"life Is Easy, Why Do We Make It So Hard"

[JRingo]

"Life is Easy. Why do we make it so hard?"

Published: 8/29/2005

“Life is easy. Why do we make it so hard?”

Why do humans choose to live their life in a difficult and complicated life like this? What do we receive from our hard work all our life? Why is the simple and peaceful way not attractive to people? Life is easy, why do we make it hard?

I lived the simple life for a short while in northern Thailand.

I think it was the happiest time of my life.

It is a virtual garden of Eden up there with food for the taking in the forests.

Nobody really worked, just sort of enjoyed life.

But without money, I had no healthcare.

And with no healthcare you die young.

And I don’t want to die young, so I left and went to work.

[thaibebop]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

Why does life need meaning? Why can't it just be? I remeber reading an interview with Paul Simon who was bouncing a ball against the side of his house while conducting the interview. The person aked him "Why are you doing that?" Simon said "Because I can."

Why can't life be like that? Then maybe we would waste so much time trying to find a meaning and killing each other over different made up meanings.

[sleepyjohn]

"Life is Easy. Why do we make it so hard?"

Published: 8/29/2005

“Life is easy. Why do we make it so hard?”

Jon Jandai

To be given life is the ultimate gift.

I thought that Buddihism viewed life as suffering, not as a great gift?

WHoooaaah!!

I'm late to go out, so do a search on Dukkha and get more accurate definitions. The fact that there is no English word for Dukkha is the reason we use the Pali. So do that.

Next if you actually interpret the Sutras yourself you may get a point of view that says:

"The way the human, in their normal human condition, views life is Dukkha. It is a deluded view, and luckily can be corrected."

I'll give you a personal view to add to it.

I have been interested to relate "Buddhist" factors in our make up, dukkha first and foremost, to a natural evolutionary root the same as everything else that we are, physical and mental. I believe dukkha has simply been another useful factor in us that has helped us get to the moment of procreation, the all important moment in Natural Selection. (Can you imagine a certain dissatisfaction making the dukkha subjected evolvee get up and doing things that might be useful to his survival quicker than a totally satisfied person? ).

However the fact it may have helped us procreate does NOT mean it helped us be happy.

I think it's important to understand that NS has also given us a positivity that actually outweighs the dukkha.........qed, we don't slit our wrists normally just because we're going thru a bad time or feeling down. This positivity generally makes us feel life is well worth having.

Despite this the Buddha, like a doctor, recognised a serious condition that did exist and proposed a cure.

So "Life is Suffering" is to me a very incorrect view of what the dharma teaches. In fact it is so incomplete that it really does point in the completely wrong direction and obscure the truth.

Next time you hear someone say it, give them a good kick in the shins.

Edited August 13, 2006 by sleepyjohn

[suegha]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

You know I don't believe in this, but I take your point!!!

[thaibebop]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

You know I don't believe in this, but I take your point!!!

Good enough for me.

[suegha]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

You know I don't believe in this, but I take your point!!!

Good enough for me.

And me too!

[kayo]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

You know I don't believe in this, but I take your point!!!

Good enough for me.

And me too!

I dunno i was ever a monkey in ancestrym but it don´t look too bad to this clown...

Me Three!

[Plus]

So what's the meaning of life, then? If people can't agree on this, they'll never agree on anything else - because they will judge everything from different perspectives.

I haven't read the whole original article, but it seems that the author doesn't recognize many opportunities that come with human life form as important. Animals apparently live their lives "as is", except they go through excrutiating pains to procreate?

Why do they need to procreate at all? Why do we need to procreate? Is it only to insure support in the old age? I'm afraid procreation is difficult to justify without any higher purpose in life. Even survival of the species - why should animals care about survival of their species? Why should I care about what comes after me?

I don't see any good answers without alluding to some higher purpose in life, on which we all disagree.

[sabaijai]

So what's the meaning of life, then? If people can't agree on this, they'll never agree on anything else - because they will judge everything from different perspectives.

