I don't get Buddhism

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
341

All animals have an inherent instinct to drive them to live until the inevitable.
To live is equivalent to they should not die. [cup half full = half empty]
To ensure they should not die, they have to run away from the threat of death.
It is more direct to interpret as animals run away from the threat of death rather than say, run away to live.
The mechanism that triggers the animal to run away from the threat of death, is the mechanism of fear that is within brain.
While the animal will not deliberate on it intellectually, from the human perspective [scientifically and otherwise] there is “fear of death” neural circuit in the brain of animals.

Yes, animals do not have concept of death nor any consideration for any concept because their brain has not evolved to deal with things conceptually as human do.
But if we think deeper, within the animal brain, there is a semblance of ‘concept’ like concepts in humans.

It is very obvious the human brain is extraordinary different from all other animals in terms of mental performances and the degree of self-awareness and self-consciousness.

The “fear of death” neural circuit in the brain of higher animals [primates and other mammals] are similar to that of human beings. Note,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear#Neurocircuit_in_mammals

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_proc … _the_brain
Researchers have found that fear is established unconsciously and that the amygdala is involved with fear conditioning.

Therefore that is “fear of death” neural circuit within the subconscious brain of all human beings.
This is the subconscious fear of death in the brain.

Because it is subconscious fear of death, the human being is not conscious of it.
However the turbulent subconscious fear of death as fed by evidence of death morph its impulses indirectly as existential anxieties, despair, hopelessness, Angst.
Because it is indirect, the human being is not aware it is from the subconscious fear of death, but the person experiences all the indirect existential pains as anxieties, despair, hopelessness, Angst.

Because these existential pains are felt consciously, the human being has to deal with it.
The majority soothe such existential pains via theism which actually give immediately results.

Since theism has its cons, Buddhism [& others] came up as an alternative to deal with the cons from theism.

So what is the proximate root cause to all the above is the subconscious fear of death.

Fear processing in the brain
By understanding how fear is developed [unconsciously] within individuals, it may be possible to treat human mental disorders such as anxiety, phobia, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear_proc … _the_brain

That is what Buddhism-proper is attempting to do, i.e. by understanding the subconscious fear of death and treating the existential anxiety spiritually, not as a mental disorder.

342

The inherent “programme” [metaphorically] via nature is set “against all odds.”
I have given examples to this and it is very obvious with the majority of humans.

But I have explained, nature is not perfect, thus the intended “programme” could be defective in a small percentile of all humans. If 1% that is 70+ million people, if 10% that is 700 million. The defect can happen before birth or later due to damages by various reasons.
That is why there are 1-2% of people are suicidal and a % had committed suicide. I don’t think it is 1% i.e. 70+ million suicide would have been very noticeable.

There are various degrees where the inherent instinctual will-to-live against all odds is weakened which range from the extreme of suicide to others, like depression and a lost of interest to live optimally.

Whatever, inherent “programme” [metaphorically] via nature is set “against all odds” is a permanent feature of all human beings. Any variation to it is merely due to defects.

Some % of humans are necessarily “programmed” to take great risks for the greater good, but that do not imply they do not have the inherent “programme” [metaphorically] via nature to survive “against all odds.” It is just that the impulse not to die is diluted by other impulses. But if these risk takers were to be caught in a potential fatal situation, the majority will strive to survive against all odds. There are many actual instances of such display of their struggling against the odds against them, e.g. mountaineers, sea explorers, jungle explorers, etc.

Religious rely on religions to deal with the indirect effects of the subconscious fear of death.
They are not directly conscious of the subconscious fear of death, but they are only conscious of the existential pains from the subconscious fear of death.
When they turned to religions, especially theistic Abrahamic religions, the existential pains are relieved immediately!! This is why the majority of theists are from the Abrahamic religions.

