal, interdisciplinary and/or interreligious debates. (2) As I understand it, "existenzials" (M. Heidegger), like: time, causality, space, and "Being/being" (to allude to M. Heidegger´s "ontological difference"), are part of a kind of "philosophia perennis" (of which modern philosophical anthropology is a part), regarding the human condition. What makes them "familiar strangers", to paraphrase the title of a book on "Time" by Julius Thomas Fraser. Sorry, got a bit lenghty. Thanks for sharing.
What do you make of the different opinions in the comments? Personally I feel like a milder interpretation is more in line with a secular approach towards integrating the buddhist teachings. If one accepts the metaphysical interpretation of samsara and rebirth, i think it makes sense to see "human life" as something overall negative, because negative consequences and an underlying negative mechanism are jn place. However a secular interpretation seems largely neutral on both. We are just here, and some types of eudaimonia are archievable even tho they might not be permanent or lead to some deprivation later. To me, the way I understand the first noble truths shifts with my metaphysical beliefs. If someone says "all conditioned phenomena are dukkha", that seems metaphysical to me. I think jacques lacan has a theory of desire that is very compelling for secularist and compatible with secular buddhism Also, are you an antinatalist, i.e. do you think secular buddhist should not reproduce?
Well I think for us unenlightened beings, the teaching can be understood as life being suffering. Since we're unenlightened, we are prone to craving and clinging, and craving and clinging just do produce suffering. They also produce happiness, but impermanent happiness. So long as we can see the Third Noble Truth there is an escape. As to having children, I think that's entirely up to each of us individually.
If that is the case, your irritability would be a dissatisfaction with not having known before and is, therefore, dukkah. I have never met anyone who didn't fall into the trap of clinging without realising it during their lives. Doug's description was simple and helpful for all of us.
It’s funny how people won’t let others say a truth a certain way and insist on one particular way of saying something.That’s how I view this issue. In a sense, “life is suffering” (or the unsatisfactoriness of it) in that the major aspects of it (aging, clinging, illness, and death) are what we could call the sum total of how an unenlightened humanity chooses to view it, so I still don’t see the problem with saying it.
I kind of agree, though I would say that the video helps with combatting misunderstandings. The phrase "Life is suffering" used to refer to just Buddhism in general can be "truthful" to the philosophy and so on when spoken by someone. But when somebody is learning Buddhist philosophy it's probably a better idea, I imagine. I wish I could organise my thoughts more coherently here.
The problem with a quote like this is that people hear the quote and completely misunderstand it. If you explain what you mean with the quote than that problem disappears. So it depends on how you use it if what you say is correct imo.
@@kartiksingh-ko2lz i am technically an Indian atheist living in Jharkhand i have studied many buddhist scriptures i requested this video since many westerner doesn't knows this and Doug's dharma is one of the most watched channels of Buddhism
😂😂Why Hindus beleive that? Thats the reason buddhism no longer availible in India,,,Hindu,Muslim had challenge with buddhism,,,go and study buddhism,,,Hindu is baby infront of buddha teaching,,, buddha born in 2500 years ago and Hindu is the main religion that time,,,why buddha leave hindusm? reason is Hindu is not the right path,,,and he leave kingdom ,,and search path to Nirwana,,,, 1st Teacher is Yogi alara kalama,,he couldnt give the answers,,2nd one is uddika rama putta he also fail before gautama started to meditation over 6 years,,,after he understand deep meditation is not the way, middle way is the best,,,he realized the truth,,,, in india now you can also see yogies meditate deeply,,,no shower,without food,without anything,,,thats the wrong,,, study buddhism
It is kind of ok for someone from non Buddhist upbringing to believe these kind of fake quotes to be true. But the thing is being born as buddhists and having the opportunity to listen to dharma sermons as well as read a plethora of dhamma books 24×7 ,most Sri Lankans believe these quotes are true 🤷
Doesn't life "cling" to the condition of living in some sense? Have you ever watched an organism go through the paroxysms of dying? Wouldn't that make "Life is suffering" true?
If your life only consists of. Birth, sickness, old age and dying it is probably quite short. Most people arent sick their entire lives or immediately old
Please do not mislead people that’s very bad karma for you. Dukha is suffering and this is the fundamental teaching of Buddha that all of the Buddhist scholars agree to.
No he is right on this. Dukka is not only just suffering , unpleasant feeling may give us suffering,thats obvious, Suppose one may have very pleasant feeling,that is also under 'Dukka sachcha' (first noble truth) Tell me how a pleasant feelings coming under dukka then ? The answer is even if there is a pleasant,unpleasant or neutral feelings all subject to impermanence, thats why it say dukka. Dukka is to be understand not based on feelings, Impermanent nature shold have to realized through the wisdom. This to not easy its very subtle only tiniest ppl can touch !
