The Dalai Lama at Glastonbury

[peter]

A couple of weekends ago His Holiness the Dalai Lama [albeit briefly] took the stage at Glatonbury festival and spoke to the gathered thousands before him in his usual avuncular and endearing style. His message was simple and to the point; It all stems from hapiness. "Hapiness of the individual [he said gesturing to his own heart] lead to hapiness of the family [he broadened his gesture] lead to hapiness of the society." The crowd was ecstatic and the figurehead of the Buddhist movement made a few encompassing gestures in their direction and then left, his entourage seen shortly thereafter sweeping out through the performers exit and on to the next venue in his pre-birthday tour.

I saw the appearance on television and there was no doubting that the crowd were singularly moved - but I [suprise, suprise] was left with a small fly in my trancendental ointment. "Yes, Dalai, agreed - but is life really that simple." Isn't there just an element of nievity in the idea that we can all be 'happy' all the time. This isn't the way things are is it? You'll be happy, your wife'll be happy - and then you discover your kid at university is taking four pipes of crack a day and is nearing suicide. Still happy? But maybe this was the buddhist message distilled down into a two minute 'sound-bite' for Glastonbury; maybe the complexities of the message were deemed just to difficult for us westerners to be given 'the adult version'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Siddhartha Guatama abandon his own family in order to achieve the 'enlightenment' as to how we could all end our suffering. Maybe that's how we achieve personal hapiness in the face of the suffering of those we love; put up a wall so their distress has no power to reach us - or indeed abandon them alltogether (simpler in the long run).

Now don't get me wrong here - The Dalhai Lama strikes me as being a really nice and genuine guy - but just, well, not the sharpest pencil in the box. No doubt he's really spiritual etc, but I just don't get the feel that deep thinking is his forte [in fairness, being plucked from a village on the Tibetan Plateau and chosen on the basis of being able to recognise the recently departed avatar's glasses might not be the ideal selection process if the next Socrates or St Augustine is what your after, so no fault on him there].

But am I getting all this wrong; Am I tarring Buddhism with a coat of nievity that it does not deserve? Did the D L really put his finger on the pulse of 'The Way' that we should all be following at Glasto and I'm just too stupid to get it?

[Fist and Faith]

As I just posted:

I took the wording of the thread's title to mean something you want people to know that they don't know. The Golden Rule would not usually fall into that category. (Although I suppose many people know the words, but don't understand the meaning/how it would play out.) So here's what I wish everyone knew. I've posted these several times over the years. If you only read one, the first is, imo, the best wording:

In the true order of things one does not do something in order to be happy - one is happy and, hence, does something. One does not do some things in order to be compassionate, one is compassionate and, hence, acts in a certain way. The soul’s decision precedes the body’s action in a highly conscious person. Only an unconscious person attempts to produce a state of the soul through something the body is doing.

-Neale Donald Walsch's Conversations With God

I saw Dina at the party tonight. She smiled brightly and said, "This year I decided to give up suffering."

-Hugh Prather

A fool is “happy” when his cravings are satisfied. A warrior is happy without reason.

-Dan Millman's Way of the Peaceful Warrior

There is no way to happiness - happiness is the way.

-Buddha

Pleasures conceived in the world of the senses have a beginning and an end and give birth to misery, Arjuna. The wise do not look for happiness in them. But those who overcome the impulses of lust and anger which arise in the body are made whole and live in joy. They find their joy, their rest, and their light completely within themselves.

-Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita

Happiness is not a state to arrive at, but a manner of traveling.

-Margaret Lee Runbeck

Oh, ho, listen, Man, and we'll tell you everything! Do you hear the waves whispering the secret? We know you know, Man. The secret of life is just sheer joy, and joy is everywhere. Joy is what we were made for. It is in the rush of the nighttime surf and in the beach rocks and in the salt and the air and in the water we breathe and deep, deep within the blood. And the sifting ocean sands and the wriggling silverfish and the hooded greens of the shallows and the purple deeps and in the oyster's crusty shell and the pink reefs and even in the muck of the ocean's floor, joy, joy, joy!

-Neverness

I honestly don't think most people view things that way, or have ever heard of trying to view things this way. And I don't pretend the cure for clinical depression is as easy as viewing things that way. But I think everyone should think along these lines as much as possible. I mean consciously think along these lines. Another quote that I can't find says something like "Be the same in pleasure as in pain." You can be sick, or in bed with a cast on your leg, and still be happy. You can enjoy the same foods you enjoy when you're healthy (assuming you're not nauseous). You still like the same songs. You can still be in awe of TCTC. Everyone should try to understand this, then try to live it.