343

That is my point, ‘death’ is a big part of it.
Religions may not emphasis the term ‘fear of death’ but in relation to the mentioned of death, it imply dealing with the fear of death, thus a promise of eternal life to alleviate the pains arising from the fear of death.
Note is not merely ‘fear of death’ but the subconscious fear of death.
Religions deals with the painful existential pains resulting from the turbulent subconscious fear of death.

In Islam 30% of the verses deal with the resulting existential pains of the subconscious fear of death.
Christianity most popular verse of the Gospel is John 3:16.
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life

The central point of Buddhism’s Buddha Story is about ‘death’ and sufferings which are churned out from the impulses of the subconscious fear of death.

Whatever which way, the central core ethos of all religions lead to the subconscious fear of death manifesting as existential pains, sufferings [dukkah], anxieties, Angst.

Death is a fact, death is to be avoided via fears, but nature has prevented humans with self-awareness not to be conscious of the fear of death, otherwise the normal human being will be paralyzed with a conscious fear of death and will not be able to live optimally to ensure the preservation of the human species.

344

Thanks for the above, it is something.
However what is critical to Christianity is its core texts the Gospel not the whole Bible.
I will look for an analysis of word for the Gospel and better still analysis by themes or contexts.
As with the 77,400+ words in the Quran, words themselves are sufficient to understand the context of the subconscious fear of death.

For example John 3:16,
For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. .

there is no mentioned of ‘death’ but by implication and in context is to deal with the existential pains arising from the subconscious fear of death. In addition, ‘perish’ would imply death.
Note my point to live = not to die [cup full = cup half empty].

To understand the Bible like I did for the Quran, one has to read the verse in the context of the paragraph, the chapter and the whole of the Gospel.
For the Quran’s 6236 verses I have to analyze each verse word by word then check its context.

The Gospel of Christianity is benign as there is an overriding pacifist maxim, i.e. ‘love all - even enemies’ as an injunction to absolve itself from evil and violent acts committed by Christian on their own free will and human nature.
If Christian itself is inherently malignant like Islam, I would definitely analyse the Gospel in terms of its ethos and theme.

345

Actually you cannot conclude with the above until you have analyzed all the mainstream religions.

I have done a detailed analysis of the 6236 verses of the Quran and the results do not represent your above themes.
I believe the main themes in the Quran is fundamentally the same for all religions, i.e. the subconscious fear of death, minus the commands to kill non-believers.

Note Buddhism’s core is represented by ‘death’ and the threat of death in the Buddha Story and the solutions are presented in the 4 Noble Truths and 8 Fold Paths.
The focus of Buddhism is ‘sufferings’ i.e. Dukkha or whatever the name is this is directly linked to the manifestations of existential sufferings from the subconscious fear of death.

The whole focus on Buddhism is on Dukkha [1st Noble Truth], i.e. existential pains and nothing much on how to live a happy life and other life developments.
Where in the 4 Noble Truths is the question ‘Why am I here?’ and the other questions you raised above?
The only likely link is ‘what is death’ as in the Buddha Story, which leads into the 4NT in terms of ‘dukkha’ from the subconscious fear of death.
Buddhism presumes once a person takes care of the existential sufferings arising from the subconscious fear of death, the person will be able to handle what is the rest of human life.

The central core of Christianity, John 3:16 of the Gospel is similar to Buddhism’s dealing with the subconscious fear of death albeit in different ways.

346

No. Your point is that that religion is entirely about fear of death. You have thrown away everything else. You lost most of the foundations for the existence of religions.

347

Suggesting that you have done this analysis and that I have not?

If a religion does not address the questions, then it does not survive for long.

I don’t know what you are reading. It’s all there. Karma, rebirth, nirvana, … the 10,000 lists of what a person ought to do. Most Buddhist versions love their lists.

It’s like you read everything with a focus on finding a subconscious fear of death.

:-k The central core of Christianity? Probably it’s the relationship of God and man.

348

ding

349

Prismatic,

You’re the 1st person I’ve heard claim that John 3:16 is dealing with the subconscious fear of death. How did you reach that conclusion?