Dukha is in contrast to Sukha. Both terms originally relating to the nature of a wheel in a wheel well. A bumpy wheel is a Dukha wheel while a smooth rise is a Sukha ride. Suffering is a stretch for a term that means a bumpy ride.
@@SoyElta sukha is also impermanent therefore that’s also dukha therefore Buddha offers session of Dukha that is to cut off all your desire but this is only basic point. You have to experience much deeper understanding of mind and nature for some realization but without the concerned of Dukha being reborn in samsara again and again it will be difficult to find motivation to practice meditation. Remember having a great life financial security etc dose not mean sukha in Buddhism that’s also Dukha because you will not like it if you suddenly lost everything
@@kbgirel6965 sukha also categories as Dukkha,not only because its sudden loss and converting in to the opposite. In celestial worlds in dewa (deities and brahmas) they always having only SUKHA feelings.But still they also suffering, So dukka does not measure only by feelings. All compounded things has the nature of impermanence(the impermanence is not just the decaying and changing nature,it goes beyond that) Suppose the incident of seeing the sky.as for our normal eye sight,it seems like a blue color wall (as a object).But actually it is not a wall(object).it only appears as such due to characteristics of the sunlight. In the same way all sukha dukka and upekkha feelings are not things they just like the blue wall concept.when we deeply contemplate them,they are mere illusions made by the ignorance. (1.noble truth )Dukkha is a thing has to be realized,(2NT)then the thanha or the craving has to be removed(when we see the 1st NB,the second will fade away),then the cessation of the dukka (3NT)can be attained.for that we have to go the path(4 NT) - beginning with this right view (the correct view of the 4 Noble Truths)
No it doesn't. I could easily point out that you're not letting things be subject to pleasant and kind experiences, like meeting wonderful people and having good experiences. Are you a bad person because you don't want to let things experience good things? Also, if you watch the video, the quote does not validate anti-natalism as the quote is not attributed to the Buddha and the phrase is unsubstantiated.
@@dravenwag I think the word "suffering" needs to be understood deep. But here's my greatest of the greatest fear: the existential self-hatred that people face leads them to believe that "life is suffering" and not "life has suffering". It looks too complex, but I'm afraid seeing people find solace in the annihilation of sentience, be it the human race alone or the whole of organisms.
I think he tried to demonstrate that he disagrees conceptually, not to sugarcoat it, but as you said people read/interpret it differently, as well as people reading rebirth differently
@@patrickthomasius I think it can be more of a case of wishful thinking than a matter of interpretation if we're not careful. We can disguise wishful thinking as interpretation and even fool ourselves, perhaps. It may not be completely avoidable, but I think it's something worth monitoring. I don't believe in rebirth, and quite frankly, I think it adds unnecessary complexity, but I can't change what may or may not have been stated about it, from a historical standpoint, solely based on my personal beliefs... or disbelief. I'm not accusing Doug of anything. I'm just speaking in general. I'm not even sure if I remember what he said... which means I don't remember what he said about what someone else said who may or may not have even existed...
🧡 If you find benefit in my videos, consider supporting the channel by joining us on Patreon and get fun extras like exclusive videos, ad-free audio-only versions, and extensive show notes: www.patreon.com/dougsseculardharma 🙂
📙 You can find my new book here: books2read.com/buddhisthandbook
Why don't you open TH-cam membership program ?
I meditated 2 days mindfully upon compassion and I had a (solid?)moment of clarity how I've been eating animal flesh for over 50 yrs and it broke my heart so to speak and I've decided to never kill or buy animal meat to eat ever again. How can I develop the virtue compassion while animals are put through torture and hell against their will when I can find something of the ground to eat.
I like how Thich Nhat Hanh explains it.
There is ill being
There is a path to ill being
There is well-being
There is a path to well-being
Yes, very well said!
There is a Sutta where the Buddha says if life was all suffering, people would not become attached to it. I wish I could remember which one said it.
Yes I remember having read something similar.
Tatiya Assada Sutta: Attractiveness (III)
SN 22.28
22.28. Gratification (3)
At Savatthi. “Bhikkhus, if there were no gratification in form, beings would not become enamoured with it; but because there is gratification in form, beings become enamoured with it. If there were no danger in form, beings would not experience revulsion towards it; but because there is danger in form, beings experience revulsion towards it. If there were no escape from form, beings would not escape from it; but because there is an escape from form, beings escape from it.
As a Marist, I believe "life is joy" is a better philosophy. With that in mind, we can strive to make not only our lives, but the lives of all people more joyful.