I haven't read the whole original article, but it seems that the author doesn't recognize many opportunities that come with human life form as important. Animals apparently live their lives "as is", except they go through excrutiating pains to procreate?

Why do they need to procreate at all? Why do we need to procreate? Is it only to insure support in the old age? I'm afraid procreation is difficult to justify without any higher purpose in life. Even survival of the species - why should animals care about survival of their species? Why should I care about what comes after me?

I don't see any good answers without alluding to some higher purpose in life, on which we all disagree.

On this point Christianity are diametrically opposed. Buddhism seeks the cessation of corporeal existence, Christianity seeks its infinite extension. One view arrives as the result of renunciation, the other out of self-preservation.

[Plus]

What exactly do you mean by corporeal? I think Christians are going to heaven not in a "corporeal" way, they go a souls.

[thaibebop]

That's a good one.

However, patently not true!

Sure it is. Look at we monkeys have gone about things since we went from living in the tree to chopping them down!

You know I don't believe in this, but I take your point!!!

Good enough for me.

And me too!

I dunno i was ever a monkey in ancestrym but it don´t look too bad to this clown...

Me Three!

I don't EVEN want to know where you got that and why.

[sleepyjohn]

Isn't saying "life must have a meaning" a misuse of "meaning", a bit like saying people, or women, or animals, are born with rights, when in fact rights are no more than something we decide is a good idea to bestow with the power we necessarily have to bestow them?

Doesn't expecting that there is a meaning to life inferring there's some sort of plan?

So isn't a "meaning" simply something we can give life if we choose to, just like rights?

.........and perhaps giving one's life a meaning might be a damned good idea.

[kayo]

Oh.... Well expressed.. Not-so-sleepy.

Indeed, what is this eternal meaning, we strive to put into place?

Mai pen lai enters into it, if you wish. It makes life easier to deal with.

Shrug of the shoulders, and on to the next thing.

think about the atypical scene, a couple of old geezers sitting on a bench somewhere,w atching the world go by.

Nothing to do except observe. Sometimes something happens, sometimes, nothing. But even when somehting DOES happen, the old men don´t get excited. They just watch. and then shrug it off and wait for the next "something"....

[suegha]

So what's the meaning of life, then? If people can't agree on this, they'll never agree on anything else - because they will judge everything from different perspectives.

I haven't read the whole original article, but it seems that the author doesn't recognize many opportunities that come with human life form as important. Animals apparently live their lives "as is", except they go through excrutiating pains to procreate?

Why do they need to procreate at all? Why do we need to procreate? Is it only to insure support in the old age? I'm afraid procreation is difficult to justify without any higher purpose in life. Even survival of the species - why should animals care about survival of their species? Why should I care about what comes after me?

I don't see any good answers without alluding to some higher purpose in life, on which we all disagree.

On this point Christianity are diametrically opposed. Buddhism seeks the cessation of corporeal existence, Christianity seeks its infinite extension. One view arrives as the result of renunciation, the other out of self-preservation.

What exactly do you mean by corporeal? I think Christians are going to heaven not in a "corporeal" way, they go a souls.

Okay, I'll try to be brief. As a christian I do not believe in Heaven going. I believe in the literal return of Jesus to the earth and the establishment of God's kingdom over which Jesus will reign for ever. That's my first point. Second, the 'corporeal' existance is bad as it is, ie, it will be changed. Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

So in a strange sort of way I agree and disagree with the above posts! I hope I wasn't too brief!

[thaibebop]

So what's the meaning of life, then? If people can't agree on this, they'll never agree on anything else - because they will judge everything from different perspectives.

I haven't read the whole original article, but it seems that the author doesn't recognize many opportunities that come with human life form as important. Animals apparently live their lives "as is", except they go through excrutiating pains to procreate?

Why do they need to procreate at all? Why do we need to procreate? Is it only to insure support in the old age? I'm afraid procreation is difficult to justify without any higher purpose in life. Even survival of the species - why should animals care about survival of their species? Why should I care about what comes after me?

I don't see any good answers without alluding to some higher purpose in life, on which we all disagree.

