My honest take on the 4 noble truths
To be completely honest, I think the 4 noble truths are bullshit.
According to Buddhist thought, there are four axioms of truth that you must accept in order to make progress towards “enlightenment”. They are:
- Life means suffering.
- The origin of suffering is attachment.
- The cessation of suffering is attainable.
- The path to the cessation of suffering.
Definitions (in italics) taken from here, my editorial comments will be below each point.
Truth #1: Life means suffering
To live means to suffer, because the human nature is not perfect and neither is the world we live in. During our lifetime, we inevitably have to endure physical suffering such as pain, sickness, injury, tiredness, old age, and eventually death; and we have to endure psychological suffering like sadness, fear, frustration, disappointment, and depression. Although there are different degrees of suffering and there are also positive experiences in life that we perceive as the opposite of suffering, such as ease, comfort and happiness, life in its totality is imperfect and incomplete, because our world is subject to impermanence. This means we are never able to keep permanently what we strive for, and just as happy moments pass by, we ourselves and our loved ones will pass away one day, too.
This is simply not true. At least, no more true than the statement that “Life is pleasure”. Why focus on the negative, guys? Why not realize that the suffering is just as impermanent as the joy? The former doesn’t outlast the latter, they are merely two sides of the coin of experience, emotions go up and emotions go down. Impermanence is as much a blessing as it is a curse. The beauty of spring is all the more beautiful because it comes and goes. The sadness of death is tinged with the joy of having had the chance to be alive. To focus entirely on the negative makes me think that you’re trying to play some kind of manipulative trick on me. To say that everything is painful and sad is simply not consistent with my own experience of the world. It would be more accurate to say that life creates in us a response of ever-changing joy and sadness, pleasure and suffering. One is no heavier or more real than the other. Life is a buffet of positive, negative, neutral, and mixed experiences. Therefore, truth #1 is not true.
Truth #2: The origin of suffering is attachment
The origin of suffering is attachment to transient things and the ignorance thereof. Transient things do not only include the physical objects that surround us, but also ideas, and -in a greater sense- all objects of our perception. Ignorance is the lack of understanding of how our mind is attached to impermanent things. The reasons for suffering are desire, passion, ardour, pursuit of wealth and prestige, striving for fame and popularity, or in short: craving and clinging. Because the objects of our attachment are transient, their loss is inevitable, thus suffering will necessarily follow. Objects of attachment also include the idea of a “self” which is a delusion, because there is no abiding self. What we call “self” is just an imagined entity, and we are merely a part of the ceaseless becoming of the universe.
This is saying that because we aren’t aware that the things we are passionate about are going to end, that the result will be suffering. Again, the elevation of importance of a single step in a long chain of reactions is out of place. You could just as easily say that the origin of pleasure is attachment. The pursuit of desires is highly pleasurable. The deep passion of engulfing oneself in the beauty of the world is one of life’s happiest pastimes. Sure, there is an arc to pleasure, and most pleasures must come to an end, but the resulting “suffering” also has an arc. The bittersweet process of mourning is not always suffering. Sometimes it is appreciation. Sometimes it is love. Would any child, upon the death of their beloved parent, wish that they had never loved their parent? That they had been indifferent? What about the “it’s better to love and to have lost, than to have never loved at all”? The lifecycle of desire, appreciation, passing, and remembrance is a net-positive experience, and one of the true joys of life. To love someone unconditionally, truly for their own selves, is a reward in itself, and can never be taken away. The same goes for a delicious piece of chocolate… the sadness of finishing a bite of chocolate only strengthens the enjoyment of it. Separation from an object of desire does not always end in suffering, and when it does, it does not cancel out the enjoyment. I just don’t understand this piece of logic at all and I call bullshit on it.
Truth #3: The cessation of suffering is attainable
The cessation of suffering can be attained through nirodha. Nirodha means the unmaking of sensual craving and conceptual attachment. The third noble truth expresses the idea that suffering can be ended by attaining dispassion. Nirodha extinguishes all forms of clinging and attachment. This means that suffering can be overcome through human activity, simply by removing the cause of suffering. Attaining and perfecting dispassion is a process of many levels that ultimately results in the state of Nirvana. Nirvana means freedom from all worries, troubles, complexes, fabrications and ideas. Nirvana is not comprehensible for those who have not attained it.