Thank you, Doug. Your explanation is extremely helpful.
My pleasure Susan, glad to help!
Very important clarification. I think one can see it this way: Of course not every second of life is suffering. But even the most blissful moments hold the seeds of dukkha. Because:
"But all joy wants eternity-
Wants deep, wants deep eternity."
- Nietzsche -
Also thank you for recommending Bodhipaksa's blog. Quite interesting stuff there. 😁
🙏🏻
Yes, Bodhipaksa is great, a lovely person too! 😊
I really appreciate u made something on this quote or Matt ig!!? As many people's even my friends who aren't Buddhist or who are Buddhists say this & I desperately wanna know if it's actually true or not!🖐🏻
Sure, glad to help!
There are many words in Pali or Magada, no equivalent translation in other languages, Dukka is one of them (also well discussed), then you have Anatta, Anusaya, prapancha, asrava, kelesa, even word like 'kusal' so the list goes on, very very long.
So, certain words have no equivalent translation, but need to be understood in native language. This is common to many other languages, as I experienced when I learned Chinese Mandarin in the early 80's.
Therefore, if one goes deep into the subject, learning Pali is pre-requisites. Even languages like Sinhalese (spoken in Sri Lanka, my background), which have similar roots to Pali and Sanskrit, suffer from 'translation anomalies' over hundreds of years passed from one generation to the next, Ex- common one is Anatta vs Anathma, and so on.
Thank you Doug, for raising these fundamental issues, for greater general awareness for practitioners and non-practitioners alike.
Yes I've done a number of videos on the language issues. Thanks Harsha.
This is what I actually wanted to know thnx!!
Great! Glad to hear it.
I enjoy "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" by the Rolling Stones as a succinct description of dukkha arising from clinging to aggregates. The events described in the song are only sources of suffering if there is to clinging to preferences that things be a particular way or not be a particular way.
Ah yes, good observation! I don't know the lyrics well enough ... !
I find the idea of life has suffering in it very different from life is suffering.
The second feels very absolute as if there is nothing we can do about it.
I noticed people often interpret the quote in that fatalistic way as well.
Yes I think so too. It's important to see the positive as well as the negative, and not become cynical or despondent.
@@DougsDharma Yes Doug, it's important to see the positive in Buddha's message..
The Buddha arose to help Humans and Gods/Brahmas (Heavenly beings too) to realise and be completely free from Samsara.
In Buddha's times there were teachers who had their own delusional views about the Samsaric rebirth of life and death.
Those 6 Heretical Teachers. And they taught those views to their followers.
One Brahmin claimed that one will naturally escape suffering of life by continuing on this repeated rebirth..
He used the analogy of like throwing a cotton wool ball from the top of a mountain and how that wool ball naturaly untangles as its falling down. Meaning one will escape by continuing on this Samsara. Which was a wrong view.
Because the Buddha who was able to see countless of his past lives, and even said the beginning cannot be discerned.
Hence Buddha's conclusion as the escape to suffering as only being in the Noble Eightfold Path!
Like that Impenetrable Fotress analogy he used, of animals entering and leaving the fotress only through a gate.
In the same way, the only way beings from the past and future will/would escape this Samsaric
suffering was through the development of the Noble Eightfold Path...
" The one who lives by the Dhamma is protected by the Dhamma itself "
- Shakyamuni Buddha
🙏
🙏
buddha said life is suffering,,also buddha said path to achive nirwana in practical way and end of suffering,Cause of suffering,,,thats the best thing in buddha teaching💖
Suffering is perhaps better defined as "that condition or state of being or action or inaction whereby there is incurring of obligation and a denial of that obligation". Starting a debt which can never be completed. To cause to another what one does not intend to cause or what oneself would like to experience brings about persistence.
I just did a video on "Economic Dukka".
Doug, please see in Sutta Pitaka, there are 3 kinds of dukkha:
1. Dukkha-dukkhata (dukkha as pain, sad, bad experience)
2. Viparinama Dukkhata, all changing are dukkha
3. Sankhara Dukkhata, all conditioned phenomena are dukkha.
You cling only to the first kind of dukkha.
Does your life change?
Do your five aggregates change? Conditioned? If your answer yes, then your life, your 5 aggregates are dukkha.
All changing and conditioned phenomena are dukkha, it is not depended if you are clinging to it or not. It is all dukkha as reality.
But if you cling to your life, you cling to your 5 agregates, then it is CAUSE of dukkha.
I am afraid, your understanding about dukkha in this video is fake dhamma.
What of the Third Noble Truth then? Is it dukkha too?
