NEO-BUDDHISM
A PHILOSOPHY OF HAPPINESS
Ian Ching
Buddhism is known as a religion, but it is also a philosophy. It is the art of finding happiness. It is a misunderstanding that Buddha would be a God, who should be honored. Buddhism does not believe in Gods, but it believes in Karma and in the wisdom to practice Dharma, which is the system of ethical rules and duties. Neo-Buddhism is a modern, pragmatic form of Buddhism, in which suffering is not anymore the central theme. Next to compassion, there is also place for enjoyment and job-satisfaction as sources of happiness. Neo-Buddhism has strong leanings with Hinduism and Taoism. Neo-Buddhism was founded by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. Dr. Ambedkar was originally a Hindu, born in a poor untouchable community, but as he was opposed to the caste system he converted to Buddhism. He argued that Buddhism was the only way for the untouchables to gain equality. Dr. Ambedkar, who wrote a great part of the Indian constitution, wanted combine Buddhism with science and modern reasoning. Therefore he introduced the term Neo-Buddhism.
To begin with an introduction to Neo-Buddhism, let me begin with the most important question in philosophy:
What is the meaning of life ?
Suppose that the purpose of my life would be that I play a role in a bigger whole, that my life has a higher purpose, which is of greater importance than my own life. Let’s say for instance, that the higher purpose of my life would be to play a role in the balance of Mother Nature. This would inevitably lead to the question: what then is the higher purpose of the balance of Mother Nature ? The higher purpose of the balance of Mother Nature could be that when Mother Nature is in balance, that then this balance is of importance for the very existence of Mother Nature in the near future. But then, what is the higher purpose of the existence of Mother Nature? To answer this question, we need to define another higher purpose, of which we can again wonder what its higher purpose is, etc. etc. A philosophy that searches for the meaning of life, as a higher purpose that is outside of ourselves, can only either lead to one of the following:
1. At some point, the final purpose is found, a final goal which gives meaning to all the persons, things and elements that have this final purpose as their meaning of life.
2. The search for a final goal is circular, and the final goal is never found.
3. The search for the final goal is not circular, but nevertheless we are never satisfied with a proposed goal, and keep on searching endlessly without finding a satisfying goal ever.
A circular search for the higher purpose of life actually doesn't answer the question what the meaning of life would be. It merely keeps on pointing to other goals as higher purposes, and this is endlessly repeated. If I, for instance, would say in the example above, that the purpose of nature is that we would all life, then I'm in such a circular search for the meaning of life. The lives of humans have a purpose in the higher goal of the balance of nature; the balance of nature has as its higher purpose in the existence of nature; and the higher purpose of the existence of nature is that we will all life. This clearly doesn't find a meaning of life. It doesn't find the final goal of this whole circle. Therefore the whole circle and its contents would be pointless.
The same is true for an endless search for the meaning of life, where we will never find the real goal, and therefore keep on looking for it without finding it ever. This is also a strategy that will never help us find the meaning of life.
So there are high demands for the real goal, that would be the real meaning of life. The demands are that it is a satisfying goal, of which there is no higher purpose. This final goal is an end in it self. The question what would be the higher purpose of this particular goal, is an invalid question, because this goal has no higher purpose. Every goal in live points directly or indirectly, to an end-goal, as its final meaning.
In fact there could also be two or more of these end-goals. But for all of these end-goals the demands are that for each of them, there is no higher goal. Every end-goal then, is an end in itself. For every end-goal, it goes that the question what the higher purpose is, is an invalid question. For there is none!
Suppose that there would be one final goal in life, and it would be God. The higher purpose of everything would be God. Then what is the higher purpose of God? This then, would be an invalid question, for God would be an end in himself. There would be no higher purpose. There doesn't have to be searched for a higher purpose of God, outside of God, for the higher purpose could be found IN God.
But to accept God as this final goal in life, there should be reasons to be convinced that God indeed would be the meaning of life. Neo-Buddhism does not believe in the distinction between spirit and body. Spirit and body are one, they are two sides of the same coin. The concept of a God, in the sense of a superior being who only consists of spirit - without having a body, does not fit within the Neo-Buddhist school of thought. Another article on this site goes deeper into the holistic idea of spirit and matter being one. So it can be concluded that Neo-Buddhism does not believe in the idea of God as a person, a man with a long beard that would be waiting for us in heaven. Therefore God can not be seen as the final meaning of life.
