Buddhism and suicide

[RedDEE]

Okay guys. It's time we talk about Buddhism, and suicide. I am a Buddhist, and I have been for 10 years. I am not any kind of authority figure - I am not an ordained monk. I am just an independent philosopher.

Let me get straight to the point. I've been a Buddhist for a long time, and I believe that the teachings of Buddhism advocate suicide. In the teachings of Buddhism, there is something called Upaya. "Upaya" translates to mean "skillful means". The Buddha states in his teachings of Upaya, that his teachings sometime use "white lies" to help guide living beings. I believe that the entire teachings of Buddhism are "skirting" around the issue of suicide. That the teachings are indirectly advocating suicide.

The Buddha taught "Life is Suffering". That's the first thing Buddhism teaches. The Buddha said that the way to liberation is to "extinguish self-consciousness". He teaches that all of our senses are defiled, and all forms are defiled. The Buddha teaches that the way to eternal peace is to escape from the cycle of life and death through the cessation of consciousness , the cessation of the self (ego), the cessation of being. The cessation of existence.

Everyone has heard of "Nirvana". No, not the band, silly. Nirvana is said to the the state of mind that the Buddha achieved which is a state of eternal peace forever, and "freedom from the suffering of existence and life". But not many people know that the translation of the word "Nirvana" means "blowing out". It literally means blowing out consciousness. Blowing out life and existence - the end of it forever. You've achieved the state of Nirvana when you no longer have consciousness. Another translation of the word "Nirvana" is "extinction".

I also believe that Buddhist reincarnation is a metaphor. Teachings of the Buddha talk about beings dieing, and then being reborn. I don't take this literally. I think that the Buddha was teaching with "Upaya", he was teaching with "white lies". What is meant, is that we "die" and are "reborn" all the time within our one life. For example, when the sun sets, we can say that the day has "died". When the moon comes up, we can say that the night has been "reborn". When the moon goes down, the night has died. When the sun rises, the day has been "reborn".

It's like a snake shedding it's skin. We die and are reborn all the time. Like for example, when we go to sleep at night, we can call that "death" because it's the end of a cycle - the end of our waking cycle. When we wake up, we can say that we are reborn - a new waking cycle has begun. I do not believe that we are literally reincarnated as bugs and other people - it's impossible.

The thing about Buddhism, is that the Wisdom of the Buddha is extremely complex. It's said that the state that the Buddha has obtained is literally "incomprehensible", that is to say, it can not be comprehended by human minds. It literally cannot be known, and it can not be grasped. It can not be visualized, thought of, heard, seen, heard, or understood in any way shape or form. So the Buddha attempted to teach that which cannot be understood. The Buddhist teachings attempt to explain that which is unexplainable. It's said that very few people can understand it. And it's also said that every single being attains Nirvana.

So there it is. There's probably going to be a lot of argument in this thread, so put your hard hats on people. Play nice.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

If the Buddha uses lies of any kind to teach the dhamma, the ultimate truth, then how can one trust the teacher?

It reminds me of his speaking harshly to his brother with whom he got frustrated for not giving up kohl eyeliner and a comfortable bed. Instead of being patient with him and trusting him to get to the truth on his own, he chewed him out in front of the sangha, and his brother complied. Gautama claimed he wasn't truly speaking to him harshly, which generates bad karma, but that he was speaking to him like a parent to a child, therefore it was done with loving intentions of guidance and correction.

Both to me seem to be mental gymnastics and excuses for karmically bad behavior, rooted in a lack of patience and trust in the student to find the path for themselves, i.e., delusion mixed with a little bit of hatred.

Edit: Is this one of those times where you're posting while under the influence (PWI/PUI), and you drop a bomb and don't participate in the discussion until you log in a month later and remember it? Did I just get sucked in by that again?

 

[RedDEE]

Edit: Is this one of those times where you're posting while under the influence (PWI/PUI), and you drop a bomb and don't participate in the discussion until you log in a month later and remember it? Did I just get sucked in by that again?