The Third Noble Truth is Nirodha. That is extinguishing cause of dukkha, i.e. extinguishing of desire (tanha). If cause of dukkha is extinguished, then there is no more dukkha (no more next rebirth, no more next life).
You must see the third noble truth in relation with paticcasamuppada. Desire (tanha) is cause for next rebirth. So, next rebirth (next life) is dukkha.
So the context is not as simplistic as you want to get something and then don't get it, then your heart becomes restless and sad, suffering. This example is not wrong, but it is not the essence of dukkha in the four noble truths.
We are all very fond of and attached to the life formations. Maybe what needs to be discussed is why life is dukkha? This is what needs to be penetrated with wisdom.
Buddhist religion is a peaceful religion no doubts duh🤍
Lol Buddhism is not religion. Buddhism is a dharma.
@@Sawo-500 Buddhist ** I didn't wrote Buddhism tho !
Buddhism is a Dharma ik that! But I talked about religion** not Dharma there.
@@riki10107 Bro, Gautama Buddha preached a dharma or dhamma . Not a religion. True Buddhism is a dharma or dhamma. Not a religion. But the vast majority of Buddhists do not see Buddhism as a dharma . As a religion.
@@Sawo-500 Oops then maybe my bad. But bruh I follow Buddhist as my main religion, I born in Canada but my whole family & me as well are Thailand people's,, maybe I donno about my own religion, (yes I sounds like a dumb, thnx) but people's have reasons & I have to,, have a good day anyways.
@@Sawo-500 Names names names. It is a Dharma, but obsessing over people defining it as "religion" sort of loses track of the point I'd think.
(Wednesday 11th. September, 2024)
===
Suffering is caused by the ignorance.
The ignorance will lead to lack of wisdom.
Lack of wisdom will lead to misunderstand.
For example : We believe that this body is our true self.
Because we are misunderstanding.
Therefore we attach to everything in this world.
I want to know, where can I find our true self?
It's just the belief. In realality our true self is just
phenomenon.What you see now doesn't mean a human being, doesn't mean an animal or an object.
===
= Everything in this world is the universal truth.
The universal truth is the true nature of reality
that has no name in any ficticious language
as we belive it.
For example : What you see or hear now is universal
truth such as...you are universal truth,I'm universal truth. Therefore we are not a human being.We are
just the phenomenon.
Therefore no one suffers. No one is happy.
(Please bare in mind).
===
Sooooo many people say to me, "how do you believe life is suffering and accept that to be true?"
I simply say to look into the first two noble truths. The first does indeed say say life is suffering, however the second explains how we can understand the first.
That's not the first noble truth, I'm afraid. The first noble truth is that, there IS dukkha; that there is unsatisfactory-ness resulting from clinging. Because you cling to impermenant states of being, there is suffering from 'an itch that can not be scratched' or a thirst that can never be truly quenched. There is no mention of life 'being' this way or 'is' this way, as that would contradict many doctrines on Sunyata, which implies that all phenomenon have no inherent nature. If life 'was' that, it could not be anything else. But because we can observe the world being things other than that, we see that it is not 'just' that.
@@dravenwag when you break it down in layman's terms, when you "cling" to something, you can create a attachment. Anything you become attached to you can fear losing. Fear of losing creates personal "suffering's".
Simply put even moreso, we suffer through our attachments.
You are almost exactly explaining my breakdown.
@@dravenwag know this too; I am not saying you're wrong.
Don't forget the third noble truth, that there's a way out ... !
Believing that life has suffering in it is not the same as thinking life is suffering.
To me that second saying feels depressing and totalitarian.
Today is Ashok Dhamma Vijayadashami. In India, it is celebrated with great pomp, on which day Emperor Ashoka left the policy of war and adopted the policy of Dhamma. 🙏☸️ Namo Buddhay 🙏
Oh thanks for letting us know Rahul! 🙏
From my experience you can calm the mind to the point that any mental activity has some degree of tension to it - even if it’s subtle. Then your mind finds the subtlest wave of formation of mental activity undesirable.
As far as I know Dukkah goes all the way down (through the mind, I haven’t gone beyond as yet).
Yes, that makes sense to me.
Your all videos are really soo informative .... I learnt lots more deep about the teaching of Buddha 🙏🙏🙏
Happy to help! 🙏😊
Bless You mate!
🙏😊
Thanks🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
My pleasure!
I officially cannot repeat this phrase endlessly now
😄😄😄
Each human being is thrown into an arena where we are programmed to attach to each other as well as our selves and our lives - only to not only face death but to know that each and every one of our loved ones will die. Noble beasts that we are, we choose to love anyway. To suggest that scenario isn’t one of suffering I think is disingenuous and waters down the power of our real situation. Ostensibly, there is no happy ending but in reality, this scenario is illusory. That’s what we need to realize.
