...
>4. If the desire to end rebirth or be enlightened will make it impossible for one to end rebirth or become enlightened, then this means that buddhists (meaning people who TRY to live according to the eightfold path) are the people who have FAILED to be like Buddha. In telling people this path, Buddha seems to have seduced his listeners TO suffering.
I've considered the same thing, and it's kind of sad. Many people define themselves by how much they want enlightenment and in doing so, they are consumed by desire for it. Then, going through all the steps and practices becomes hollow. I believe most buddhist practices serve to make the mind into "fertile ground for enlightenment" but these guys get tunnel vision and just want to get through it and reach the goal. Clearly this was not the intention, but if you tell a desirous person "I will show you how to stop suffering" I guess that's what you often get...
Like I mentioned above, I don't claim to be fully enlightened or anything, but my way in was basically that I wanted to understand Buddhism (after studying various other religions of interest,) so I studied it up and down, followed crazy leads to tangents, pondered the meaning of koans... found it all very interesting but hard to crack, then went on with my life. Then one day it kind of sunk in how absolutely all things are changing constantly if subtlely, and even if it takes a million years, eventually things will be reduced to dust and debris in the vastness of space. All of my loved ones, any and all of my toys, diversions, and creature comforts could at any time be lost for good, so it would be wise not to become too attached to them. It kind of clicked there and my world view was shifted in perpetuity thus far. I surround myself with diversions and comforts unbecoming of a devout buddhist, but when I lose them - for example a few big hard drive crashes, a stolen motorcycle, and this week I lost a keyword database of about 17,000 pictures on my hard drive - I'm shocked, then sad for a short time, then I simply move on because to dwell on it would be to become trapped in the desire to have it all back and unless I can do something about it, that would be counterproductive. In my interpretation of Zen non-attachment, you should be fully aware and present for these feelings of loss as they're only natural, but then let them go because they've been addressed and letting them cling is a distraction.
>If Buddha wasn't an all-knowing divine being, how come buddhists told me that Buddha never spoke anything but truth, and didn't leave anything unsaid? How come any other opinion than Buddhas opinion is expressly forbidden on E-sangha - the largest buddhist board - and that these are considered "wrong" even when voiced as personal opinions? This implies that in order to become a buddha, one must agree with everything that Buddha said, including his talk about rebirth, making it plain idol worship: "Agree with anything that Bono says, and you'll be as great as him."
The scriptures (of which no official collection exists! ha!) largely speak of absolute truth and infinite compassion, etc. They are also (all?) written after Siddhartha's death, much like the bulk of the Christian bible I think. Some of them have buddha addressing assemblies of gods and teaching them as well. I think this is not literal, but illustrative. Many of the more esoteric and bizarre of them also would make more sense when taken in the context of (ancient?) Hinduism. There wasn't much to be said for religious purity back then, and Buddhism picks up some interesting stuff as it moves East across Asia. In a nutshell, Zen is the result of Buddhism being born around Brahmanism, moving through India in Buddhist and Hindu form, then bouncing off China, dropping much Hinduism and picking up some Tao, before settling in Japan and being further whittled down to Zen. The real story is much more complicated though.
So that explains the absolute truth angle of it, but not being questionable? That is crap... one of the things I appreciated was the willingness to be questioned I found. As I studied, I found many places where questioning was invited, but I can't find a good link that isn't an academic paper on early buddhism so again it could be just that I adhere to one of hundreds of niche schools of buddhism that does it this way... This is a very good article on secular buddhism that also addresses point 3 well:
http://home.elp.rr.com/helmling/nonfict/buddha.htm
I will say this though - I don't mean to be preachy by posting all this info up here, but instead just to clarify misconceptions. DO NOT take buddhist teachings for granted, but if you find yourself interested, simply give them fair consideration as to how they may apply to you... I'm someone who would happily classify himself an atheist, but buddhism didn't require me to change that, and I found all too often that I agreed with the teachings on a philosophical and logical level so I took the label. That is also why I'm not the model image of devotion here...
