Only wisdom that ends suffering is of value

[Pam Seeback]

Does the wisdom of "logic" end suffering?

[Diebert van Rhijn]

The thread title implies the existence of wisdom that prolongs suffering which should be avoided.

Logic stands to wisdom as ignorance stands to suffering.

[Dan Rowden]

As the Buddha would have it: suffering is of the nature of ignorance; that is, suffering is a product of ignorance. The only real remedy for ignorance is wisdom and that requires thought. The best thinking tool is logic/reason.

[Pam Seeback]

The Buddha spoke of the wisdom of nirvana, the extinction of self. When the self is extinguished, logic and reason are also extinguished.

Jesus said: I am the light of the world and I and the Father are One. It is the revelation of the nature of these metaphors of Thought that is the wisdom that ends the suffering of man.

To my knowledge, neither the Buddha or Jesus ever spoke of logic or reasoning as being the Way to end suffering.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Wisdom ends suffering in the sense that there is less of a reaction to reality.

An emotional reaction that is.

the ego is reaction and blind desire, and when the desire isn't meant, there is frustration, anxiety, anger, and all the rest of it.

When the ego ends, and reality is understood as indifferent causality not working in favor of our desires, then there is acceptance how things unfold as inevitable.

That understanding is the beginning of nirvana. It is the first step.

But of course, we have the will to have many of our desires meant, but there is limitation there, and some desires shouldn't be satisfied because they could be based on delusions.

And many times, the ego may have one final desire that it associates with the achievement of lesser desires that are connected, but the whole movement is delusion, a waste of energy, and a cause of suffering.

For instance: suppose I want to be famous, which I associate with being a musician, I may spend years of my life dedicated to learning an instrument, practicing in a band, and all the struggle that comes with it. However, the end result is based on delusion, so all the lesser desires that are associated are also a waste of time as well.

Part of being wise is being able able to examine an entire person's life, and conclude how their time was wasted.

[Carl G]

Wisdom ends suffering in the sense that there is less of a reaction to reality.

An emotional reaction that is.

So does Zoloft, and other fine anti-depressants.

the ego is reaction and blind desire, and when the desire isn't meant, there is frustration, anxiety, anger, and all the rest of it.

When the ego ends, and reality is understood as indifferent causality not working in favor of our desires, then there is acceptance how things unfold as inevitable.

Ego does not end.

That understanding is the beginning of nirvana. It is the first step.

But of course, we have the will to have many of our desires meant, but there is limitation there, and some desires shouldn't be satisfied because they could be based on delusions.

Ah, so will is the same as ego?

And many times, the ego may have one final desire that it associates with the achievement of lesser desires that are connected, but the whole movement is delusion, a waste of energy, and a cause of suffering.

For instance: suppose I want to be famous, which I associate with being a musician, I may spend years of my life dedicated to learning an instrument, practicing in a band, and all the struggle that comes with it. However, the end result is based on delusion, so all the lesser desires that are associated are also a waste of time as well.

How is wanting to be famous a delusion? How is practicing music and achieving success with it a waste of time?

Is anything besides thinking not a waste of time?

Part of being wise is being able able to examine an entire person's life, and conclude how their time was wasted.

Or one's own, if one is not a psychologist!

[Ryan Rudolph]

Carl,

How is practicing music and achieving success with it a waste of time?

its a waste of time compared to putting all that energy into understanding oneself and all ones motivations. Basically, once one is wise, pursuits that most people believe are ultimate become unimportant and wasteful.

just think about how many males around the world are practicing guitar with the aim of becoming famous and scoring lots of women? Imagine if how that energy was put into becoming wise..

[IJesusChrist]

Why is happiness a good value? A good belief?

Who are we to label morals and values correct and incorrect?

Suffering causes learning and change. Without suffering, how much wisdom would exist?

[Carl G]

Carl,

How is practicing music and achieving success with it a waste of time?

its a waste of time compared to putting all that energy into understanding oneself and all ones motivations.

You backpedaled to cover yet another of your useless statements. You didn't say relatively poor use of time -- compared to other things. You said waste of time, implying out and out loss, no benefit derived.

Basically, once one is wise, pursuits that most people believe are ultimate become unimportant and wasteful.