Sure, a life filled with longing and loss will be one of suffering.
@@DougsDharma The reason I mention this is because I believe the impulse to turn away or to sugar coat our suffering is a matter of turning down a valuable gift with ugly wrapping. At the same time I take your point - that life should be celebrated and enjoyed and that life is good. I hope I'm not putting words in your mouth.
Dukkha is pervasive. There is occasional dukkha: birth, decay, disease, death. Then there is frequent dukkha: united, separated, not getting what one wants. Finally there is continuous dukkha: the five grasped-at aggregates.
And existence will go on indefinitely and in our perpetual wandering in samsara we would have shed enough tears/blood to the four oceans. The sensitive soul would look at this with horror and the fact that life is dukkha is a fake quote is not of a consolation.
Yes, thanks Kwok!
TQ 🙏
My view is there is a spectrum to suffering.From unease,unsatisfactory to suffering.From the standpoint of suffering,it can be felt when we lose our love ones ,fortunes or health.Those people who never contemplate on lifes suffering may resort to suicide.
Yes, for sure there is a spectrum, and some people have it much worse than others. This is one reason why compassion can be so powerful.
The basic premise truth often referred to as 4 noble truths and it is further qualified in detail in Satara Satipattana sutta under Dhammanupassana Bhawana
Five aggregates are the pun-skanda
Mama Rupa sunchnga sanjana and vignana
Strangely patichch samuppada described as dependendent origination is the foundation of analysis ...very few would agree with me if propose that paticca-samuppada is a dialectical process
Thank you for your brief discourse on suffering
You're very welcome zama, thanks for the comment!
Yes Doug, we cling to the varrying topics, views and ideologies etc from this world.
We cling to the varying famous people in the public, political parties etc.
And we form this identity of ourselves. Which we cling to, that are the 5 aggregates..
And in the moment of death, this identity we cling to cannot be let go of.
I admit I cling to Heavy Metal music, while I see some others who cling to Popular music.
And yes because of my clinging I may develop hate for those who only like Popular music.
But I do my best and put effort to not to let that happen.
Because I used to listen to Popular music back in the day too.
And I know that the defilment of Aversion is in me and so
I cultivate compassion and loving kindness instead
to counter the defilement of (aversion)
So the defilement (aversion) could be developed because? Because of my clinging to that type of Music.
And yes, they are definitely people that cling to heavy Metal (in the Heavy Metal community)
whom hates those who listen to Popular music. Vice Versa!
Now let's look at clinging to a view about Allah/God..This is just an example of Islam.
Yet this would occur in all the other religions.
Even among Buddhists it will occur, people follow certain delusional views, as not every Buddhist are well
educated about the teachings of Buddha. And because of the 3 defilements they occur!
For example those Terrorists cling to a view from the Quran and in them arise the defilement (aversion) and (delusion) to oppress the non believers
and terrorise them etc. Or defend their ideolgy. So in this way the defilement (hate/aversion) has arisen due to clinging to that view.
Evil intentions arises within them, and those terrorists act on those evil intentions. But that ultimately leads to their own suffering.
And also clinging to sensual pleasures, say someone is clinging to the pleasure of sexual satisfaction through harming others.
Then that person acts on those evil intentions due to clinging to that pleasure of sexual satisfaction. And hence the defilement of (Lust)
is so developed, that their mind is able to do evil. Just to satisfy their craving for that sexual satisfaction. Hence we see rapists and serial killers in this world who are able to do evil just for few moments of sexual satsfaction/sensual satisfaction. And they also don't have
a moral compass. Such as Psychopaths and Sociopaths, are unable to feel remorse/empathy or guilt etc.
This could be due to their defilments of aversion, delusion and lust being so strong, or physical damage on the brain etc.
And so they are unable to satify that craving/lust, as they are immensely clinging to sensual pleasures.
I recently watched the Netflix series called House Of Secrets. That was about a couple/family who was clinging to a rites and ritual
that would apparently save them and help them to obtain salvation etc.
Now because of that clinging to rites and ritual, they created an unfortunate circumstance that got their family killed.
That was clinging to rites and rituals, the defilment (Delusion) arose in them and cultivated. They were unable to see the real nature
of what they were doing, would actually get them killed!
So in this way we can see all this happening within us and others too! Hence Life is Suffering..
For sure, if life is filled with clinging, it will be suffering.
Sadhu sadhu
Thank you friend!
My pleasure!
hello , thanks for those beautiful videos , i have a question what is the best Buddhism books u recommend for beginners to start with , tks .
