Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Science

Buddhists Really Are Happier 154

Posted by michael from the ommmmmm dept.
bjornte writes "For anyone that wonders what Richard Gere is up to, the BBC explains: 'Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are happier and calmer than other people. Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.' So, if you're suffering from the ongoing IT slump..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Buddhists Really Are Happier More

Buddhists Really Are Happier

Comments Filter:

  • Might be better than chemical happyness (Score:3, Funny)

    by Golthar ( 162696 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @07:33AM (#6014313)
    Sounds like the next best thing compared to chemical happynes :P

    Think of the computers that get saved if IT personel have more peace of mind

  • mentality not the religion (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Joe the Lesser ( 533425 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @07:34AM (#6014315) Homepage Journal
    These findings would be better stated as 'calm and stressless lifestyle is happier'. It has nothing to do with religion, just that fact that Buddhists are smart enough not to get worked up over stupid things like getting cut off in traffic or being late to a meeting.

    Or even simpler, as was taught when I was younger: Don't worry, be happy.
    • mentality is certainly important but i think the research shows that there are additional, long lasting benefits from regular practice of meditation

    • Re:mentality not the religion (Score:5, Insightful)

      by torpor ( 458 ) <ibisum@@@gmail...com> on Thursday May 22, 2003 @08:54AM (#6014708) Homepage Journal
      You're perverting the sense and definition of religion here.

      Religion is *supposed* to give you the tools to lead a calmer, less stresseful, happier life. If it doesn't, its not working as a religion.

      Those who would stand to benefit from an un-calm, stressy society (WMH, Eli Lilli and Co.) seek to actively denigrate religions' potential for delivering calm, stressless people, and those who have bought the humanist party line from the last 20 years that "All Religion Is Bad, The pseudo-science of Psychology is the Only Way" support them in their effort to discount the positive effects which religion can have on a persons well-being.

      All religion is not bad. Buddhists *do* lead happier lives than the anti-religion types... most of whom are pretty stressy people. I'm yet to meet a Buddhist (true buddhist, not dilletantes) who wasn't a happy, fun person to be around, generally.

      Make your own determination of the value of religion in modern society if you will, but discount its worth and positive value at your own peril ...

      • Re:mentality not the religion (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:42AM (#6014998)
        Just because there is a correlation between Buddhists and happiness does not mean that religion has any soothing abilities. It may very well be that those who are calmer, happier people would be the most likely to take up/continue to practice Buddhism. Especially in the United States, where Buddhism is not at all a majority religion.
        • Correlation or not, to just bluntly state that 'religion doesnt make people happy' is just as stupid a stance to take given the evidence at hand.
        • I would believe just the opposite, actually. If you're happy, and you believe in Christ/Satan/the Pope/Shrub/nobody, why change religions/lifestyles? No, it's the unhappy, the seekers, who convert to Buddhism. To paraphrase Shaw, "All progress depends on the unhappy man."
      • "All religion is not bad."

        I would beg to differ. The majority of spiritualist traditions have been perverted by organized religion. The Bible warns of the dangers of institutions, and we see the prophecy come true with the Vatican selling redemption for money before the schism of the Reformation. Buddha taught that there are no gods, but only a single universal truth that we are all connected to each other (AFAIK). Somehow, traditional culture has perverted this ideology with the deification of the Buddha,
        • Somehow, traditional culture has perverted this ideology with the deification of the Buddha

          Very true. People tend to transform religious ideas into worshipping cults, or into institutions that claim to have sole authority on moral issues. But you can nevertheless search for the true value of a religion on your own, or with like-minded people. This of course applies to all religions, not just to Buddhism.

          I remember hearing about a Zen koan, which basically said: "If you meet Buddha on the way, kill him

          • For some reason, when I had heard that it was "when you meet the buddha on the road of life, kill him."

            Thing is, when I heard it like that, it reminded me of the fact that the true buddha would not be "Hey, I'm buddha. Isn't it cool?" in the sort of deification (Sic) others have discussed here.

        • There is a subtle science involved in it. What the Buddha taught was a practical method for looking 'inside' oneself. A technique of meditation which will lead to Nirvana (enlightenment) for anyone who follows it. No one person has a monopoly for truth. There is no 'One Jesus' or 'One Mohammed' or 'One Gautama', but there were, are and will be in the future man Buddhas (enlightened ones - The Ancient Indian seers of the Vedas, Mahavira, Jesus, Gautama, Mohammed all counted - Those who followed these methods

      • Dude, if I wasn't so fucking humanistically calm and stressfree, I might take offense at your uptight slander of my people's unique cultural heritage, man. ;)

        Translation: You sure seem pretty mad at atheists/humanists for a Buddhist.