350

I think that’s fair.

eternal life is, well, not dying.
Unless you take a more gnostic take on what it means, which actually drives it over towards Buddhism, at least potentially.

But there are things in the Bible, like this, that could be addressing a fear of death. I don’t think he’s off on that one.

351

Yes, that is a much stronger position. The Ten Commandments, which Jesus deepened in the NT, focuses on this first, then moves out to other moral issues. Relationship with God, then being a good person/parent/family member—>community member. That seems central to me.

I think sex is more important that death in the Bible. There is a lot of killing, but especially under Jesus the rules around Sex get very strict - you can’t even cheat in your mind. Then the Adam & Eve story can be take sexually. Sodom and Gomorrah. The Virgin Birth. Jesus, John The Baptist, Elijah, Paul at least for most of his life.

He’s not unlike Iamb here. There is an implict ‘I am braver than thou’ since you hide in religion (can’t face your fear of death) or contraptions (can’t face whatever fear that goes into Iamb’s hole which he is facing. In both cases we are dealing with someone who wants to radically oversimplify human diversity (whatever the irony this creates with other beliefs of theirs).

352

Just for the record, it’s not a question of atheists being “braver” than Buddhists and other religious advocates. After all, how on earth would that - could that – be determined given the extraordinary complexity built into all of the variables that come together over the course of any particular life to predispose both the religious and nonreligious to think and to feel what they do. Embedded in myriad genes and memes embedded in conscious, subconscious and unconscious components of “I” embedded in a particular world understood from a particular point of view.

The social, political and economic permutations here alone are off the charts.

Instead, my frame of mind revolves more around the extent to which value judgments [religious or otherwise] serve to sustain some measure of psychological comfort and consolation in a world bursting at the seams with contingency, chance and change. It’s not that you are a Buddhist or a Christian or a Mormon or a Scientologist. It’s that being religious allows you to anchor “I” in “the right thing to do” on this side of the grave and immortality on the other side.

Broaching dasein here is to suggest just the opposite of an oversimplified “self” interacting in an oversimplified “society”. It is to suggest instead that both “I” and “we” are embedded in frames of mind that are profoundly problematic.

In other words, calling your own “self” a pragmatist in regard to Buddhism [or to any other set of value judgments], doesn’t make the components of my own moral philosophy go away. The “hole” that “I” am in is derived from the philosophical assumption that in a No God world human identity can only be derived existentially from a particular set of variables derived from a particular world into which one is fortuitously thrown at birth. And then the part where we are indoctrinated as a child. And, then, given the nature of contingency, chance and change embedded in the “human condition”, the part where “I” is ever subject to refabrication from the cradle to the grave. Depending on which particular experiences one encounters in which particular set of contexts.

Unless of course through religion or reason or political ideology or enlightenment or assessment of nature etc., one comes to conclude that there is an optimal or a one and only rational assessment.

That’s when I request this assessment be brought out into the world of actual conflicting goods, given a particular context.

353

Buddhism describes a No God universe. And change and the “refabrication” of “I” is exactly the reason that Buddhism says that there is no self.

Yet when one states that there is no self, Iambig reacts as if it’s a ridiculous idea. :laughing:

:-k What am I missing here?

354

KT,

Hmm. If we take John 3:16 within the context of Christianity as a whole, and not a stand-alone statement, I think the primary objective is to reconcile man with God. The promise of eternal life is the greatest reward for believing in Jesus, I don’t think that is disputable. As such, it is very possible that Christianity acts upon the fear of death. But because the offer is explicit – it requires us to make a conscious choice. I don’t dispute that the subconscious mind is a factor in such a decision, but there are other psychological factors at play, such as our inclination to believe in something/someone like Jesus.