My pleasure meds. For books, check out my playlist: th-cam.com/play/PL0akoU_OszRjBKHxKj98qtSmcLpBmDWkL.html
Thank you so so much absolutely love your videos
Very kind of you to say. It's my pleasure! 🙏🙂
As being depressed, I know that life is suffering
I hope you can find a way out of depression. 🙏
Hey Doug, I find most of your videos really good, but I think you've given a limited definition of the word dukkha here by focussing on that last sentence "five aggregates subject to clinging". It sort of comes across to me as if you are saying that life becomes "satisfactory" if there is no clinging to the aggregates. The Buddha would reject this (positive) view too, just as he would reject the average (negative) interpretation of "life is suffering".
If we have a look at the 12 links in dependent origination, it should be apparent that he also considered clinging to birth as suffering. He called any form of becoming as dukkha. Repeatedly in the maha-parinibbana sutta for example, freedom from the craving of existence is mentioned. With a limited definition of dukkha, our definition of nibbana also becomes limited and subject to the (false) views of satisfactory non-existence or satisfactory existence. With an expanded definition of dukkha, our definition of nibbana becomes expanded and not subject to views of existence/non-existence.
Well the life of the arahant is a satisfactory life. What makes it satisfactory though is that there is no clinging to that life, no clinging to existence, and hence no particular desire for rebirth. This is the essence of the Third Noble Truth, which is the truth of the cessation of dukkha.
@@DougsDharma Thanks for the reply! I think it depends what you mean by „life“..? I assume that you mean the experience as through the 5 aggregates? I don‘t see what can be satisfactory about that which is continually disintegrating.
The third Noble truth is about freedom from suffering, not finding satisfaction in the aggregates that you once clung to. Finding satisfaction in the 5 aggregates and the view that all conditioned things are impermanent are contradictory views.
Thank you so much ❤️
My pleasure!
What I got from this idea is high expectations lead to suffering.
Yes, that can definitely be true, too.
buddha talked about truth about suffering, the cause of suffering, and how to end suffering...dukhalayam means world of suffering. suffering comes from the mind. the soul is trap in the mind and yoga is to help free the soul from this entrapment.
The Pali word from Buddhism, dukha, is also used in the Sikh religion which has scriptures written in Punjabi.
Interesting, I wonder if it's the same root.
Additionally, there is the phrase "Bhavanirodho nibbānaṁ" in the early discourses meaning "the cessation of existence is nibbana." Since nibbana in some way is the opposite of dukkha could we rephrase that as: existence is dukkha? And Bhikkhu Bodhi explains bhava as explicitly meaning "sentient existence" which is life.
I would say, existence subject to clinging is dukkha. It's the clinging that brings about the dukkha, as per the second noble truth. 🙂
@@DougsDharma As you mentioned in your video on the 2nd truth, it is the craving that leads to new existence. So the dukkha here is the new existence. What do you think?
Thank you
My pleasure!
It is a misunderstanding in confusion between the truth of suffering and a sensation of suffering.
Indeed, life is not only dukkha vedana; a feeling of suffering.
It is dukkha ariya sacca; the truth of suffering that exists.
Right, so long as we are subject to clinging.
The experience of dukkha can also lead to one realizing the imperfection of life
Yes, exactly so. It can spur us to practice.
🙏
🙏😊
Seriously, what if the Buddhist teaching is only ideology, built around some truisms, which really do not explain much, just like Murphy´s Law: "Nothing is always, and everything depends!"?
Well one of the central tenets of the Buddhist dharma is that of non-self. I don't think it's a truism. That said, his positions were subtle and complex. A thinker trying to conceive of a system of practice without considering what depends upon what will not be successful. Everything does depend.
@@DougsDharma well, thank you very much for your reply. Still I have problems with the whole "Buddha-Shop" (a bit like the May-Fourth Movement had with the "Confucius-Shop"). Let me put two arguments forward, as examples:
(1) Historical sciences have it that we don´t really know much about the life and work of the historic Buddha, Gautama Siddharta, the Muni from the Shakya-clan. There are not many hard facts---according to current scientific standards---available. Moreover, people still today hotly debate what the "non-self"-doctrine(s), which developed over many generations of Buddhist learners/teachers, really mean(s)---here, only to mention Stephan Batchelor, who recently did, i.m.o., some interesting hermeneutical exegesis on this topic. And, looking into human history, nearly all known belief-systems developed some kind of anthropological, or even universal e g o l o g y, so the Buddhist approach does not seem to me that unique---and some of the others may even have explored and/or explained some aspects more accurate, not to mention diverse modern scientific disciplines; but that would be a subject for further, most probably quite controverisal, interdisciplinary and/or interreligious debates.