Okay, this may be true. But it is a ridiculous idea. Dispassion as a goal, it seems to me that this is a strategy that only self-pitying fools would take. The assumption of this truth is that if living isn’t going to give us everything we want, then we will choose not to play that game. It’s like someone taking their ball away from the playground because the other kids didn’t let him win. It’s a sore-loser strategy. Saying that it’s not comprehensible for those who have not attained it is a cop-out. If you want a truth to be believed, it has to be falsifiable, and have some kind of argument for its validity. Personally, I see no reason to reject the playground of sensual craving, conceptual attachment, passion, desire, love, worries, trouble, complexes, fabrications, and ideas. I love this playground, all the more because it is a complex creature that doesn’t obey my every whim. It surprises, delights, and inspires. It is a lovely game, filled with lovely people. While I see some truth in #3 here, because it provides a strategy towards a goal that I don’t believe is valuable, it seems to me to be a useless truth.
Truth #4: The path to the cessation of suffering.
There is a path to the end of suffering – a gradual path of self-improvement, which is described more detailed in the Eightfold Path. It is the middle way between the two extremes of excessive self-indulgence (hedonism) and excessive self-mortification (asceticism); and it leads to the end of the cycle of rebirth. The latter quality discerns it from other paths which are merely “wandering on the wheel of becoming”, because these do not have a final object. The path to the end of suffering can extend over many lifetimes, throughout which every individual rebirth is subject to karmic conditioning. Craving, ignorance, delusions, and its effects will disappear gradually, as progress is made on the path.
First of all, nobody really believes in the cycle of rebirth anymore. It wasn’t even mentioned as one of the previous truths. It’s an old idea, unsupported by science, and probably believed to be a fairy-tale even by a good percentage of practicing Buddhists. Second of all, even if there were a cycle of rebirth, why wouldn’t one want to continue on it? Life is fun, if I could live multiple lives in a row as different people, I’d totally sign up for that. Thirdly, from the previous truths, it’s clear that the spectrum of pleasure and suffering is not very well understood, and I wouldn’t trust a “middle path” between extremes to be very nuanced. In fact, the Eightfold Path, while it does have some interesting points, falls victim to the same flaws in logic that the 4 noble truths do. Primarily, I believe that the Eightfold Path misunderstands that the cycle of creation and destruction is part of how the universe works, and part of its beauty. To place all of the importance on ending the cycle of creation and destruction is to disregard the primary method that this universe evolves and grows and continues to evolve. Natural selection requires experimentation, risk-taking, pleasure-seeking, engaged individuals and groups to test strategies that either succeed or fail, and which learn from their experiences and continue to improve over time. I believe that the 4 noble truths and the Eightfold Path encourage lack of participation, and slow down this process. And are therefore not only misguided statements, but counter-productive.
Conclusion
The 4 noble truths might be useful to someone too weak to take a little suffering in their daily routine. The truth that I understand includes the continued participation in the pleasure/pain suffering/joy playground of life, knowing that it is through these experiences that we continue to grow, enjoy, love, appreciate, and generally live. To take away these mechanisms of life is to take away the sweetest fruit of life. Much sweeter and more rewarding than simply the lack of suffering that they covet so highly.
March 16th, 2009 at 6:19 am
Every once in a while, sit with your eyes closed, and focus on the breath, and nothing else. If thoughts arise, acknowledge them and let them pass. This is called meditation, and it’s good for you.
The words don’t matter.
March 16th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
But isn’t calling attachment a “game” and “playground” a form of nonattachment?
I think this is bullshit to you because you already know it…
March 16th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
No, it’s not nonattachment because I’m still linked to them and get enjoyment and other reactions from the system. I’m playing in the system, which is the opposite of what the 4 truths suggest doing.
