Well said! I agree on how vipassana can enhance activism and work capacity, and I can’t emphasize the value of serving enough.
In reply to: Buddhism does not claim to have a real solution to the enormous suffering experienced by non-humans (particularly in the wild, i.e., wild animal suffering), and most of its followers are not actively pursuing a solution to this either Indeed, the meditation technique is based on the notion that suffering comes from reacting to sensations with desire or aversion. You might have heard in the courses, that Goenka says something like ‘you are very fortunate to have a human life’. Humans have an advantage over animals for they can practice and liberate themselves, and no one else can liberate another. As you note when you speak of karma, this implies the idea of rebirth.
Nevertheless, I appreciate that Vipassana as an art of living is focused on an ethical way of living, and liberation of one’s own suffering. Doing no harm or not killing is at the base of the technique. The purer the mind, the more aware and capable of non-harming others or acting for the benefit of others -human and non-humans. sila, samadhi and pana- each strengthen each other.
I actually appreciate from Vipassana that it doesn’t promote universal solutions or prescribe how to act. I much prefer having a tool to improve each person’s judgment and strengthen their minds, than a guide to act to ‘save others’.
Thanks Laila! I agree that mediation should not be a guide how to act to ‘save others’. But it should, optimally, create the willingness, the wanting, some vision maybe even, to act for others, including, and maybe especially, at the macro effective altruism level, where each one does what he thinks is best to reduce suffering in the world. and this, at the macro level, is missing, in my view.
Well said!
I agree on how vipassana can enhance activism and work capacity, and I can’t emphasize the value of serving enough.
In reply to:
Buddhism does not claim to have a real solution to the enormous suffering experienced by non-humans (particularly in the wild, i.e., wild animal suffering), and most of its followers are not actively pursuing a solution to this either
Indeed, the meditation technique is based on the notion that suffering comes from reacting to sensations with desire or aversion. You might have heard in the courses, that Goenka says something like ‘you are very fortunate to have a human life’. Humans have an advantage over animals for they can practice and liberate themselves, and no one else can liberate another. As you note when you speak of karma, this implies the idea of rebirth.
Nevertheless, I appreciate that Vipassana as an art of living is focused on an ethical way of living, and liberation of one’s own suffering. Doing no harm or not killing is at the base of the technique. The purer the mind, the more aware and capable of non-harming others or acting for the benefit of others -human and non-humans. sila, samadhi and pana- each strengthen each other.
I actually appreciate from Vipassana that it doesn’t promote universal solutions or prescribe how to act. I much prefer having a tool to improve each person’s judgment and strengthen their minds, than a guide to act to ‘save others’.
Thanks Laila! I agree that mediation should not be a guide how to act to ‘save others’. But it should, optimally, create the willingness, the wanting, some vision maybe even, to act for others, including, and maybe especially, at the macro effective altruism level, where each one does what he thinks is best to reduce suffering in the world. and this, at the macro level, is missing, in my view.