I don't think everybody can always be happy. I'm not sure anybody can. But better to work in that direction than the other.

[Vraith]

Am I tarring Buddhism with a coat of nievity that it does not deserve? Did the D L really put his finger on the pulse of 'The Way' that we should all be following at Glasto and I'm just too stupid to get it?

Well, there is nothing naive about Buddhism. The answer is simple to say. The doing/living is something else.
Still...just knowing the answer, knowing it exists, seeing it out there---for some, just that little notice is enough for them to achieve/hold a sliver of it.

Not all Buddhism points towards same conclusions---but on a number of things, there is misinterpretation in the wider world. There is no "wall"---you still feel, but you don't let it disturb your essential being and/or determine/dictate your behavior. A ripple in your pond. [[[That is apparently not true in some branches/sects...in those, instead of flowing through you, but not being causal, you are in a kind of bubble and can note them flowing around, but they no longer can effect you at all---the "wall" version. You looking at a ripple in the pond.]]]

So I guess the answer to your questions is " yes" and "no" and "maybe" and "both" and "you missed some questions."

[peter]

I knew that was coming - but I expected it to be a lot more brutal so thanks for that V.

But let's just look at Fist's post;

The first quote is great if you're born happy, or compassionate of whatever - but it's message is that if you're not you're pretty screwed.

2nd qoute - sorry guys, do I really need to point out the problem here?

3rd quote; Everybody is 'happy without reason' - it's unhappiness that comes with reasons. Hapiness is absence of suffering and suffering is the reason for unhappiness, so all we need to do is 'decide to give up suffering. Easy as that!

Fourth quote - we're back to the first one

Fifth - have some symapthy with this but it requires an emasculation of spirit that is certainly above me. It's anger that drives me onward through the day often. Without it I'd no doubt be happier - but I'd never abhieve anything, never have the drive/will to advance.

Again - fine fine if you 'have it' [in which case the last thing you need to be occupying your mind with is thinking about it - nothing kills comedy faster than dissecting it, and I suspect the same goes in large part for 'happiness'] - bad luck if you don't.

Last one; occasionally drugs have given me a brief glimps at this kind of euphoria, but that's a bullshit version of it. however, it's the best that most people outside of a lunatic asylum get.

And finally Fist [not to get at you honestly because I expect you to come back and whup my post into creamed s**t ] we finish with the words - "better to work in that direction than in the other" which is in direct opposition to the first quote [but is actually the one I'd prefer to agree with].

Sorry Guys - I like the DL, and I like the Budhhist idea even if I consider it nieve and based entierly on false assumptions; It's heart is in the right place and that must count for something.

I'm going to suggest as an alternative 'philosophy' for dealing with life that you can do a lot worse than follow the fatalistic view of life offered in The Rubbaiyat of Omar Khayyam. This tells you that life is going to be a fucking hard business and suffering will be the default condition. But amongst it there will be islands of happiness, periods where all things are as they need to be. It is the other periods that will give these 'happy' periods there value and will make the 'default times' bearable. And in the mean-time, there really are some fine red wines to be sampled out there!

[Fist and Faith]

In a sense, you're right. But in a sense, you're wrong. A few points...

1) Basing your happiness on getting or doing some particular thing is a recipe for failure. The universe is going to prevent you from getting or doing it. It's not like life hands us everything we want, eh? You might not get what you want even once. And if you do, it's not like fulfillment once makes you happy for the rest of your life. You need it again, and again. Eventually, you'll be prevented. If that thing is what makes you happy, you are now unable to be happy.

Let's take an extreme example. I have a friend who climbs cliffs and runs marathons every weekend. What if he becomes injured to the point that he can no longer do these things? If he can only be happy by doing these things, then he's screwed forever. But if he finds happiness in something else, then it's because happiness is his state of being, and he applied it elsewhere.

How many times do people make huge life decisions on the premise that X will make them happy? How many miserable women have a baby thinking it's what they need to be happy? How many miserable men leave their family for another woman thinking that she'll make him happy? And how amazed are we when they remain miserable after achieving their desire?


