The western path to happiness is pathologically conflated with, and therefore subverted by, the contaminant nature of acquisitive consumerism, and the faulty thinking that we can actually buy our way to it, or read our way to it, or attain it if we wear the right clothes, or we ape the glossy aspirational celebrity lifestyle. It’s ridiculous really, trite, shallow, yet there is something in our psyche that makes us vulnerable to such puerile deceit, and it is used relentlessly to oppress us.
Consumerism is like drinking salt-water. The more we drink the thirstier we become. It is self evidently absurd – we feel unhappy, afraid, existentially irrelevant, so we go out and buy something. And we feel better for a millisecond. Some of us might wake up to this never ending cycle of and seek happiness instead in religion, in a belief in something greater than ourselves, greater even than the consumer society, something spiritual. But religious belief can also run counter to what is humane, or sensible, or even decent, especially when dogma is held to be of more importance than individual human suffering. Then we end up merely fighting the other guy because he does not hold to our beliefs, and because his very existence is a challenge to the validity of our own ideas. And in destroying him we prove our beliefs are stronger, truer, closer to God and all that. By our own oppression of others then we seek to prove that we are right.
The perverted nature of both consumerism and religion is writ large enough in the world for us all to know it when we see it, but it is still hard to untangle ourselves and live a decent, happy life. If we are fortunate in finding a way to analyse ourselves, this can at least grant us sufficient perspective to avoid the worst excesses of our profoundly sick society. And curiously, sometimes, self analysis throws up parallels to the ancient founding methods espoused by certain religions themselves, methods that take much by way of digging now to get at, as they have been glossed over or obscured by sedimentary layers of elaborate decoration.
Take me, for example. I have been following a largely Buddhist path for decades now, but even to label it as such risks narrowing its meaning to the point where it disappears. In attempting to explain this philosophy in simple terms I sometimes say I am drawn to Buddhism, but I find even the mention of that word causes confusion
“So,… like,… you mean,… you actually worship the Buddha?”
No, I do not worship the Buddha.
I don’t do that kind of Buddhism.
Secular or philosophical Buddhism is not a belief system. It does not offer up an image for deification and worship, although the Buddha finds himself, much against his own advice, an inevitable candidate amongst the more religious followers of his teachings.
Secular Buddhism is more a pragmatic approach to understanding the mind. Among the many traditions, it comes closest to the enigmatically inscrutable Zen or Chan Buddhism. In this sense there is much to compare between it and the western practice of Psychoanalysis. The man we call Buddha thought about the nature of suffering, and its antithesis: happiness. Why are we not happy? Because we suffer. Why do we suffer? Because we fear the loss of something, all the time: money, youth, prestige, health, and ultimately life itself. Through our attachments, and our self centred cravings to hold on to these things, and through them our selves, we suffer.
The realisation of the nature of suffering and its causes in continual craving are the first two of the four so called noble truths of Buddhism, and the keystone of its thinking. From here, Buddhism can become either a religion or a philosophy, depending on one’s approach. If we accept these things as being true, but without any direct experience of them, then they become part of a belief system, and Buddhism becomes a religion we choose to believe in. If however, we have a visceral experience of the truth of these things, then we have the beginnings of a practical approach for realising our own happiness, which means attaining a peaceful coexistence with our selves and our fellow human beings.
The notion of an eternal craving giving rise to suffering is something I have no trouble accepting. Apart from the usual aforementioned day to day stuff my own significant past cravings have been for wellness and acceptance, neither of which are attainable by craving them, so I have had to find a way of stopping craving them. This is not to say that to stop craving them means we will attain them, merely that the lack of them no longer makes us unhappy. At times, we defeat ourselves from the outset in our search for a thing simply by setting out on the search for it in the first place.
The other two noble truths follow on from the realisation of suffering and its cause: craving: namely that craving can cease, and that there is a way of achieving it, a path if you like, a way of thinking, a way of approaching life, of recognising that what we seek is not always the thing we most need and that what we most need, we can discover unexpectedly by not looking for it. By not looking for a thing, we discover something else, something better.
Like all the ancient religions, Buddhism is now overlaid with rich tapestries of tradition, ritual, and myth. Its myths, like all religions, offer a slant on what happens to us when we die – namely the belief in reincarnation and that the quality of our current life is determined by our conduct in the last one (Karma). Differing Buddhist traditions offer varying emphasis, and more or less significance to each. Many in the west have trouble with both Reincarnation and Karma, but if we get to the root of Buddhism, we find we need not hold to them if we do not like them. It does not exclude us from Buddhist thought.
I have written elsewhere about the possible nature of a continuation of a form of psychical existence after death. This is my own myth-making and borrows more from the western classical tradition. I have woven it into my stories as a means of exploring it, and am drawn intellectually towards the evidence suggestive of it, (precognition, lucid dreaming, near death experience)but this evidence is far from conclusive, and to claim otherwise would be to infuse my explorations with a religiosity demanding much by way of belief. And I am not a religious person.
Buddhism does not inform such beliefs, more it affirms the value of simply saying we do not know. In the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, meditations on the approach and nearness to death are said to ready one for the transition to the afterlife state, and subsequent rebirth, but if it turns out there is no such thing, to approach one’s death calmly, through meditation, is far better than to approach it in a state of fear. Here we see traditional belief tempered back from the rigidity of dogma, by an admirable pragmatism.
Buddhist religious beliefs vary from one tradition to the next, but at its root it can be taken as a purely agnostic system of thought. To be agnostic, we accept there are certain things in life we cannot know. This is not to confuse agnosticism with indecision, nor scepticism. In true agnosticism, we simply rely on our rational senses to take us as far as we can in understanding what’s going on, without accepting as concrete any conclusions drawn by others that have not first been demonstrated to us, and thereby absorbed into rational knowledge by our own experience.
Nor is, “awakening”, in the Buddhist sense, to experience a mind blowing, transcendental awareness of our oneness with all things. This is not say such things do not happen; they have happened to me, and they are perplexing, but I do not know what they mean, and it’s all right not to know, and to accept that one may never explain them. To awaken is simply to realise the nature of suffering, and that its cause lies in our perpetual craving for things to be other than they are.
To live along Buddhist principles is to walk the path of gradually releasing oneself back into a state of awareness untainted by craving. And to be released is to experience the world around us more vividly , and with a compassion for everything alive in it. We feel craving day to day as a resistance to things, to ideas, to the way things are going, or might go for us, to the thought of things running out, time or life or both, to the thought of things filling up like our email inbox when we are away on holiday. We wish these things were not so, internally, we resist them. Letting go of the craving for things to be other than they are, is a matter of simply not resisting what happens.
“Only if we resist what happens are we at the mercy of what happens, and the world will determine our happiness and unhappiness. “
– Eckhart Tolle
If we can reasonably bring about change in order to subvert what we perceive to be an adverse fate – like pulling our money out of the stock market before it crashes – then we should do so, so long as we do not expect such things to permanently secure our happiness. But in the main it is about remaining alert for those things that give rise to a resistance of the present moment, and learning to let them go. We rest then in our own experience of life, resisting nothing, trusting only in what is worthy, and believing in absolutely nothing.
But don’t be fooled. Life is still a trial. I rant, get cross and grumpy about things I cannot alter and fail to act in time with those things I can and should alter. I lose myself in the noise, I fall down in despair at the apparent unfairness of things, I become a “poor me”, but sometimes,.. just sometimes, I’m able to catch myself, remind myself there is another way to think, another way to be, and then I am able to brighten up, to enjoy the world for a while once more.
This may be Buddhism, it may not.
Call it what you like.
Read Full Post »