        I don't know if you've noticed, in general, but most religion's add a lot of stress to people's lives, and to the world. They add guilt, and hatred and conflict and confusion at leat as often as the add love and serenity. I'd say a lot of the stress in the world is caused by

        • I don't know if you've noticed, in general, but most religion's add a lot of stress to people's lives, and to the world...To the extent that it tells people to stay calm, meditate an hour a day, and treat other people as though they were yourself, I don't consider it a religion.

          The problem, as usual, is one of definition.

          According to ESR's neopagan FAQ [catb.org], "religion" comes from roots "re ligare", meaning "to rebind" to roots, to strengths, to the basics of things. In that sense, of rebinding, reconnectin

      • B-U-L-L-S-H-I-T.

        Religion is not meant to lead you to a calmer life.

        Crussaders, suicide martyrs, inquisitors should be enough prove for that.

        If you are a religious calm person is a different.

        As for the "anti-religion" types (whatever that is) I know plenty of atheists that are calm and peaceful people.

    • Re:mentality not the religion (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ichimunki ( 194887 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:31AM (#6014940)
      The salient point of the article is not that Buddhism per se is a "happier religion" (which you kind of pointed out) but that there seems to be scientific evidence for the idea that a regular program of a certain kind of meditative practice can have a positive effect on the brain.

      The activity, which meditation most certainly is, is not unlike parts of standard hypnotherapy or yoga. Concentrating on nothing or simply on breathing, putting the body into a state of complete relaxation, etc, are not unique ideas to Buddhism. In fact, the same positive effects may well flow from other more overtly religious activities like saying the Rosary.

      But scientists haven't studied that as much I'm guessing-- perhaps because prominent Catholics aren't as interested in working with science as prominent Buddhists are. The Dalai Lama meets regularly with western scientists and pseudo-scientists to discuss similarities and differences between Buddhist thought and scientific theory. Further, Buddhism generally says that there is no infallible word of God, which may or may not be contradicted by scientific evidence, so Buddhists do not cling to their beliefs out of "faith", but generally welcome any opportunity for greater understanding.

      And when it comes to Buddhist doctrine, reincarnation and/or non-rebirth are certainly more comforting "afterlife" theories than the prospect of eternal torment. Once you stop worrying that the slightest mistake on your part could result in infinite pain after death, you can relax a bit. ;)
      • And when it comes to Buddhist doctrine, reincarnation and/or non-rebirth are certainly more comforting "afterlife" theories than the prospect of eternal torment. Once you stop worrying that the slightest mistake on your part could result in infinite pain after death, you can relax a bit. ;) Christianity has the concept of grace. The Karma rule says you always have to pay back for you evil deeds. According to Christianity everyone deserves infinite pain after death. Once you accept Christ as your saviour, a

        • Re:mentality not the religion (Score:5, Informative)

          by speaker4thedead ( 193887 ) <sam.walters@gmail.com> on Thursday May 22, 2003 @10:22AM (#6015294)
          In Buddhism, Karma is not seen as a physical or metaphysical force that forces you to pay back your evil deeds, but rather as a psychological principle.

          I could go on for a while about this, but I'll try to keep it short.

          Ideally, once an action has happened, it is gone. Our mind, however, likes to hold on to what was and will not let go. Since the past is already gone, it is not a good place for the mind to dwell. Your karma is the part of you that holds onto the past and measure the present in terms of the past. If you measure the present in terms of the past, then you see more of what was than what is. A buddhist strives to see things as they are in the present (this is what meditation teaches) No buddhist claims that they will ever be free of karma, of their attachment to the past, but if they could be, they would be "enlightened."

          A quick example: Let's say that you spent the past two years building your own house by hand. On the night that you move into the house, it burns down. If you hold on to the past and your memories of what was, then you will suffer at the thought of loss and the "wasted" time you spent building the house. If you see things as they are, then you will be happy that you are alive and start planning for a new place to live and perhaps rebuilding the house.
        • Your statement about karma is not quite correct and your statement about Christianity is a narrow truth stated as a general rule.

          Karma is not the idea that you "pay back" for your "evil" deeds. It is the idea that any action you take has an effect on your life and subsequent reincarnation(s). Here is a good explanation of karma [buddhanet.net].