2) A lot of people are unhappy out of habit. Seriously. I remember someone or other here posting that he was angry for years. Always went into a rage, screaming at everyone. One day he realized it was a miserable way to live. He realized he was acting like this NOT because he had so many legitimate reasons to be angry, but because it was an easy response that had become habit. So he started viewing things in a different way, and it changed how he felt and acted. If you are diagnosed with depression, or could be, then maybe you cannot view things this way. Maybe meds are necessary to help you get to the point where you can view things this way. But are we to assume that everyone who does not view things this way is clinically depressed? If you're not, try this view. To what degree can you decide to give up suffering?


3) Again, I doubt anyone can be happy all the time. I doubt life would be very worthwhile that way. No light without the dark, eh? But try to work in that direction. No, not by trying to achieve goals in order to be happy; but by trying to find a core of happiness even in bad circumstances. See if it's possible more often than you thought it might be. Why would someone not want to try? I'm not saying, "Yee haa!!! I got fired today, but I'm as happy as can be!" I'm saying you are still the same person you were before you got fired, and the same things that made you smile then could make you smile now. Be upset and angry, because getting fired might be a terrible thing. But understand it's just a bump in the road. Remain the person you are, instead of letting it decide what person you are.


The extreme example of everything I'm saying is in this Zen story that a comic book writer named Doug Moench put at the end of the last issue of The Hands of Shang-Chi: Master of Kung Fu:

A man was being chased by a ravenous tiger. He came to the edge of a cliff and began to climb down a hanging vine. Then he looked and saw a second, equally ravenous tiger waiting at the bottom. At that moment, a mouse began to gnaw at the vine. Something caught the man’s eye - a luscious, red strawberry growing just within his reach. He plucked it and ate it and exclaimed, “How delicious this is!”

The guy had a minute to live. He lived them in happiness. Would he have been better served by screaming, crying, and shouting curses at the universe/God/whatever? Sure, it's a metaphor. I doubt anyone could let go of the desire to live under those circumstances. I doubt anyone could ignore impending death for a strawberry. But if I'm faced with a much less urgent crisis, which is pretty much everything, I'll try to have his attitude.

Richard Bach's Illusions is another great metaphor. I don't think I can make clouds vanish simply by the cloud from my mind. But if the cloud is a mood, certain thoughts, or even a lot of situations that piss us all off, then I have a damned good shot at making it disappear simply by removing it from my mind. Would it be better to wallow in it?

[Avatar]

You might be surprised Fist.

Anyway, Buddhists don't say you can or must or even will be happy all the time. The opposite in fact. Being unhappy and suffering is part of life too. Don't let it get you down.

--A

[Fist and Faith]

Right? I can see it now...

*EMERGENCY WEATHER ALERT*
*EMERGENCY WEATHER ALERT*

[Camera 1]
"Good evening. I'm Elizabeth Scarborough. We're interrupting your show for an emergency weather alert. That huge storm system we've been talking about for a few days is moving into the area. Here is meteorologist, Philip Blake. Philip?"

[Camera 2]
"Thank you, Elizabeth. Yes, we have a massive storm coming at us. We've been warning everybody about it for a couple days, and it's finally here. And it looks even bigger than we were expecting. There have been two tornado sightings in the last couple hours. Both were fifty miles south of the city, but it's all headed this way. We have a live feed from the Fisk Building, showing the sky to the south as the storm approaches. It's close enough to see some pretty scary lightning bolts."

[Live Feed. Beautiful, clear, sunny sky.]
Voice of Elizabeth Scarborough: "Uh... Philip? Is that the right feed?"

Voice of Philip Blake: *sigh* "Yeah, it's the right feed." [Camera 2] "Never mind, folks. Apparently, some joker's vaporizing clouds. Shimoda, if that's you again, you're gonna get me fired. Third time in the last six months I look like an idiot up here! And seriously, you need to stop! You're destabilizing the weather patterns for half the country!"

[Vraith]

And in the mean-time, there really are some fine red wines to be sampled out there!

That might be a better help than you think...as long a you don't often get too drunk, which is bad---not for the drunkenness, I think getting drunk gets a bad rap from society at large, for the fact that it bio/physically depresses.

There are a few things that are known and shown to increase happiness---and none of them is money beyond a pretty modest level.

Gratitude [apparently---this is a facebook memeish thing, but supposedly demonstrated]

Hang out with people you like as much as possible.

Do things you love to do as much as possible. [even---especially---if those things are not your job. Jobs are depressing. Many people who "do what they love" end up hating what they used to love. But we hear the stories only from people who still love it.]