March 16th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
@josh – Yes, I like meditation. It’s not part of the 4 truths though.
March 17th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
What translation are you using?
March 18th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Oh, sorry. I didn’t notice the link.
It seems to me you are finding issues with a lot of the words used in this translation. I would ask you to look at some others. Perhaps you already have.
March 18th, 2009 at 12:03 am
For example, here is another take on Dukkha, taken from Wikipedia:
“In classic Sanskrit, the term du?kha was often compared to a large potter’s wheel that would screech as it was spun around, and did not turn smoothly. ”
But you’d probably have a better understand of what you wrote on if you read the whole page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dukkha
March 18th, 2009 at 12:12 am
Sorry, I guess your loosey goosey adjective sets the tone here.
There are several things to call bullshit upon on the path of enjoyment. Four noble truths seems like a strange choice.
March 18th, 2009 at 12:34 am
BTW, I love your site and read it regularly.
September 22nd, 2009 at 3:27 pm
I am saw your website to do my homework.It is I am look the title is different to othe websites.
October 27th, 2009 at 4:50 am
It’s obvious that you have a very shallow understanding of Buddhism. You should really do more research before you write senseless articles.
December 8th, 2009 at 3:42 am
Most people just learning Buddhism often mistake the 4 Noble Truths as being pessimistic or thinking that life is always suffering. The point of the First and Second Noble Truths don’t translate well to the English language from its original Pali.
In plain English, the first Noble Truth means that the nature of life (birth and rebirth) is essentially suffering.
http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Four_Noble_Truths
February 1st, 2010 at 7:07 pm
I would agree with you except you fundamentally misunderstand the Four Noble Truths. Some of the languaged used in it are terms that have specific meaning in Buddhism (attachment, suffering for example).
May 22nd, 2010 at 7:25 am
I’m a Buddhist only a person who haven’t mastered all the knowledge, but it seems to make you understand, you gotta go back to the past when Buddha lives as human form
^^V peace
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:01 pm
I agree with others that said you don’t have a good understanding of the noble truths and their application. They are just saying that we should understand the relationship between attachment and suffering; and developing mindfulness will allow us to intercept false perceptions and thoughts that if acted upon would result in suffering.
The goal of buddhism is to achieve and maintain joy and happiness; living life to the fullest in all its splendor and possibilities.
June 22nd, 2010 at 9:12 pm
I found your article searching for stuff on reincarnation in Buddhism. I am trying to reconcile ”many lifetimes” and “ending the cycle of rebirth”. Something is definitely missing in translation. I have the same question that you have.
June 28th, 2010 at 1:37 am
I really appreciate this article. I used to think Buddhism was different from religion, and ‘just a philosophy’ and a positive one, until my best friend got sucked into a Buddhist cult that derailed his career right after getting his PHD. Then I started studying it, and decided to take the plunge and actually try to practice it. Then I realized it was just more supernatural magic bullshit. Not to mention misogynistic, nihilistic, and soul-destroying. Buddhists are obscurantists who make claims to knowledge they can’t back up rationally. When you call them on their irrationality, they start to question the validity of enlightenment values. It’s seriously damaging woo, like every other religion.
June 28th, 2010 at 1:39 am
And I’d like to expand on what I said– all of you saying, “you just don’t understand! It’s a bad translation!” are practicing obscurantism. Explain it to me, if you can do so with valid arguments! If not, quite pretending your magic is real.
July 23rd, 2010 at 6:26 am
@ Sara
I’m honestly sorry to hear about what happened to your friend. However, even considering that it did happen, it still raises tons of questions to me.
1. There are people who hide under the cover of Buddhism to complete their own ends, PRECISELY because of its peaceful nature which make it hard to suspect. This is supported even further with the fact that they actually did somebody harm – in your own words, “[the cult] derailed [your best friend's] career.”. Not to mention, from your own description, they presented themselves as a “Buddhist cult”; considering they’re already using their brains to deceive someone, do you really believe that they’ll announce their real religion out in the open? If those people are cruel enough to destroy somebody’s future, they also don’t practice Buddhist ideologies at all. In which case, the whole problem can’t be said to have been caused by Buddhism or Buddhists, is it?