On this point Christianity are diametrically opposed. Buddhism seeks the cessation of corporeal existence, Christianity seeks its infinite extension. One view arrives as the result of renunciation, the other out of self-preservation.

What exactly do you mean by corporeal? I think Christians are going to heaven not in a "corporeal" way, they go a souls.

Okay, I'll try to be brief. As a christian I do not believe in Heaven going. I believe in the literal return of Jesus to the earth and the establishment of God's kingdom over which Jesus will reign for ever. That's my first point. Second, the 'corporeal' existance is bad as it is, ie, it will be changed. Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

So in a strange sort of way I agree and disagree with the above posts! I hope I wasn't too brief!

So, basically you are going to wait around rotting in the dirt until Jesus decides to show up? Nice.

[Plus]

That begs a joke - Jesus went to heaven in coproreal form.

Generally Christians/Jews/Muslims want to go to heaven, or is it only until Christ's return?

[suegha]

So what's the meaning of life, then? If people can't agree on this, they'll never agree on anything else - because they will judge everything from different perspectives.

I haven't read the whole original article, but it seems that the author doesn't recognize many opportunities that come with human life form as important. Animals apparently live their lives "as is", except they go through excrutiating pains to procreate?

Why do they need to procreate at all? Why do we need to procreate? Is it only to insure support in the old age? I'm afraid procreation is difficult to justify without any higher purpose in life. Even survival of the species - why should animals care about survival of their species? Why should I care about what comes after me?

I don't see any good answers without alluding to some higher purpose in life, on which we all disagree.

On this point Christianity are diametrically opposed. Buddhism seeks the cessation of corporeal existence, Christianity seeks its infinite extension. One view arrives as the result of renunciation, the other out of self-preservation.

What exactly do you mean by corporeal? I think Christians are going to heaven not in a "corporeal" way, they go a souls.

Okay, I'll try to be brief. As a christian I do not believe in Heaven going. I believe in the literal return of Jesus to the earth and the establishment of God's kingdom over which Jesus will reign for ever. That's my first point. Second, the 'corporeal' existance is bad as it is, ie, it will be changed. Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

So in a strange sort of way I agree and disagree with the above posts! I hope I wasn't too brief!

So, basically you are going to wait around rotting in the dirt until Jesus decides to show up? Nice.

You are correct. Should I die before his return I will lie in the dust of the earth awaiting resurrection. 'For dust I am and unto dust I will return'.

[suegha]

That begs a joke - Jesus went to heaven in coproreal form.

Generally Christians/Jews/Muslims want to go to heaven, or is it only until Christ's return?

Hi Plus, not sure which post you are actually refering to, however, many Christians are awaiting the return of Jesus to the earth. And yes, he did 'bodily' ascend and he will 'bodily' return. See my comment above to Thaibebop regarding resurection. 1 thes 4.16-17 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever.

So like I said many christians (and jews) don't believe in Heaven going but believe in everlasting life here on the earth.

I hope this helps.

[sleepyjohn]

Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

Earlier I suggested the Buddha was saying something like:

"The way the human, in their normal human condition, views life is Dukkha. It is a deluded view, and luckily can be corrected."

Revelations may have given a great example of a delusion.....that death is somehow bad. Actually there's nothing bad about death in any case is there....it's the expectation or fear of death that's a problem? But this fear is only built into us by a combination of evolution and experience of our elders and peers being afraid of it, bringing about habitual fear in us. It's all you can do to get to see a good dead body in the west these days. Just noticing the way some other cultures regard death with much less trepidation should show fear of death is largely a learnt experience.

Suegha you don't have to wait for God to wipe the tears from your eyes......you can do it yourself.

There's a well mapped method. It's called the Eightfold Path.

Edited August 16, 2006 by sleepyjohn

[camerata]

Since we're on the subject of saviours returning to earth, it's worth noting that many Buddhists (mostly of the Mahayana persuasion) believe that one day Maitreya ("the Buddha of the Future" but currently a bodhisattva) will "return" to earth and "save" us all. In other words, another Buddha will arise and guide humanity to liberation in the way Sakyamuni once did.

