Tinman

The gospels tell us that Jesus was terrified the night before his crucifixion, knowing that Judas had betrayed him, and prayed to God that he would not suffer and die ("if it be possible, let this cup pass...") Later on the cross he cried out to God, "why have you forsaken me?" I bring this up since not everyone who has read the scriptures agrees that Jesus intended to die for the world. Albert Schweizer, a man of deep commitment, humanitarian action and a renowned Biblical scholar, was one who did not believe Jesus knew what his future held (see his book, The Quest of the Historical Jesus). My point being that commitment, even to Jesus, does not imply any particular Christology.

My other point would be that commitment to any particular value system, humanist or religous will always require us to make choices which are at odds with our natural inclinations. We are, after all, just animals.

Tinman

AdamWho

I brought this point up to more serious Buddhists and their response was very different from mine. They said, "An enlightened person would be beyond the NEED to be loved or any attachment to the body, self".
If Jesus was clinging to life and the desire for existence then a Buddhist would say that Jesus wasn't very enlightened.
This point actually furthers my case that Christianity is fundamentally materialistic.
Whereas Buddhism see the clinging / desire as part of the problem Christianity seems to be deeply involved with clinging to the self and attachment to emotion.

St. Robert

Tinman,

Why not finish the verse? You left out the most important part of Jesus' prayer at Gethsemane. Jesus does ask his Father to take the cup from him, but then says: "Yet not what I will, but what you will."

Numerous times in the gospels, Jesus predicts his own death and resurrection. Theorizing that Jesus didn't realize his own fate is absurd.

Question about desire:

How can a person expect to accomplish anything without first desiring to accomplish it? Would men have landed on the moon without first desiring to do so?

No one can escape desire. Even Buddhists desire when they desire not to desire.

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: St. Robert ]

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: St. Robert ]</p>

AdamWho

St. Robert:
In the first post in this thread and in the earlier pages I asked a similar question.
Does Buddhism operate on a society in negative ways, such as increased passiveness, lack of innovation, little political evolution? How does Buddhism operate on the individual, are there negative side effects to the reduction of desire?

But (as you know) I have spent the last 3 pages defending Buddhism against wild assumptions / preaching made by a certain poster. If that post would like to talk about Buddhism I would be more than happy.

St. Robert

"Desire is the essence of the human soul, the secret of our existence. Absolutely nothing of human greatness is ever accomplished without it." - John Eldredge

It is not a question of whether to desire. We do and will desire. What we should be discussing is what to desire. If a person seeks to remove all desire from their life, they wish to remove the very thing that makes them human.

[ June 30, 2002: Message edited by: St. Robert ]</p>

AdamWho

St. Robert:

We have gone full circle with you practically quoting my first post on this thread

Mine
Yours
But I think that a point is being missed here. As discussed in the first 6 pages of the thread, the word "desire" is a rough translation to the actual intent. Many have commented on this in detail in previous posts.
I think that we would both agree that "excessive clinging or attachment" can cause suffering. I think that we disagree on the issue of what is excessive.
Discussing this issue is the purpose of this thread. I have posed that the Four Nobel Truths (FNT) should not be taken as absolutes, but as a road map for psychological health, separate from all supernatural aspects. Others have disagreed, wanting to interpret the FNT as absolutes, extending them to supernatural realms. Still others have ignored the question completely. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

Tinman

AdamWho,

Your topic was much appreciated, and I believe I've learned quite a bit reading the long posts.

I'm a bit guilty for getting off topic, but it's difficult to ignore blatant preaching by posters who quote scripture at us as if it were magic incantations, with no relevance for the topic. This is not Christianity, it is common superstition.

But back to the topic. Some time ago I read the Dalai Lama's "The Art of Happiness", and I remember some illumination and correction regarding my former assumptions about "desire". Unfortunatelly, I am sufficiently senile (44) to require a good re-read of that common-sense book. I do not think it's portrayal of desire bears much resemblance to the objections raised here by those non-buddhists.

But additionally, I suspect that no amount of talk and arguement can recommend Buddhism. The "proof" is in the experience.

Tinman

AdamWho

Tinman:
I agree. I hope that non-Buddhists do not think that my arguments constitute evangelism. I want everyone to have less suffering no matter what religion (or non religion) they follow. This seems to be a point missed by some because they desire certainty with respect to religious practice... hence more suffering.