(2) As I understand it, "existenzials" (M. Heidegger), like: time, causality, space, and "Being/being" (to allude to M. Heidegger´s "ontological difference"), are part of a kind of "philosophia perennis" (of which modern philosophical anthropology is a part), regarding the human condition. What makes them "familiar strangers", to paraphrase the title of a book on "Time" by Julius Thomas Fraser.
Sorry, got a bit lenghty. Thanks for sharing.
common sense will tell you life is suffering
What do you make of the different opinions in the comments?
Personally I feel like a milder interpretation is more in line with a secular approach towards integrating the buddhist teachings. If one accepts the metaphysical interpretation of samsara and rebirth, i think it makes sense to see "human life" as something overall negative, because negative consequences and an underlying negative mechanism are jn place. However a secular interpretation seems largely neutral on both. We are just here, and some types of eudaimonia are archievable even tho they might not be permanent or lead to some deprivation later. To me, the way I understand the first noble truths shifts with my metaphysical beliefs. If someone says "all conditioned phenomena are dukkha", that seems metaphysical to me. I think jacques lacan has a theory of desire that is very compelling for secularist and compatible with secular buddhism
Also, are you an antinatalist, i.e. do you think secular buddhist should not reproduce?
Well I think for us unenlightened beings, the teaching can be understood as life being suffering. Since we're unenlightened, we are prone to craving and clinging, and craving and clinging just do produce suffering. They also produce happiness, but impermanent happiness. So long as we can see the Third Noble Truth there is an escape. As to having children, I think that's entirely up to each of us individually.
I'm a bit irritated that I haven't heard this expressly stated before.
If that is the case, your irritability would be a dissatisfaction with not having known before and is, therefore, dukkah. I have never met anyone who didn't fall into the trap of clinging without realising it during their lives. Doug's description was simple and helpful for all of us.
Interesting Dan! Well, I hope it cleared something up for you then.
It's not life is suffering, its
1; the truth of suffering.
2; the truth of causes.
3; the truth of cessation.
4; the truth of the path.
Are you Chinese ?🤔
Yes, exactly so.
Yep indeed!
It’s funny how people won’t let others say a truth a certain way and insist on one particular way of saying something.That’s how I view this issue. In a sense, “life is suffering” (or the unsatisfactoriness of it) in that the major aspects of it (aging, clinging, illness, and death) are what we could call the sum total of how an unenlightened humanity chooses to view it, so I still don’t see the problem with saying it.
I kind of agree, though I would say that the video helps with combatting misunderstandings. The phrase "Life is suffering" used to refer to just Buddhism in general can be "truthful" to the philosophy and so on when spoken by someone. But when somebody is learning Buddhist philosophy it's probably a better idea, I imagine. I wish I could organise my thoughts more coherently here.
Sure, so long as we understand the context it may be OK.
The problem with a quote like this is that people hear the quote and completely misunderstand it. If you explain what you mean with the quote than that problem disappears.
So it depends on how you use it if what you say is correct imo.
Buddha says life annica,dukka,annata.
Well he says these are the three marks of existence: th-cam.com/video/MqAW6BU2O_8/w-d-xo.html
Suffering mean kashat dukha
Do a video on was buddha a avatar of the hindu god vishnu?
@@kartiksingh-ko2lz yes i know but hindu nationalists needs to know the truth
@@kartiksingh-ko2lz i am technically an Indian atheist living in Jharkhand i have studied many buddhist scriptures i requested this video since many westerner doesn't knows this and Doug's dharma is one of the most watched channels of Buddhism
😂😂Why Hindus beleive that? Thats the reason buddhism no longer availible in India,,,Hindu,Muslim had challenge with buddhism,,,go and study buddhism,,,Hindu is baby infront of buddha teaching,,,
buddha born in 2500 years ago and Hindu is the main religion that time,,,why buddha leave hindusm? reason is Hindu is not the right path,,,and he leave kingdom ,,and search path to Nirwana,,,,
1st Teacher is Yogi alara kalama,,he couldnt give the answers,,2nd one is uddika rama putta he also fail
before gautama started to meditation over 6 years,,,after he understand deep meditation is not the way,
middle way is the best,,,he realized the truth,,,,
in india now you can also see yogies meditate deeply,,,no shower,without food,without anything,,,thats the wrong,,,
study buddhism
It is kind of ok for someone from non Buddhist upbringing to believe these kind of fake quotes to be true.
But the thing is being born as buddhists and having the opportunity to listen to dharma sermons as well as read a plethora of dhamma books 24×7 ,most Sri Lankans believe these quotes are true 🤷
Interesting, I wonder why.