According to The Buddha in the Jungle, early Christian missionaries in the north of Thailand were overjoyed to find villagers showing deep respect to pictures of Jesus Christ - only to be disappointed when they subsequently discovered the villagers thought the image was of Maitreya.

Maitreya

[sabaijai]

Since we're on the subject of saviours returning to earth, it's worth noting that many Buddhists (mostly of the Mahayana persuasion) believe that one day Maitreya ("the Buddha of the Future" but currently a bodhisattva) will "return" to earth and "save" us all. In other words, another Buddha will arise and guide humanity to liberation in the way Sakyamuni once did.

According to The Buddha in the Jungle, early Christian missionaries in the north of Thailand were overjoyed to find villagers showing deep respect to pictures of Jesus Christ - only to be disappointed when they subsequently discovered the villagers thought the image was of Maitreya.

Maitreya

Some Mahayana followers also believe in a Buddhist version of heaven, aka Pure Land, where one dwells in happiness for all time.

For Theravadins however there is no such realm. Heavenly realms, brahman realms, deva realms, all our illusory and temporary.

Buddhism has a best heaven. Everything is just the way you want it to be. In this heaven, there is no reason to change anything. You are ultimately happy. The problem is that it's not permanent, as is everything in Buddhism. One day in the heaven realm is equal to 400 human years, and your stay is four thousand heaven years, so you will be there a really long time.

Do Buddhists Go to Heaven?

[Plus]

Let's not get very deep into differences over heavens here. My point originally was that people expect some sort of a reward after death - heaven here, heaven there, end of suffering etc each religion has its own.

To get this reward they need to follow some instructions, change their lives in some way, change their priorities, change their goals in life. Their definition of happiness will also change (assuming that what is everyone after).

The original post defined happiness as some sort of animal existence without setting any other, post-death goals.

What also provoked my interest was that it's difficult to explain "evolution" without any future, after-death benefits.

What's the purpose of procreation, for example? They call it "survival of the species", not individuals - are species some sort of intellegent beings that care about their future beyong individual lives?

I don't know the answer, it's not a windup, just a point to reflect on.

[sabaijai]

Let's not get very deep into differences over heavens here. My point originally was that people expect some sort of a reward after death - heaven here, heaven there, end of suffering etc each religion has its own.

To get this reward they need to follow some instructions, change their lives in some way, change their priorities, change their goals in life. Their definition of happiness will also change (assuming that what is everyone after).

The original post defined happiness as some sort of animal existence without setting any other, post-death goals.

What also provoked my interest was that it's difficult to explain "evolution" without any future, after-death benefits.

What's the purpose of procreation, for example? They call it "survival of the species", not individuals - are species some sort of intellegent beings that care about their future beyong individual lives?

I don't know the answer, it's not a windup, just a point to reflect on.

I agree, teleological questions well worth pondering.

[chownah]

"..................

What also provoked my interest was that it's difficult to explain "evolution" without any future, after-death benefits.

What's the purpose of procreation, for example? They call it "survival of the species", not individuals - are species some sort of intellegent beings that care about their future beyong individual lives?

............."

Darwin's theory of evolution does a good job of explaining one theory of how evolution works without any mention of "after death benefits. I think that the basic principle is that the genes of each new animal are slightly different than its parents and sometimes that difference makes a trait that helps that individual compete in its environment...successfully competing means primarily that the individual will reproduce more effectively and the result will be copies of the gene which imparted the difference that gives the edge in competition. In short: a genetic change that is helpful in survival will get passed on more so after a few/many years it will predominate. Nothing in the discussion has to do with "after death benefits".

Thinking that procreation has a purpose is not per se necessary for an understanding of evolution. All you need to know is that without procreation a species will last only one generation and then be gone.....that's why all the species that you see every day DO reproduce because if they didn't (or hadn't) then they would no longer exist. It has nothing to do with any "purpose"....it is simply necessary for the species to continue or "survive".....hence the term "survival of the species".

Chownah

[suegha]

Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

Suegha you don't have to wait for God to wipe the tears from your eyes......you can do it yourself.

