Hi Tamdrin,tamdrin12 wrote:In the Buddhist world view, just satisfying your romantic desires doesn't make you happy. That is the problem, it gives you temporary enjoyment or rather distraction and then when it is over you are left back at the place you started. Pursuit of temporary pleasures consumes ones time and in an effort to become happy one doesn't really find true happiness. Thus a greater happiness is found by seeking liberation.
Whether you agree or not, In Buddhism desire and emotions have been likened to something like this: ((( If you have an itch it feels good to scratch it, but it is better not to have had the itch in the first place.)))
I disagree with your assessment that all Buddhists are soulless and without passion. You met the Lama Garchen Rinpoche. If you watch him he is always alive with good energy, smiles, and loving other people. Even though he went through some serious difficulties in his life (20 years in prison in China) he came out loving and not resentful. That certainly is a good result from Buddhist practice.
Buddhism recognizes that every single, not only human but animal and unseen being wants to be happy, yet we are not, so found within Buddhism are the teachings on how to attain relative worldly happiness, not just transcendental nirvana. We want happiness, but yet, we- human beings- do actions that bring misery (the opposite of what we want)- this Is a reason for compassion.
Buddhism should be a way to overcome adversity and the suffering that we will inevitably have in life.
Winston: Get real happier abroad does not offer a grand solution to lifes problems. The truth is that once the lonely men in America find companionship abroad they will be faced with a new reality of problems that were previously unseen. This is the reality of life in samsara... No matter who you are or what you get you cannot be totally content with it. Many very wealthy people in western countries are depressed and feel lonely for example. Plus just indulging your passions doesn't make you more human at all. LOok at the guys who run around and f**k anything walking on two legs. They are more like animals if anything. What makes you more human is your ability to love other people not indulge in your fantasies and desires. That said I am not against fulfilling your desires I just don't think people should make that their life's purpose with the expectation that it will bring true satisfaction.
Starchild: The reason that India is in such a sorry condition is not the presence of religion. It is because the Indians are not following the core ethical commandments of the religion which will bring happiness and harmony to a society. People are cheating, lying, scamming, etc.... We are actually more moralistic in the west , but that is not something that definitely has to come from religion.
No of course, satisfying your desires doesn't lead to long term permanent happiness. Duh. No one thinks that it does. But it's better than always being dissatisfied and never getting what you want. Yes life is suffering in that there will always be problems of some kind in your life, whether it's money and love, or something else. But that doesn't mean all lives are equal. The super rich Donald Trump has a much better life, for example, than a beggar in the Philippines who is malnourished and dying of hunger and malnutrition. Anyone would choose Donald Trump's life over the latter, even if both have different kinds of suffering. Get real here.
Besides, you heard the term, "Better to have loved and lost then to have never loved at all." Even if you loved and lost, at least you had real emotions and you really cared. That's what makes you human. In the movie "The Firm (1993)" with Tom Cruise and Gene Hackman, near the end, Gene Hackman character, a corrupt lawyer, tells Tom Cruise's wife that he hasn't felt love or cared about anyone for a long time, and he misses the ability to care for others. You see, being a corrupt lawyer without ethics, he lost the ability to feel or care or empathize a long time ago, so it ate away at his soul. When you can care and love for someone, it makes you feel alive and human, and that's better than being repressed and sterile like Buddhists usually are, at least the ones I've met. Do you understand?
Not all Buddhists are soulless. Of course the Lama Garden Rinpoche is going to look happy. He is at a high level spiritually and the closest to enlightenment. But he is an exception. I was near Tibet and the Tibetan monks were more genuine and direct, not as repressed as the Buddhists in Taiwan and America. But then again, Taiwan and America are repressed sterile cultures, so Buddhism merely gives people an excuse to be what they already are -- repressed and sterile. However, most of the staff that I met at the Buddhist center in Arizona were in fact repressed. It's in their vibe. And Taiwanese Buddhists monks are definitely repressed for sure, since that's part of their culture as well as their religion. Go to Taiwan and see how Buddhist teachers and gurus are there -- they look very repressed, uptight and overly serious. Not like Lama Garden Rinpoche at all.
Buddhism does contain good coping techniques for dealing with stress and pain. For that it has great value. But it doesn't necessarily lead to lasting happiness or fulfillment, at least not for everyone. In fact, it is lacking in many ways. Here are the problems I see with Buddhism and why it doesn't lead to happiness or fulfillment:
1. The problem is that Buddhism doesn't give you any meaning in life, no purpose to live for, and no cause to fight for. A man needs a noble cause to fight for, an honorable reason to live, etc. Do you think the Knights of the Roundtable of King Arthur would be happy with Buddhism giving them no reason to live or cause to fight for? lol. Some people need a purpose to live for and fight for. Not just a way to end suffering or attain peace of mind. You gotta understand that. That's why Buddhism is not for everyone. No religion is for everyone.
In the original Star Trek episode "This Side of Paradise", Captain Kirk is against letting his whole crew go down to the green planet below to live out their lives in peace, happiness and contentment without want or desire, because, as Kirk says, "Man has no purpose to live if he doesn't strive to be better than what he is." Without the striving to improve yourself and your society, there is no growth and mankind's evolution is stinted, Kirk was saying.
Think about this for a moment. Suppose Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Hitler, were all Buddhists instead of conquerors. Would they have been more happy? Not necessarily. You see, some men need a purpose to fight for and are willing to die for their cause. They'd rather die doing something they believe in than live doing something they don't believe in. Such figures wanted to conquer Europe, that was their purpose that gave their lives meaning and glory. Glory was what they wanted, not peace. They were willing to die for this glory too. So, even though they all ended up dead, and suffered in their pursuits, still, at least they did what they believed in. Even if their glory caused them "suffering", at least they did what they believed in.