Neo-Buddhism, instead, holds that no such a final goal, as the meaning of life, can be found in the outside world. The final goal should be an end in itself, it could have no higher purpose, and it should give a higher purpose to our lives. But no goal in the outer world meets these demands. Such a final goal, that would be an end in itself, must have a consciousness. Without a consciousness, it is impossible to have a goal, leave alone a higher goal. If the final goal wouldn't have any goal for itself, then it could not be an end in itself. Therefore the final goal not only must have a consciousness, but this consciousness must be a high and complex consciousness, a self-consciousness that has the capability to have a goal for itself and to formulate that goal. Such a consciousness can be found in men. The consciousness we are looking for, the final meaning of life, is not found in a superior being, but it can be found in the individual human. The final goal, which is an end in itself, can be found inside ourselves.
The whole of everything, the universe, has also a kind of consciousness, but it is not comparable to the human consciousness - because it has no brains. Only individuals have brains. The whole of everything has a very broad, but simple consciousness. Only a consciousness with brains can have a complex mind. Therefore every human has a high consciousness. The human individual is very conscious, or at least has the possibility to be very conscious. Therefore every individual is an end in himself.
Every man is his own meaning of life, there is no higher purpose.
|
"Live is an end in itself". |
Therefore our life and our happiness are our own responsibility. We have this task to take care of our own. That is our prime target. Of course helping others
is one way to take care of our own happiness as well.
The Dalai Lama
Buddhism holds that every man had the right to find happiness, and that happiness is the meaning of life. It is interesting that Buddhism makes a difference between happiness and pleasure. It would be possible for instance to experience pleasure from drugs, while it doesn't lead to more happiness. I could have pleasure all day with all kind of worldly things, like eating and drinking. But would that make me happy? Maybe I derive more happiness from the labor satisfaction that I get from my work, although I do not always enjoy my work. Buddhism holds that pleasure often leads to wanting more and more, and that this greed leads to an unsatisfied feeling: Being not satisfied with still more material and other worldly things than you possess already. Or not being satisfied because someone else even has more than yourself, which makes you jealous. This unsatisfied feeling is a source of suffering, of unhappiness. The most radical forms of Buddhism therefore see pleasure as something to avoid. They try to find enlightenment by choosing purely for happiness, without pleasure. It then is also of high importance to avoid other sources of suffering, like fear and pain. The source of happiness is found in the compassion with others. This is meanly expressed by helping other people by freeing them of sources of suffering, so that these people can also come closer to happiness (suffering, being a source of unhappiness, will decrease).
The main difference between these radical forms of Buddhism and Neo-Buddhism is that the radical forms of Buddhism have a negative viewpoint on the concept of happiness. The highest goal in life is happiness, and to achieve it we are going to help each other to stop suffering. Helping each other to stop suffering is actually the only source of happiness, so it should be the main content of our lives to do so. Everyone that we help to stop suffering can achieve happiness by helping still others, etc. etc. Suppose for instance that John helps Dagny to stop suffering. And suppose that Dagny, then helps Hank to stop suffering. Now suppose that Hank helps again John, to stop suffering. So we are all helping each other! Everyone is happy, because he is helping someone else. Now suppose that we succeed in our mission, and everyone stops suffering.
Now the real problem begins, because we have suddenly lost our only source of experiencing happiness (which is helping others to stop suffering). We are not unhappy, because we have stopped suffering, but we are not happy either, because there is no one to help. So if we would all reach Nirvana, and we will all be enlightened, will we then not be able to experience happiness? Is it so, that in Nirvana, there is no goal anymore, and everything has become pointless?
In Neo-Buddhism there are more sources of happiness than only compassion, for instance labor satisfaction. By contributing to society when working, and being rewarded for my work with material and immaterial components, I experience happiness. Suppose that I was an architect, and I would make a beautiful skyscraper for people to live in, then I would be proud on my achievement. But suppose that no one would ever look at my building, and nobody would ever be going to life in it, then I wouldn't experience it as a source of happiness. I would have the feeling that I would have made an pointless creation. The process of creation contributes to my happiness, but part of this happiness consist of the idea that my creation contributes to the happiness of other people. So labor satisfaction has a strong social component in it, and in abstraction this social component is a form of helping others.