Like guitar playing? How about doing laundry? Maintaining a home and playing golf in Tasmania? Where does a wise person draw the line? Must a wise person set aside all but the most essential survival tasks in order to give full devotion to thinking. Is it not possible to think while learning guitar, or introspect while practicing, perhaps to learn about oneself through practicing?

just think about how many males around the world are practicing guitar with the aim of becoming famous and scoring lots of women?

Strawman. You are constructing a worst-case scenario, adding information after the fact, to prop up your useless statement. Why not just admit that making the statement was a waste of time, on your part?

Imagine if how that energy was put into becoming wise..

Are all of them capable of wisdom? Is one wasting one's time practicing guitar if one is incapable of wisdom?

[Dan Rowden]

Wisdom ends suffering in the sense that there is less of a reaction to reality.

An emotional reaction that is.

So does Zoloft, and other fine anti-depressants.

Jesus, Carl, that's the greatest piece of bullshit you've typed in a very long time. I hope you're kidding.

[Carl G]

Greatest? Thank you. Not sure I follow, though.

[Dan Rowden]

Nevermind. I didn't read what Ryan had said carefully enough. Your reply makes sense having done so. Apologies.

[Animus]

The Buddha spoke of the wisdom of nirvana, the extinction of self. When the self is extinguished, logic and reason are also extinguished.

And so is the body. The same school of Buddhist teaching that holds to the belief that logic and reason are extinguished with the self, also holds that the body and anything else constituting one's existence is also extinguished. Upon attaining to Nirvana one has the option of returning to Samsara as a Bodhisattva or bodily death.

Jesus said: I am the light of the world and I and the Father are One. It is the revelation of the nature of these metaphors of Thought that is the wisdom that ends the suffering of man.

"In the beginning was Logos..." (John 1:1)

Logos is the greek root of the word "Logic" and where we get our suffix -ology from; as in astr-ology or cosm-ology.

Bible translations usually have Logos translated as "Word", as in speech, but early philosophers thought of speech and reason as inseparable complements of each other. In the Babylonian myth of Marduk, Maduk succeeds the mother godess Tiamat by speaking things in and out of existence. That is, Marduk formed the thought in his mind, then spoke it into existence. A mythological precursor perhaps to John 1:1. The general point however is that Logic, Reason, Speech, Language, Word, and so forth, in ancient times were not as distinct amongst intellectuals as they are now. Still the debate rages on in linguistics and neuroanatomy as to whether or not the two really are separable. However, on a colloqiual atmosphere there seems to be a stark difference. Of course the majority in the colloquial sphere are neither scientists nor philosophers.

To my knowledge, neither the Buddha or Jesus ever spoke of logic or reasoning as being the Way to end suffering.

No, Jesus spoke of "The Word" or "Logos" depending on the translation. As was typical of the Jewish tradition, Jesus always spoke of God in parables.

[Animus]

Logos (pronounced /ˈloʊɡɒs/ or /ˈlɒgɒs/; Greek λόγος logos) is an important term in philosophy, analytical psychology, rhetoric and religion.

Heraclitus (ca. 535–475 BC) established the term in Western philosophy as meaning both the source and fundamental order of the cosmos. The sophists used the term to mean discourse, and Aristotle applied the term to rational discourse. The Stoic philosophers identified the term with the divine animating principle pervading the universe. After Judaism came under Hellenistic influence, Philo adopted the term into Jewish philosophy. The Gospel of John identifies Jesus as the incarnation of the Logos, through which all things are made. The gospel further identifies the Logos as divine (theos).[1] Second-century Christian Apologists, such as Justin Martyr, identified Jesus as the Logos or Word of God, a distinct intermediary between God and the world.[2]

Etymology
In ordinary, non-technical Greek, logos had two overlapping meanings. One meaning referred to an instance of speaking: "sentence, saying, oration"; the other meaning was the antithesis of ergon (ἔργον) or energeia (ἐνέργεια), meaning "action" or "work", which was commonplace. Despite the conventional translation as "word", it is not used for a word in the grammatical sense; instead, the term lexis (λέξις) is used. However, both logos and lexis derive from the same verb legō (λέγω), meaning "to count, tell, say, speak".[3] Logos also means the inward intention underlying the speech act: "hypothesis, thought, grounds for belief or action." [4]

The primary meaning of logos is: something said; by implication a subject, topic of discourse, or reasoning. Secondary meanings such as logic, reasoning, etc. derive from the fact that if one is capable of legein (λέγειν; infinitive of legō), i.e. speech, then intelligence and reason are assumed.