So you see, sometimes, doing what you believe in and enduring the suffering that comes with it, is better than not being able to do what you want at all, or to live the way you want. Not everyone can be a peaceful Buddhist monk, you see. For some, doing what they love that gives them purpose and glory, is MORE important than alleviating suffering or achieving peace of mind. Do you see what I mean?
2. Buddhism also does not explain where life came from or acknowledge our creator or creators, who probably lord over us today. Buddhism merely says that everything comes from "cause and effect" implying that Darwinian evolution may explain everything, but it doesn't. Evolution does not explain how the first cell was formed and replicated. All evolutionists admit that. Evolution is lacking and doesn't explain where we came from at all. That's an important topic I believe, but Buddhism considers it unknowable and therefore not worthy of attention.
3. Buddhism does not advocate standing up to evil or fighting against evil. Instead, it tells you to yield to your enemies and submit to them. It's too pacifist, so it's useful to the elite in pacifying the populace. So according to Buddhism, if evil cabals such as the Illuminati/NWO/Big Brother take over your government and destroy your Constitution and take away your freedoms and conduct conspiracies without accountability, resulting in vast corruption, you are to allow it all to happen. In other words, you are not to fight evil, but let it take over, because being a pacifist is the best way to nonviolence and your own safety. It allows evil to take over and dominate, because Buddhism doesn't believe in fighting evil, even if it's justified. If the American colonists were all Buddhists, for example, then the American Revolution would never have happened.
Also, let me ask you something. If Buddhism is a great spiritual religion, then why didn't the good karma of the Tibetan Buddhists protect them from the invading Chinese soldiers? Why didn't the good karma of Native Americans who were in harmony with nature, shield them from invading white armies and settlers? What good is a religion if it doesn't protect you? But instead, lets your enemies trample all over you?
4. Buddhism can help solve certain type of problems, of course, but not all. For example, it offers no solution for those who are lacking in love, romance, sex, or even friendship. It offers no remedy to loneliness. It does not fulfill one's sexual or romantic desires. Simply meditation or trying to reduce your desires, is not going to solve such basic needs. Denying them is not going to either. Lying and pretend that you don't need love, sex or romance, is only deceiving yourself and everyone else either, and will not fulfill your needs either.
In contrast, HappierAbroad does have a solution to this, which is to go to a better country and location that can better provide what you need, in terms of social life, dating, love, romance, sex, etc. Take me for example. My sexual and dating needs were met by getting out of America -- which offered no social or dating or sex life for me -- and going to the Philippines, where I got abundant dates and sex.
But if I had only turned to Buddhism in America, it would not have told me to go to the Philippines or even abroad. It would have told me to meditate to try to reduce my desires and detach from my cravings and emotions, so that I would not need other people for companionship or need women for romance or sex. That would NOT have solved my problems of course. You can't just turn off a major basic desire like the craving for sex or food. No way. To assume that you can is delusional and NOT TRUE. Yet Buddhism, as well as New Age and self-help pop psychology, tells you to STAY in your home country and change yourself, if you can't change your environment. Well that would NOT have fulfilled my sexual or romantic needs. But going abroad to the Philippines did. No comparison. See what I mean? This is just one example of why HA can solve a man's needs and desires, but Buddhism can't. Buddhist solutions do not usually involve changing LOCATION, but HA solutions do.
5. Likewise, Buddhism also doesn't help you if you are not happy with your location, culture and environment. If I felt lonely, alienated and disconnected in America or Taiwan for example -- because people in those countries are antisocial and don't talk to strangers or meet new people or make new friends, and because people in those countries no longer have any soul or emotions like they did in the past -- Buddhism would not be able to solve that. Buddhism would tell me to deal with my loneliness by meditating and being mindful of my emotions so that I learn to detach from them. However, that's not a realistic solution nor would it solve my problem, because humans are not meant to be hermits. Humans are meant to have companionship and social connection. So being lonely is NATURAL and NORMAL, not some bad affliction that has to be suppressed or detached from. That's the WRONG way of going about it!
Buddhism would NOT tell me that if I go to other countries, such as Russia and China, I can connect with people because people in those countries still have REAL souls and REAL emotions and act like REAL humans -- like Americans did in the 1960's and 1970's -- thus I will NOT be lonely and alienated in those countries. Buddhism would NOT tell me that if I go to Europe, I can meet people who are more genuine and down-to-earth and socially inclusive, thus I would have a better and more natural social life, and have a much easier time CONNECTING with others. Because the Buddhist solution does not usually involve changing LOCATION. Neither do New Age movements, pop psychology, or the self-help industry. But the HA solution does. So you see, what Buddhism lacks, HA makes up for and provides answers for.
Therefore, it is obvious that Buddhism is INCOMPLETE in many ways. It does not provide meaning or purpose in life. And it does not solve problems related to loneliness or lack of romance or sex. Yet HA does. I've experienced all this personally. So it's a FACT for me. Therefore, how can Buddhism lead to lasting happiness or fulfillment? Sure it helps in coping with stress and pain. But it doesn't solve problems or fulfill the needs described above. Neither does it give you the power to change your life or fight evil. Instead, all it does it pacify you.
Do you understand my position now? Sure Buddhism has real value and has helped many people. But so does Christianity and other major religions. These religions do help many people of course, otherwise they wouldn't exist. But they are incomplete for the reasons I listed above. What do you think? Do you see what I mean?