LMAO - I know exactly what you're talking about. I came back to that thread, and saw all the arguing, and I was like GOD DAMN, I really started some shit!

Here's my take on it. The Ultimate truth of Buddhism is considered to be incomprehensible and ineffable. Anything you speak about it at all, is a lie. I could say it's eternal peace. That's technically a lie - because "eternal" implies time, and the state of Enlightenment is timeless. To say it's peace is also a lie, because "peace" is an experience, and there has to be consciousness to experience peace. There is no experience after Enlightenment, because there is no consciousness.

Buddhism is "pointing at the moon" - but it is not the moon.

The entire teachings of Buddhism is gymnastics. It's philosophical, verbal, religious, and meta-physical gymnastics. It speaks in riddles, and in white lies. But you cannot call the Buddha a liar. Because the Ultimate Truth is incomprehensible - he was just trying to teach it in a way for people to understand. The Buddha teaching us the Dharma, is like trying to explain to a blind person what the color blue looks like.

 

[GoodPersonEffed]

I'm glad you laughed.

And I can indeed call the Buddha a liar if he lies! Although I didn't call him one.

Also, not lying is one of the five precepts, and there is a reason for not lying. Lying leads to fear, hostility, and oppression. How can one trust someone who lies, who they fear, who is hostile, and/or who oppresses? It would be unwise and unskillful to do so.

"Further, monks, a noble disciple gives up false speech and abstains from it. By abstaining from false speech, the noble disciple gives to immeasurable beings freedom from fear, hostility and oppression."

(Aṅguttara Nikāya 8:39; IV 245–47)

Because he was not a noble disciple but the noble Tathagata, was he above the precepts?

Also, upaya comes from the Lotus Sutra that originated with Mahayana Buddhism and not Theraveda, correct? It's my understanding that this sutra did not originate with Gautama and reworked his original teachings, which were supposedly perfect from the moment he spoke them (though the mass suicides of the monks who hated their bodies and his subsequent advice for overcoming the hatred indicates the teaching was not perfect or they wouldn't have misunderstood).

Disclosure: I'll admit I've studied Buddhism, not as much as you have, I've limited my study to one book, In the Buddha's Words, and have been studying it for a year and half. I also admit that as a result, I've gotten some things I greatly value from the philosophy, but I do not trust, have faith in, nor admire Gautama. I find him to be a bit of a megalomaniac, somewhat abusive, and a mental gymnast. My criticisms are a result of my reading, not from any outside source. I wanted to get as close as I could to the original teachings to see for myself what I thought of Buddhism rather than trying to figure out which school or which teacher to approach, so that's why I chose that text. Anyhow, I don't seek to convince you, nor am I wearing boxing gloves. I just enjoy a good theological conversation, which sometimes may be a debate.

 

[sighingspider]

Buddhism has many branches, there are the ones that I authethic Buddhist and those that are branched out from the authentic ones. The Authentic ones, those that follow Buddha and Buddha alone, says nothing bad about suicide but he does indeed tell us about ignoring the sufferings. I am a Buddhist but I am the branched out one. I don't know about you, but I am taught that there are 3 states of Buddha. The pass, the present and the future. Buddha reached enlightenment because of all 3, he accepted all 3. Lao Tzu once said, and this is really horribly translated I guess,

"Past not to be remembered. Present not to be remembered. Future not to be foretold."

I don't know how to explain in English cause even in Chinese it is hard to understand. But from my perspective, I think what he is trying to say, and so is Buddha, is that you must not let anything affect your spiritual self.(?)

Hm. Doesn't make sense.

Anyways, Buddhism is not a religion. It doesn't really tell you what to do. There is no clear guideline, so everyone has their own interpretation. It is more of a way of living. Don't hurt animals, don't hurt others, etc. But why can't you hurt others? Well, in reincarnation, there are what you call, "stages'.

There are hell, which I guess sucks.
There is the insects, which I guess is not that bug but would not want to be
Birds and fishes? (I can't remember)
Land animals, so those we 4 legs.
Humans, unlike me.
Saint, probably not me
Buddha.