There's a well mapped method. It's called the Eightfold Path.

You miss my point, and the point of Rev 21.4 It refers to all eyes, all death, all sorrow, all crying, all of life's pain, the former things, ie, the state the world is in now will be done away with - only God can do that. As for 'wipe the tears from my eyes' I did that a long time ago when I discovered a life in Christ, true Christianity!

Thanks for your comments.

[Plus]

Well, see, Chownah, you are talking about the species as if they are separate beings with life of their own!

What does every individual animal care about procreation? What's in it for them? They would die anyway, with or without offspring. I can see from "species" point of view - it would die without procreation, but individuals? They appear to work for some after death benefits of the species.

So yes, Darvin explained HOW it works, but I still don't know why, for what purpose, under which force.

Edited August 16, 2006 by Plus

[suegha]

What also provoked my interest was that it's difficult to explain "evolution" without any future, after-death benefits.

I enjoyed your post Plus. However, I believe in a creator God, not evolution. Do you think that we developed the ability to die?

[Plus]

What do you mean - ability to die? Do you mean a suicide? Otherwise it does not seem to be the option that requires any special ability.

Now we, as humans, developed the ability to restrict our lives in certain ways according to our believes that are not based in any visual, hard facts. But looking back at the animals there - don't they base their actions on some sort of belief, too? That they should procreate no matter how difficult it is.

I've just seen "Emperors' Journey" documentary - male penguins there go for upto four months without food!!! Walk hundreds of miles, sit on the eggs in the open space, expose themselves to the elements during Antractic winter.

They accept hardships in a firm belief that it will bring definite benefits in the future - the offspring (that will leave them forever once they learn to hunt). Do they have some form of religion that keeps wayward penguins in place?

[kayo]

Suegha, particularly,

I quote a passage of your earlier post:

Okay, I'll try to be brief. As a christian I do not believe in Heaven going. I believe in the literal return of Jesus to the earth and the establishment of God's kingdom over which Jesus will reign for ever. That's my first point. Second, the 'corporeal' existance is bad as it is, ie, it will be changed. Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

which I challenge not in any form.

I would only liek to propose an alternate version i believe, of the same ideas.

What I interpret is this. Jesus was one of the human people who showed others a way to live, that had not previously been contemplated, at least not in the circles in which he moved.

As he died, it was not to be interpreted that He would literally return. It Was interepreted that his lessons would live on. May there one day come a day that all live in this "new " manner. That should be the day that jesus´EXAMPLE is within all of us.

As for the revelation 21.4:

This peaceful existence shall exist when we learn how to live it.

That was what that man, among others, in other spiritual circles, long dead and decomposed, tried to teach us.

[suegha]

Suegha, particularly,

I quote a passage of your earlier post:

Okay, I'll try to be brief. As a christian I do not believe in Heaven going. I believe in the literal return of Jesus to the earth and the establishment of God's kingdom over which Jesus will reign for ever. That's my first point. Second, the 'corporeal' existance is bad as it is, ie, it will be changed. Revelation 21.4 speaks of that time when the former things will be put right, "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away."

which I challenge not in any form.

I would only liek to propose an alternate version i believe, of the same ideas.

What I interpret is this. Jesus was one of the human people who showed others a way to live, that had not previously been contemplated, at least not in the circles in which he moved.

As he died, it was not to be interpreted that He would literally return. It Was interepreted that his lessons would live on. May there one day come a day that all live in this "new " manner. That should be the day that jesus´EXAMPLE is within all of us.

As for the revelation 21.4:

This peaceful existence shall exist when we learn how to live it.

That was what that man, among others, in other spiritual circles, long dead and decomposed, tried to teach us.

Nice one Kayo my friend. However, Jesus return is clearly literal, Acts 1.9-11 "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." This is the most obvious verse, there are 1000s more.

Rev 21.4 It is impossible for 'us' (mankind) to learn how to live without God's intervention, ie sendinf Jesus back to the earth.

I enjoyed your comments - you are a thinker!