Have a long term goal and go for it. [this doesn't HAVE to include quitting your job and risking starvation/homelessness for most things. Some peeps it might, though].

Help others.

There are a few more. They all seem trite/new-agey/self-helpy...but they work. And, it seems, for most of us, simple as they seem to be they are harder to do than the shit we think will make us happy but never, ever, will.

Oh, meditation works, too---not so much by itself, though that's part of it. It also helps one do the other things on the list.

BTW---as true as that stuff all seems to be, and I tend to believe most of it, do you think I pay attention and do it?
Of course fucking not.
Who does?

[peter]

Good effort all round guys, but tell me this? Are you so absolutely sure of what happiness is - that it even exists? I have an inkling that it might only be defined by the absence of other things [of physical pain, of mental anguish etc] with a veneer of pleasure over the top [the pleasure of seeing your new grand-child, your new car in the drive, the sun shining etc]. That makes it essentially a selfish state of mind [something akin to grief as we discussed briefly in another thread]. No - I think to concentrate too much on whether you are happy or not [and feel yourself lacking if you decide you are not] is to approach life from the wrong end. Do all the stuff V. says, but because it's right to do it, not because of the 'happiness' carrot. Play your life to minimise the discomfort [physical and mental] it throws at you if that is your want [but though how anyone who has children can be said to be doing that G alone knows], and learn to minimise your wants and take pleasure from the small things of life. Aside from that, take the knocks and roll with the punches; be up, be down - but never out. It's not over 'till the fat lady sings!

[Avatar]

Our modern concept of happiness is very...well..modern. For most of history, happiness has been recognised for what it is...transitory. Only fairly recently have we come up with the idea that we are supposed to be happy all the time, let alone that we deserve to be...

--A

[Fist and Faith]

Of course we deserve to be happy. At least I do. Because I say I do. Anyone else is free to decide they do not deserve it. Not sure why anyone would do that, but to each their own.

Peter is taking it a step further, deciding it doesn't even exist.

[Fist and Faith]

Happiness is not transitory, and it's not an absence of anything else. It's an outlook; an attitude; a baseline; a state of being; a way of life. It doesn't mean every second of your life is wonderful. It doesn't mean you don't get angry or sad when this or that happens. I mean, come on! Some serious shit happens in our lives! But if you're not a happy person in the first place, how do you get through those times? What is the quality of your life for the majority of your life? Should we be happy only on rare occasions, when something particularly good happens? Only when it's warranted? Or should we be happy in general, and sad or angry only when something particularly bad happens? "Happy in general" doesn't mean like we see in movies or tv where some guy is bouncing all around the place, thrilled at every chair or car or dog, because he has ADHD or is under the influence of some particular drug. (I don't know if ADHD or any particular drug does that to people. I'm just talking about the way people are portrayed at times.)

An analogy that just came to mind is Bach's passacaglia. A melody of 10-15 seconds is stated. Then it's altered in every way. Different harmonies. Different rhythms. Broken up into different patterns. Other melodies on top of it. But the original melody is always there, buried within those alterations. You can't shake it. Listen for it, and you'll hear it. It's the foundation of the whole piece.

[Zarathustra]

Emotions are evolution's tools to modify our behavior in ways that facilitate our survival and reproduction. So we can learn a lot by studying them, but they're certainly not the point. It's like saying orgasm is the point of sex, when it's actually the replication of genes. But we've evolved from small-minded organisms which were easier to motivate with orgasms than with the knowledge of seek gene replication. Seeking happiness for happiness sake is like mental masturbation.

We should follow our bliss, but let reason be our navigator. Happiness is a pretty good indicator of the better things in reality, but it evolved during a time when there were far fewer illusions.

[Fist and Faith]

True enough. Don't seek happiness. That's not how it works. Pursue the things that you love. You don't pursue religious faith, Z, right? You pursue reason, scientific method, logic. You don't view reality that way in an attempt to attain happiness. But it makes you happy.

[peter]

But I want to know what happiness is - how else can I decide if I'm happy or not. To say it's a 'state of mind' tells me nothing; give me something concrete that I can get my teeth into, that I can test my definition of 'absence of physical and mental suffering with a veneer of pleasure overlaid on top' against.