2. You said a Buddhist “cult”; that’s another thing that intrigues me. In all my 20+ years of being a Buddhist, I’ve never heard of Buddhists gathering in any form of “cult”. And I follow Buddhism news closely, mind you. Though I admit that there are different variations on Buddhism, even they’re not known to form cults. In this case, the Four Noble Truths are related to Theravada Buddhism ONLY, which practices the un-altered teachings of Buddha himself; and I’m from Burma, which is the only country to maintain Theravada throughout. And I can assure my countrymen don’t tolerate those fake cults, let alone letting them exist.
3. About the “supernatural” and “magic”; I don’t know which practice you went into, but I hope you didn’t mistake our Buddhism with Scientology or a circus. Theravada is about following Buddha’s guidelines; no magic, just concepts. We do worship Buddha, who’s passed on a long time ago; not as an almighty being, but a perfect human being, i.e: the greatest teacher. Technically, we worship Buddha to remind ourselves of his teachings. There are TONS of pious reverends in Burma, and believe you me, they denounce mumbo jumbo disguising as “Buddhism”.
4. And the rest of your posts… now you’re just being unreasonably hateful. You don’t just state things; you back up your claims. To quote yourself, “Explain it to me, if you can do so, with valid arguments!”. The fact that you don’t understand what “suffering” and “attachment” in this case explains that if you really did study what you thought of as Buddhism… it wasn’t. I’m sorry. You’re missing the points in the Four Noble Truths, just like Buster.
5. The Four Noble Truths Buster quoted here are abridged versions. The real expanded version (Dharmacakra Pravartana S?tra) is really long and complex, and Burmese books analyzing the sutta in details are no thinner than over 2 inches. Buddha himself spent SIX years trying to figure this out AND understand; do you think two non-Buddhist persons without any belief in the religion and knowledge about its teachings can understand this in one reading?! …Don’t make me laugh. This applies especially to you, Buster.
So, Sara dear… an analysis of your statements strongly suggest that you’re just spreading groundless hatred for Buddhism, and you’re using the flimsy “best friend” backstory to support yourself; I’m sorry if this assumption is wrong, but that’s what your claims are pointing at. Religion is a matter of faith, and a sensitive subject; if you don’t have enough knowledge, stay quiet. The wise know when to speak and when not to; the foolish don’t.
August 21st, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Buddhism is vague, ambiguous, and does nothing to clarify a point of action other than passivity. The followers take pride in their humility, their supposed awareness and their “non-aggressive” judgements of the unenlightened. if one were to follow the teachings in their totality, it would lead to inactivity.
The main problem is defining this equality or equanimity in essence. To hold all beings as equal creates the inability to differentiate between the good and bad qualities that are or are not conducive to awakening. It is impossible not to judge in some sense. To hold equanimity toward all beings means passivity only. That is not love, because love depends on the ability to differentiate between that which is not loved (or liked less; disliked more).
For a doctrine that is supposed to promote the eradication of attachment, expectations, craving and desire, whether in some sense or all senses, it is a doctrine of inactivity and the Buddhists themselves seem prone to attach to the teachings of the Buddha themselves and to hold dogmatic viewpoints dressed up as open-mindedness. There is no concrete, tangible teaching to extract from Buddhism, only the subjective interpretations of the teachings due to the ambiguous nature of them.
People are in all senses selfish whether or not they hide it behind a veil of altruism. Would people feel empathy and give and share if it did not make them feel good, useful, important, vital or necessary? Would anyone give if noone truly appreciated it? The root of altruism is selfishness and this is what makes life beautiful. We’re here to copy our genes, that is it.
Most people alter buddhism to fit their worldview or their society rather than vice versa. Buddhism depends on the existence of non-buddhists because people need a goal to fulfill to feel woth something. Buddhists, like every other person, have attachments to a goal and if the goal is vague, ambiguous and/or unrealistic, then there can be no let-down from the failure to accomplish it.