Doesn't life "cling" to the condition of living in some sense? Have you ever watched an organism go through the paroxysms of dying? Wouldn't that make "Life is suffering" true?
Well the third noble truth says that we don't necessarily cling to life. It does take a lot of practice work though.
Analytic philosophy entered the room 👀
Language game?
😄The Buddha was very analytical himself ...
Birth is suffering,so is decay,disease and death.
If birth,old age,sickness and death is not life, so what is life?
Life is suffering!
If your life only consists of. Birth, sickness, old age and dying it is probably quite short. Most people arent sick their entire lives or immediately old
Please do not mislead people that’s very bad karma for you. Dukha is suffering and this is the fundamental teaching of Buddha that all of the Buddhist scholars agree to.
No he is right on this.
Dukka is not only just suffering , unpleasant feeling may give us suffering,thats obvious,
Suppose one may have very pleasant feeling,that is also under 'Dukka sachcha' (first noble truth)
Tell me how a pleasant feelings coming under dukka then ?
The answer is even if there is a pleasant,unpleasant or neutral feelings all subject to impermanence, thats why it say dukka.
Dukka is to be understand not based on feelings,
Impermanent nature shold have to realized through the wisdom.
This to not easy its very subtle only tiniest ppl can touch !
He is correct. Dukkha is not inherently suffering, studying concepts like Interdependent origination will correct this viewpoint.
Dukha is in contrast to Sukha. Both terms originally relating to the nature of a wheel in a wheel well. A bumpy wheel is a Dukha wheel while a smooth rise is a Sukha ride.
Suffering is a stretch for a term that means a bumpy ride.
@@SoyElta sukha is also impermanent therefore that’s also dukha therefore Buddha offers session of Dukha that is to cut off all your desire but this is only basic point. You have to experience much deeper understanding of mind and nature for some realization but without the concerned of Dukha being reborn in samsara again and again it will be difficult to find motivation to practice meditation. Remember having a great life financial security etc dose not mean sukha in Buddhism that’s also Dukha because you will not like it if you suddenly lost everything
@@kbgirel6965 sukha also categories as Dukkha,not only because its sudden loss and converting in to the opposite.
In celestial worlds in dewa (deities and brahmas) they always having only SUKHA feelings.But still they also suffering,
So dukka does not measure only by feelings.
All compounded things has the nature of impermanence(the impermanence is not just the decaying and changing nature,it goes beyond that)
Suppose the incident of seeing the sky.as for our normal eye sight,it seems like a blue color wall (as a object).But actually it is not a wall(object).it only appears as such due to characteristics of the sunlight.
In the same way all sukha dukka and upekkha feelings are not things they just like the blue wall concept.when we deeply contemplate them,they are mere illusions made by the ignorance.
(1.noble truth )Dukkha is a thing has to be realized,(2NT)then the thanha or the craving has to be removed(when we see the 1st NB,the second will fade away),then the cessation of the dukka (3NT)can be attained.for that we have to go the path(4 NT) - beginning with this right view (the correct view of the 4 Noble Truths)
This quote singlehandedly validates the antinatalists.
No it doesn't. I could easily point out that you're not letting things be subject to pleasant and kind experiences, like meeting wonderful people and having good experiences. Are you a bad person because you don't want to let things experience good things? Also, if you watch the video, the quote does not validate anti-natalism as the quote is not attributed to the Buddha and the phrase is unsubstantiated.
@@dravenwag I think the word "suffering" needs to be understood deep. But here's my greatest of the greatest fear: the existential self-hatred that people face leads them to believe that "life is suffering" and not "life has suffering". It looks too complex, but I'm afraid seeing people find solace in the annihilation of sentience, be it the human race alone or the whole of organisms.
The truth is often uncomfortable. I prefer not to sugar coat it. You don't have to agree.
I think he tried to demonstrate that he disagrees conceptually, not to sugarcoat it, but as you said people read/interpret it differently, as well as people reading rebirth differently
@@patrickthomasius I think it can be more of a case of wishful thinking than a matter of interpretation if we're not careful. We can disguise wishful thinking as interpretation and even fool ourselves, perhaps. It may not be completely avoidable, but I think it's something worth monitoring. I don't believe in rebirth, and quite frankly, I think it adds unnecessary complexity, but I can't change what may or may not have been stated about it, from a historical standpoint, solely based on my personal beliefs... or disbelief. I'm not accusing Doug of anything. I'm just speaking in general. I'm not even sure if I remember what he said... which means I don't remember what he said about what someone else said who may or may not have even existed...