[Lets take my dictionaries definition; well - it doesn't even have one. It tacks 'happiness' on to the end of the entry on 'happy' which runs as follows. 1. Felling, showing or expressing joy; pleased. 2. Willing {I'd be happy....etc}. 3. Causing joy or gladness (well - Coco the clown does that!). 4. Fortunate or lucky {eg the happy position of not having to work}.

......none of which is really very helpfull.

Lets say for example I define happiness as 'the palpable sensation of being in a reposed state of mind, with un underlying sensation of non-directed and general optimism pertaining to ones existance. The first part is my 'absence' [ie of suffering], the second part my 'veneer' [ie of pleasure]. It sems to me that all definitions of hapiness will fall into this catagory, and thus I contest that hapiness and pleasure are more synonymous than most of us care to admit. We can have pleasure without hapiness [it seems] but hapiness without pleasure?

[Someone once made the observation alond the lines of 'show me the stoic who can endure the toothache' (or words to that effect) and I contest that even the Dalai Lhama's happiness is only one toothache deep! ]

[Fist and Faith]

Define love. Define the tao. Define consciousness. Some things don't define the way you're wanting. Is love worth having? Is happiness? Why argue against or attempt to avoid either?

No, the Dalai Lhama's happiness is not only one toothache deep. Being happy doesn't mean you are happy every instant. Shit goes wrong. Someone crying at their mother's funeral is not evidence that s/he is not a happy person any more than seeing a couple fight is evidence that they're not in love.

[Vraith]

give me something concrete that I can get my teeth into, that I can test my definition of 'absence of physical and mental suffering with a veneer of pleasure overlaid on top' against.

[Lets take my dictionaries definition; well - it doesn't even have one. It tacks 'happiness' on to the end of the entry on 'happy' which runs as follows. 1. Felling, showing or expressing joy; pleased. 2. Willing {I'd be happy....etc}. 3. Causing joy or gladness (well - Coco the clown does that!). 4. Fortunate or lucky {eg the happy position of not having to work}.

......none of which is really very helpfull.

On the first---
I doubt this has any teeth-getting-into-it-able properties, but maybe some teeth-pulling ones, so you don't have to worry any more:
how do you know that your PLEASURE isn't the deep/real/essential/foundational thing, with just a veneer of physical and/or mental suffering overlaid on it?
You might think I'm not serious---but I'd wager it is damn close to the truth.
Anyone who tells you "life is pain/suffering/torment" and all that other crap is trying to use you, control you, or sell you something.

Dictionary definitions are almost always unhelpful. In fact I'd propose a rule that the helpfulness of a dictionary definition is inversely proportional to importance of idea to the 4th power [one power for each dimension of spacetime].
For example: "one"---the dictionary is pretty useful if you need to know "one" when telling the fruitseller how many apples you want.
somewhat less useful in the use/def. in "uni verse"
barely comprehensible [in its entirety, a full understanding] for the abstract/mathematical thing.
and completely useless applied to Oneness.

[Zarathustra]

You don't pursue religious faith, Z, right? You pursue reason, scientific method, logic.

Well no, I don't pursue reason. Reason is just another tool that evolution has given us, like emotions (which are really another kind of intelligence ... emotional intelligence). I pursue truth, understanding, reality--despite the fact that not everything I understand about reality makes me happy. A lot of it sucks. However, it does make me happy and amazed that we can understand it at all, connect with it, and affect it. I'm grateful we have such a useful tool as reason to do that. That possibility of access makes me happy. Transcending myself and connecting with the world makes me happy. And I think that our ability to reach these depths of happiness would be diminished without reason (just read Krauthammer's article in the Pluto thread in the Loresraat).

[peter]

Apologies to the DL for using him unfairly in this thread and apologies to you guys for [maybe] misleading you a bit. I know what it is to be happy and equally I know what it is to be not; I just find it interesting that I can't nail it down, but as Fist says, that's just the way the cookie crumbles. It would seem that this 'emotion' [is it an emotion? - really? - or whatever it is then] is hardwired into us at a very fundamental level. It seems to be 'inate', going deeper than say language or ability to even think; it must then have been a very early development in our fledgeling brains in the days gone by. In addition, it seems that the faculty of experiencing hapiness is one that we are all not equally endowed with. We will all fluctuate within the limits of our own given slot on the 'hapiness scale' - but those limits or their position on the range will not be set equally for all of us. Again, just the way the cookie crumbles.

[Avatar]

If you have to move, even one inch, from where you are now to be happy, you probably never will be.

--A