Its semantic field extends beyond "word" to notions such as "thought, speech, account, meaning, reason, proportion, principle, standard", or "logic". In English, the word is the root of "logic," and of the "-ology" suffix (e.g., geology).[5]

On April 1, 2005, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (who would become Pope Benedict XVI just over two weeks later) referred to the Christian religion as the religion of the Logos:

Christianity must always remember that it is the religion of the "Logos." It is faith in the "Creator Spiritus," in the Creator Spirit, from which proceeds everything that exists. Today, this should be precisely its philosophical strength, in so far as the problem is whether the world comes from the irrational, and reason is not, therefore, other than a "sub-product," on occasion even harmful of its development or whether the world comes from reason, and is, as a consequence, its criterion and goal. The Christian faith inclines toward this second thesis, thus having, from the purely philosophical point of view, really good cards to play, despite the fact that many today consider only the first thesis as the only modern and rational one par excellence. However, a reason that springs from the irrational, and that is, in the final analysis, itself irrational, does not constitute a solution for our problems. Only creative reason, which in the crucified God is manifested as love, can really show us the way. In the so necessary dialogue between secularists and Catholics, we Christians must be very careful to remain faithful to this fundamental line: to live a faith that comes from the "Logos," from creative reason, and that, because of this, is also open to all that is truly rational.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logos

[Animus]

So when the bible says that someone received the word of God, it might be saying the individual came into a realization of the universal logic, and since that logic binds the individual to the reality (God), its as if God spoke to them. Parabolically, metaphorically, cryptically...

[Animus]

I should add another obvious parallel here with speech and logic, particularly logic. When we exercise our faculty of reasoning, in accordance with logic, we are capable of attaining an understanding of reality with predictive properties. This enables us to manipulate our environments subjectively prior to manipulating them objectively and results in our dominion over the plants and animals of the earth who do not have such subjective reasoning abilities.

Therefor, Logic itself is a window into the operations of God (i.e. Causality). It is therefor the intermediary concept that links Man to God (Christos). Provided, parabolically as Jesus. Now, as to whether or not Jesus was historically a real man, it matters not because the message is in principle the same, and even if Jesus were a real man who had attained equivelance of action with what he perceived to be the divine order, then that itself makes him a manifestation of the divine order (logos) and a Son of God. Having attained to this perfection, Jesus the man speaks "I am the truth" and instructs his followers to imitate him. Jesus repeatedly claims that he exists eternally, speaking of himself as the Logos, and when he instructs his followers to imitate him, he is saying imitate the Logos with which he identifies.

I think, as a matter of unsophisticated ego, admirers of Jesus Christ have propelled him [Jesus] to insane loftiness. Claiming that he was the one and only begotten Son of God. But hear what Jesus himself says - as recorded by John - 'Jesus answered them, "Is it not written in your Law, 'I have said you are gods'?"

Perhaps what makes Jesus unique is his strength of determination to lay down his life for truth. Because Jesus the man was inseparable from the sovereign will of God (read: Romans 9) its as if God afore prepared Jesus life for his sacrifice. Whether or not Jesus was a biological man with a brain abnormality that caused him to say this, Jesus is identifying all of his actions as following in accordance with the Logos (i.e. predestination). Within that frame of reference, any and all actions undertaken by Jesus would have been eternally decreed by God, his uniqueness in willingness to sacrifice his life was no less the eternal decree of God. Thus it must have seemed to Jesus that he was especially prepared to glorify God over and above his peers who would have shrank in self-preservation. Instead, Jesus makes the ultimate sacrifice.

[Animus]

Prima facie it might seem like an incredibly stupid thing to give over one's life in such a manner for the propagation of truth. But given the absurdity of events the story has lived on and to this day is very well known. It therefor has the potential to teach millenia after his death. From a purely selfish perspective, this may not be a good trade, one's own life for the propagation of truth. But, if Jesus had truly identified with the Logos, then his concern would have been on maximizing truth and not his own life.

And that to me would be a far greater sacrifice than if Jesus was the only begotten son of God endowed with supernatural powers and selectively rescued from death by his father, that simply spells out Nepitism. Not much of a sacrifice at all for a God to spent a few years in human suffering. A huge sacrifice for a man to give up his only life knowing that there is no fleshly reward. No 72 virgins. No eternal bliss. Just oblivion.