The fact that it is possible to contribute to the happiness of other people, implies that these other people can experience happiness from my contribution. In this example, these people experience the enjoyment of living in this place. Only if the enjoyment of living in a certain place, is a noble cause, then it would make a point to help someone with living in a certain place. Only then I would make a contribution by building a house or a building. If this were not the case, building houses and buildings would be pointless. So the question is whether enjoyment, pleasure, can be a source of happiness.
Classical Buddhism
Classical Buddhism especially concentrates on compassion, which is helping other people not to suffer, and partly or totally denies that pleasure is a source of happiness - for it is seen as a source of suffering. Neo-Buddhism on the other hand holds that pleasure is a positive impulse which is directly an end in itself, or is indirectly by means of labor satisfaction, a source of happiness. I have to add to that labor satisfaction not only derives from reaching the end goal of this particular work (for instance a building), but also the process of creation itself, the use of your talents, is an important source of happiness.
From this perspective it is possible to have a goal in nirvana. We can still help each other with other things than stopping the suffering. We can also help each other with experiencing enjoyment, pleasure. And we can help ourselves with experiencing pleasure. Pleasure is the positive source of happiness, while stopping the suffering is a negative source of happiness (for you can derive happiness by helping some else to stop suffering).
It is the art of life to take care that experiencing pleasure, does not lead you to feelings of dissatisfaction because you are too obsessed with greed. You will need to find balance in your life, between the things that you want, and the things that you can reach. If you want more than you can reach, that will be a source of suffering. If you are in balance you want what you can reach, you can achieve these goals and enjoy the pleasure, and this is a source of happiness. I you are denying pleasure as a source of happiness, then you will miss this happiness. Balance is the key. A good tip is to enjoy that what you already have, instead of focusing only on what you don't have. I you have a realistic goal to reach for something that you don't have yet, and you really want to achieve it, then you have a good impulse to use your creativity to reach this goal. And this will contribute to your final goal, which is happiness.
The basis of classical Buddhism consists of four noble truths:
1. Life is suffering. Suffering and dissatisfaction, Dukkha, is the essence of human existence.
2. Suffering is caused by desire. Men has desire for and gets attached to things which are transitory. This is because everything that exists is applicable to transitoriness. This is the principle of Annica.
3. Suffering can be ended by overcoming desire.
4. Desire and ignorance can be overcome by following the noble eight folded path.
THE NOBLE EIGHT FOLDED PATH
The doctrine of Dharma is symbolized by a wheel with eight spokes. The eight spokes of this wheel symbolize the noble eight folded path. By going along this path, the Buddhist develops understanding of the nature of existence, of which transitoriness is an important aspect. This understanding leads to the wisdom to find ways to be able to let go of desire and greed and thus leads to redemption. The Buddhist walks along the the eight folded path by:
- The right vision: a vision that holds the four noble truths.
- The right intension: thinking without greed and anger.
- The right way of speaking: telling the truth, not to gossip or to use abusive language.
- the right behavior: Not killing or hurting humans or animals, and not stealing.
- The right living: having an honest job.
- The right effort: the effort to do the beneficial
- The right attention: attention to what happens now and here.
- The right concentration: concentration on a beneficial cause or on that what is going on here and now.
The final goal is Nirvana.
The Buddhist's aim is redemption. This redemption is found in the form of the enlightened consciousness that is called Nirvana.
Nirvana is the only escape from the eternal wheel of re-birthing, Samsãra, in which a being roles from the one dissatisfying live to the other. To reach Nirvana, man has to leave desire and greed behind. The word "Nirvana" comes from the Pãli-language and is a junction of a denial, nir, and desire, wãna.
According to Buddhism it is possible to become enlightened, and it is worthwhile for everyone to develop himself. Reaching Nirvana can take several lives.