We cannot IMV isolate one particular subconscious factor that John 3:16 is appealing to within the context of Christianity, no matter how obvious it seems to us consciously (not to mention how our own subconscious’ effects our thinking on such a matter), and then claim that this is the factor - which is where I believe Prismatic is off. I don’t think it is only the fear of death that drives people to make the decision to believe in Jesus, as Prismatic seems to imply. There are of course different layers of psychological factors at play.

I’ve heard quite a lot of testimonies about people who became believers, and not one of them gave the fear of death as a reason for their choice. Most of them wanted to change their lives, because they’d hit rock bottom. Prismatic can always say “the fear of death is subconscious, so people aren’t consciously aware of it”, but that claim is unfalsifiable. From my perspective, it seems strange to claim that Christianity is based upon the subconscious fear of death. If not at least for the fact that so much of it is based upon how we live, and answering existential questions. It plays not only on our fears, but also our hopes and dreams!

355

Come on, I adressed this:

Now, you may not share in this assessment, but how would you show that it is necessarily the wrong approach to understanding the self of any particular one of us? And I am certainly not arguing that it is necessarily the right approach. My assessments are no less the product of dasein than yours in my view.

As for the role that No God plays in Buddhism, how then does it explain existence itself? How was the Buddha able to justify his own path to enlightenment in a No God world? It would seem that the only alternative here is pantheism. It’s not a “personal God”, but somehow the universe/nature is set up so that Enlightenment itself is synonymous with Buddhism’s very own precepts.

356

KT,

From my perspective, it is wrong or a fallacy to read about the subconscious mind (without any formal education/training or actual experience in the field of psychology) and believe that one has a handle on it. More so to the point where one can create sound, detailed arguments about how the subconscious relates to religious decisions and behaviours for all human-beings. As such I think that Prismatic is way off, and if he believes that he is unequivocally right, which I think he does, then he’s waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay off. Basically, if he’s right, then he is a genius. With respect to him, I don’t think he is :angry-nono: .

357

Prismatic,

Which involves?

What is Buddhism-proper? One ideology being inferior to another is a matter of perspective, not fact.

Optimal spirituality without belief in anything, except science?

I don’t want to take part in your vision for ‘Perpetual Peace for Humanity.’ is that a problem? How would you deal with people who have a different vision from yours? What about people who don’t want peace, how would you deal with them?

358

Buddhism-proper is whatever Prismatic believes about Buddhism. Everything he does not believe about Buddhism is part of Buddhism-improper.

359

My point is the fear of death simmering within the subconscious mind is the most critical factor that is responsible for the emergence of religions.

I don’t deny there are many other factors underlying the reasons for religion, but I have to give ‘the subconscious fear of death’ a significant weightage - priority as I had justified as evident from the religious texts and behavior of religionists.

Are you familiar with using weightages in decision making?

Thus in my review of the basis for religion, there could many reasons, but I will give ‘the subconscious fear of death’ a weightage of 90%, the rest will share the rest of the 10%.

360

I was suggesting the requirement.
I believed I have met the requirement with some exceptions.
If you think you have then you can declare you position, preferable with details if possible to support the credibility of your statements.

There are perhaps 100s or even thousands of themes within Buddhism and the various schools of Buddhism.
However there is only one core ethos and core principles plus sub-principles.

The core ethos of Buddhism is the 4NT followed by the 8FP.
The supporting of this is the Buddha Story.
The core principles of Buddhism are impermanence [anicca or anitya ], anatman [anatta], co-dependent origination, Sunyata, the two-truth theory, the Middle-Path [if missed any, it would be one or two]

The 100s and 1000s of other elements within Buddhism will be sub-elements and sub-principles to the above.
Show me one Buddhism’s element that cannot be categorized within the above.

It is due to the subconscious fear of death that drives a Christian to establish a personal relationship with God so that the Christian is assured of eternal life thus to soothe the subconscious fear of death.
It is the same with Muslims and Allah, if anyone is a threat to their relationship with God SOME Muslims will kill them to ensure the indirect pains from the subconscious fear of death do not torment them.