If you do anything bad in one of those stages, you would get karma points. (I made that up) The more karma points, the lesser your stage would be. So if I killed someone, I would go straight to hell and I have to work my way up. So that's why incarnation plays a big part of buddhism. It wants you to do the right thing, to give you the right consioence.

 

[kane]

It's an interesting take. The fact that there hasn't been a massive increase in suicide and a decrease in births in predominantly Buddhist countries since the time of the Buddha would suggest that such teachings were rather too well hidden. So what would be the point? To encourage the few oddballs who happened to penetrate the cryptic web of deceit and off themselves? More effective to just make an open philosophical defense of suicide and antinatalism, even if people would be more hostile.

In relation to rebirth: if you take the view that conscious experience is a property of matter/energy, then when one dies that experience becomes new things - bacteria, ants, birds etc. What 'we' are is reborn. It's not 'us' in the sense of our identity or concept of self - because that's a construct of a brain that will decay into other things. But it's 'us' in terms of the matter that is now generating the experience of being this person going on to produce the experience of being other things.

 

[Wayfaerer]

As an atheist, I've always thought it was funny when buddhists say that you need good karma to achieve Nirvana. No, you don't! Everyone attains Nirvana the first time!

If that was Sidartha's Gautama intention, then why didn't he just say "Life is suffering, so go kill yourselves." then? Imagine Buddha saying that lol that'd clear the air pretty quick.

 

[Superdeterminist]

I appreciate this interesting perspective and I agree that Buddhism seems to inevitably advocate suicide whether it admits it or not. However, I'm not convinced by the interpretation of rebirth. It's very easy to make loose associations like that with all manner of things, and its significance is questionable. As well, the use of such obscure metaphors only serves to hinder learning, and if true, for me it becomes more difficult to take it seriously.

In my opinion, if you want to teach people effectively, you tell them the direct truth, you don't use roundabout methods; life is confusing enough. Ultimately though, I don't know or claim to know what the true meaning of the text is.

As for reincarnation, why is it impossible? Do you just disagree with the Buddhist definition of it involving Karma? I'm not very familiar with the Buddhist definition of reincarnation or Buddhism in general, I *think* that I don't agree with it either (not well-read on it), but I am strongly convinced by the idea of coming back again as a sentient organism. It seems sensible that after you die, you eventually return to consciousness. While you are dead it's reasonable to assume that infinite time can pass and it won't be felt, since it appears that to feel the passage of time requires consciousness (in dreamless sleep, the passage of several hours occurs in what feels like an instant).

I also think that it's reasonable to suggest you may have lead several if not many lives prior to this one you're living now, perhaps not all as a human. We know that there's something it is like to be a human, but mounting scientific evidence suggests there is probably something it is like to be certain other animals - consciousness isn't unique to humans (although there appears to be different levels of it). So, do you entertain the idea of not "RE"incarnation per se (as nothing is carried forward into the next life - no soul or otherwise) but incarnation? The idea that you'll likely be in the seat of experience again after this life.

 

[Meditation guide]

Okay guys. It's time we talk about Buddhism, and suicide. I am a Buddhist, and I have been for 10 years. I am not any kind of authority figure - I am not an ordained monk. I am just an independent philosopher.

Let me get straight to the point. I've been a Buddhist for a long time, and I believe that the teachings of Buddhism advocate suicide. In the teachings of Buddhism, there is something called Upaya. "Upaya" translates to mean "skillful means". The Buddha states in his teachings of Upaya, that his teachings sometime use "white lies" to help guide living beings. I believe that the entire teachings of Buddhism are "skirting" around the issue of suicide. That the teachings are indirectly advocating suicide.

The Buddha taught "Life is Suffering". That's the first thing Buddhism teaches. The Buddha said that the way to liberation is to "extinguish self-consciousness". He teaches that all of our senses are defiled, and all forms are defiled. The Buddha teaches that the way to eternal peace is to escape from the cycle of life and death through the cessation of consciousness , the cessation of the self (ego), the cessation of being. The cessation of existence.