>Becoming a monk means a life of devotion to oneself. While perhaps not evil, that has to be at least selfish.
Yep. In many cases I'd agree, though I'd respect them as experts in their field with more spiritual and meditative experience than I. It does seem like a cop out to just devote ones life to meditating and begging for alms though. (Again, not all do. I like Hyakujo (aka Baizhang Huaihai's) approach -
http://www.101zenstories.com/index.php?story=83 He was one of the very earliest Zen masters)
>5. I'd love to know which study too, but unfortunately the TV news doesn't specify its sources. While settling for less doesn't necessarily make you miserable, the study shows craving more makes you even happier. It may seem strange to desire more than the numerous inanimate objects in nature, but perhaps that's what make humans tick and survive evolution.
Agreed. I just doubt the universality of it. The crux of Buddhism is that this can be transcended AND happiness found in doing so, as has been going on formally recognized as such for over two millenia. Not that wanting and seeking aren't thrilling, but it's not the only way; and as they say, "money can't buy happiness." If you're always left wanting, you always have a hollow spot that is never filled... This concept is sometimes referred to as "hungry ghosts."
>6. Trying to be aware of everything, is a typical example of overloading ones awareness/senses. If you even invite things such as koans (with premises such as certain wise men being wise) while overloading, the koan will bypass your will (while its caught up in the distraction of trying to be aware). Hypnotism will also make you concentrate better, as it rids you of doubt.
Good things to be aware of, but still not quite accurate. If you are overwhelmed by Zen meditation, you are trying to hard and thinking too much. In reality, mental focus shifts subconciously like the point of focus of your eyes (saccades.) When I meditate, I am not so overwhelmed with sensory data that I zone out, but once I stop thinking on whims and tangents and running my brain over little things that don't matter, I start to notice things like the feeling of breathing, little bodily discomforts I'd been ignoring, the temperature of the room I'm in and any little air flows or drafts in it, the smell of the area, sounds coming from outside, how well rested I am, etc... - things that are glossed over when distracted by um... "non-zen thought?" It is refreshing, like having a fog lifted from my head, and is literally expanding my sphere of awareness as I am aware of much more of my surroundings than usual, but the only profound realizations that come of it occur when - without all the normal inhibitions and clutter in my mind - a thought arises and I'm able to deal with it freely without mental inhibition. I'm not really more suggestable to anything unless I'm already predisposed to think that way without all my personality constructs and tatemae getting in the way. (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tatemae sorry for all the links. It's really hard to explain something like this in plain language which is why so many writings on the subject are cryptic and bizarre...)
But really, without being able to grab your brain and stick it in a meditative state for you, I don't know what would convince you this isn't just religious nut babblings... that's the rub. THIS form of meditation is literally the opposite of hypnotism and self deception. You are supposed to be fully present in the current moment, not thinking about other distractions, not zoning out and slipping into an "altered state," but instead... as close as possible to absolute sobriety. That is one reason it is so invigorating - you concentrate on the present moment (as it passes to the next...) as though your life depended on it and do not accept boredom. You do not accept doubt either, but likewise of any koans and teachings - those are not "now" and are also left behind. What you see is what you get. Like I said, if you practice this, it greatly benefits mental discipline and concentration, as well as awareness in daily life even if you take it without a single buddhist concept attached. If you want to try this it is important to remember that the human mind DOES get sidetracked habitually and that's no reason to get mad at it, simply shrug off a thought if it is superfluous and move on without returning to it. If it IS important, deal with it with full concentration and then move on.
I'll end this epically long post by saying that I won't have time to cite sources and dig up articles like this again this week, but Gil Fronsdal has a real gift for explaining Zen concepts in plain English in a way that a Western audience can relate to it.
http://www.audiodharma.org/talks-gil.html