Neo-Buddhism versus Classical Buddhism
The four noble truths of Neo-Buddhism:
1. Happiness, pleasure and unfortunately suffering, are part of life.
2. There are many possible sources of happiness, of pleasure and of suffering. Despite the transitoriness we can life a happy life here and now. The greed for pleasure, possession or power can be a source of suffering, for yourself and for others. This is especially the case when greed becomes an obsession to want to possess more then you have regardless of what you possess already, without being able to enjoy your possessions because you are obsessed with the dissatisfaction that you don't possess enough.
3. You don't have to live as a monk to be a Neo-Buddhist. You don't have to give up desire or pleasure. It is wise to find inner peace by means of finding balance.
4. The art in life is to find balance between the desire for your goals, your sources of happiness, at one side, and a rational, realistic view on reality to see whether these goals are realistic and whether they are of real importance for your happiness, at the other side.
Because happiness can be found now and here, escape from this life is neither necessary nor desirable. Transhumanism offers a scientific possibility to experience re-birthing: by freezing the body after clinical death, you could be unfrozen and awakened later on. Because life can be good and happy, it is beautiful if you have a chance on another life.
|
10 wisdoms: |
|
|
|
|
2. Suppose you could choose between goal A and goal B. And suppose that you cannot find a reason why A would be better than B or vise versa. Maybe you could check your feelings. But suppose that your feelings have nothing to say. Then you could also make a decision on basis of spontaneity, on the spur of the moment, and by whim you choose A. Without any explanation. It is then the art to go fully for A. B is nothing, it is not your choice, it is really A. You will find that your feelings and even enthusiasm will develop for A. When A disappoints you later on, for whatever reason, you can always simply change directions 180 degrees, and go for B. If you don't have any agreements with people about this, then you owe no-one an explanation for your behavior. You don't have to feel guilty because you change your life. Eventually, in this way you will build up feelings about which goals in life have your preference. This is because the human brain adapts to decisions once made. If your feelings or your mind have an opinion however, this will help you more then cheer whim. Whim is the road along trial and error, which could be the only way, but when you have a choice it is not the best way. |
|
|
3. If you have a goal, don't let yourself be influenced by your environment. You have goal A. Let others choose B if they want so. A is your target, and you have nothing to do with all the others with their goal B. Being the ambassador for your own goals and your own happiness, is your prime task and responsibility. This is the healthy form of egoism. |
|
|
4. Helping others with their goals, is a way to contribute to your own happiness as well as to the happiness of the person helped. You can help someone to achieve B, and then go on with your own goal A. If you are never helping someone else, that could be a source of unhappiness for yourself, an unhealthy form of egoism. |
|
|
5. The goals that you pick should be within reach, or otherwise these goals would be irrational. Don't underestimate your possibilities, but don't overestimate them either. Goals that do not contribute to your inner happiness, will probably only serve your short term interests, while on the long term they could be harmful to your feelings of happiness. Do not let go of your passions, by saying they are out of reach, and summing up al sorts of practical problems for yourself. Within the context of reality, the practical problems are there to overcome. Don't say to yourself that something is not for you, when it is your passion and could be for you. |
|
|
6. Working towards a goal is most of the time of more importance for your happiness, than the goal itself. |
|
|
7. Not realizing one of your goals does not have to be a reason to be unhappy. Life exists of multiple goals. You can also enjoy that what you already have, and the goals you have already realized. |
|
|
8. With complex targets, like a job or a romantic relationship, it is best if your mind and your feelings are in harmony about it. If you have no clue what you want in life, it would be wise to start with developing simple goals as is described in wisdom 2. Doing so, you can build up a basis of feelings that will lead you to the pathway of knowing what you want in life, and deciding which jobs and relationships fit your personality. |
|
|
9. In your life, relationships and jobs, stay authentic. The best strategy is to be different from the rest. The strategy to give people what they want, and to copy the success of others, is doomed to fail. |
|
|
10. The human being has only self-consciousness as an individual, while the collective, by lack of collective brains, hasn't. Nevertheless it is not a good idea to look at people only as an individual. Man, being a social being, has the tendency to identify with the group, and to be lead by leadership and other group processes. Because you are, as an individual, in the possibility to make individual choices, it is possible to choose to which group you want to belong or identify, which leaders in which social context you will accept, which groups you could lead yourself if you have that in you, and which people, groups or opinions you don't want to have anything to do with. |
Art and inspiration as a source of happiness