Everyone has heard of "Nirvana". No, not the band, silly. Nirvana is said to the the state of mind that the Buddha achieved which is a state of eternal peace forever, and "freedom from the suffering of existence and life". But not many people know that the translation of the word "Nirvana" means "blowing out". It literally means blowing out consciousness. Blowing out life and existence - the end of it forever. You've achieved the state of Nirvana when you no longer have consciousness. Another translation of the word "Nirvana" is "extinction".

I also believe that Buddhist reincarnation is a metaphor. Teachings of the Buddha talk about beings dieing, and then being reborn. I don't take this literally. I think that the Buddha was teaching with "Upaya", he was teaching with "white lies". What is meant, is that we "die" and are "reborn" all the time within our one life. For example, when the sun sets, we can say that the day has "died". When the moon comes up, we can say that the night has been "reborn". When the moon goes down, the night has died. When the sun rises, the day has been "reborn".

It's like a snake shedding it's skin. We die and are reborn all the time. Like for example, when we go to sleep at night, we can call that "death" because it's the end of a cycle - the end of our waking cycle. When we wake up, we can say that we are reborn - a new waking cycle has begun. I do not believe that we are literally reincarnated as bugs and other people - it's impossible.

The thing about Buddhism, is that the Wisdom of the Buddha is extremely complex. It's said that the state that the Buddha has obtained is literally "incomprehensible", that is to say, it can not be comprehended by human minds. It literally cannot be known, and it can not be grasped. It can not be visualized, thought of, heard, seen, heard, or understood in any way shape or form. So the Buddha attempted to teach that which cannot be understood. The Buddhist teachings attempt to explain that which is unexplainable. It's said that very few people can understand it. And it's also said that every single being attains Nirvana.

So there it is. There's probably going to be a lot of argument in this thread, so put your hard hats on people. Play nice.

Buddhist monks have sometimes committed suicide. It's been a debate but generally the main theory is it is not ok. The idea is to achieve enlightenment to put an end to eternal reincarnation. And if you do not achieve enlightenment you will continue to reincarnate until you do.

So first detach from all worldy things. At least that way hopefully if you ctb you might have a chance to not reincarnate.

I think this is a metaphorical suicide that you are talking about not an actual one.

 

[RedDEE]

Hey guys, there's a lot of thoughts in this thread, and it would take me a long time to reply to each one. I will make some blanket statements that hopefully address each of your concerns.

The truth is, Buddhism is kind of a false religion, but at the same time, it is the "truest" religion. Buddhism is the margarine of religion. You know the commercial for margarine, "I can't believe it's not butter!". Well Buddhism's commercial would be "I can't believe it's not real religion!"

The state of nothingness that comes after death is "true religion". There is nothing there, no senses, nothing. After you die, it doesn't even go "all black". After you die, it is not all black, it is not a pure white light, and it's neither holy nor evil.

That state is true religion. That state is true wisdom. True wisdom is not a thought. True wisdom is the absence of all thoughts. True wisdom is the absence of all existence. In this state, there is pure silence. No sound is made. Every word you utter in this life is blasphemous, as it adds disturbance to the pure silence. A "true monk" would not utter a single word.

Christians sing songs about the Glory of God - all their songs are abominations to God. Buddhist Monks bang on drums as an offering to Buddha. A true offering to Buddha would be to shut the fuck up. "God" is the state of nothingness that happens after you die. God cannot be worshiped, because every act of worship actually is an act of blasphemy. Every thought you think, every sound you make, and every act you make, is sacrilegious. After you pass on into eternal oblivion, that is when you are truly worshiping God and making offerings to the Buddha.

It is only after you have passed on into eternal peace, and pure silence, that you venerate God. To have no thoughts, to have no mind - that is true reverence. To be completely silent, is to speak the wisdom of Buddha/God.

I would like to add this. Buddhism technically does advocate a type of suicide. The goal of Buddhism is to end all cycles of death and rebirth. To end the cycles of rebirth is to "kill" your self. To end being reborn, is to end your (karmically) recurring life. Even if it's done in a fancy way, like sitting under a tree and meditating, - it's still technically a type of suicide.