          As for Christianity, there are numerous sects, and one of the more prominent is the Roman Catholic Church. Their program for salvation is significantly more complicated than si
      • And when it comes to Buddhist doctrine, reincarnation and/or non-rebirth are certainly more comforting "afterlife" theories than the prospect of eternal torment. Once you stop worrying that the slightest mistake on your part could result in infinite pain after death, you can relax a bit. ;)

        What even most Christians fail to realize about their own faith is that the whole point of Jesus' ministry is that the "slightest mistake" will NOT result in endless torment. I blame the Santa Claus meme for perpetuat
        • Buddhism doesn't place any expectations on anyone. It simply states for every cause, there is an effect. The expectation comes from the want of yourself and others. 'I want a new car. I'll have to earn money.' 'If I kick this dog, he may bight me.' Christianity on the other hand expects you to want to go to heaven. And gives you a condition under which you can get there. The point of Buddhist enlightenment is to free yourself from want. Whether you WANT this or not is your problem.
    • Joe the Lesser writes:
      "It has nothing to do with religion, just that fact that Buddhists..."

      Not a flame, but Buddhism isn't a religion. No god(s), which is probably a bare minimum to meet a western standard of religion-ness.
    • just that fact that Buddhists are smart enough not to get worked up over stupid things

      Or maybe it's just: Ignorance is bliss. :-)

      (Just kidding. I agree with you.)

      In all seriousness, ignore-ance is bliss. For a while. Maybe. Until the terrorists kill you in your sleep. Until you wake up in hell.

  • yes (Score:1)

    by bobba22 ( 566693 )
    karma please!

  • Correlation/Causation strikes again? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @08:11AM (#6014462) Journal
    There's not enough detail in the article to know whether this is a problem, but it looks like there's at least potential for a serious "correlation implies causation" error. Does Buddhism make people happy, or do people who are already happy become Buddhists?

    I'm also not sure how "calm" got transformed into "happy" in the article. My personal definition of "happy" doesn't really have much to do with "hard to scare".

    The study is interesting to some degree but drawing conclusion from it is unwarrented, until more data is collected from more sources.

    • Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Goronguer ( 223202 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @08:55AM (#6014712)
      Does Buddhism make people happy, or do people who are already happy become Buddhists?

      Here's an anecdotal, unscientific answer for you. In the nine years since I became a practicing Buddhist, I have become happier and happier, and I am definitely happier than I was before I became a Buddhist. I know many other Buddhists who could tell you the same thing about their own experience.

      I'm also not sure how "calm" got transformed into "happy" in the article. My personal definition of "happy" doesn't really have much to do with "hard to scare".

      Though I might quibble with the particular wording, here is an example of what is meant.

      When you encounter an obstacle in your life, do you freak out and ask "WHY ME?", or do you face it calmly and rationally, with the confidence that you are up to the challenge. Since I have become a Buddhist, I increasingly find myself taking the latter approach.

      Less time spent freaking out = more time spent being happy.

      Take a look at the website of the SGI-USA [sgi-usa.org] if you are interested in learning more.

      • Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:16AM (#6014847) Journal
        I go more for

        "Don't collect for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal. But collect for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves don't break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eye is generous, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is stingy, your whole body will be full of darkness. So if the light within you is darkness--how deep is that darkness! "No one can be a slave of two masters, since either he will hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot be slaves of God and of money.


        "This is why I tell you: Don't worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Isn't life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the sky: they don't sow or reap or gather into barns, yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Aren't you worth more than they? Can any of you add a single cubit to his height by worrying? And why do you worry about clothes? Learn how the wildflowers of the field grow: they don't labor or spin thread.Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was adorned like one of these! If that's how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, won't He do much more for you--you of little faith? So don't worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?' For the Gentiles eagerly seek all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided for you. Therefore don't worry about tomorrow, because tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.
        • Here on slashdot, Buddha will ruin your karma if you *gasp* write Biblical passages. Here is where intolerance reigns and the sheep are all lost.

          • I think that the poster only wanted to illustrate that Jesus too taught us not to dwell on the past or to worry about the future, but to live here and now, and not to cling to eartly things that pass away anyway. In that sense his teachings are inaccordance with Buddism.
        • I think the reason that more people are willing to point directly to buddhism as opposed to religion in general in this sort of thing, despite the bible passages you quote, is due to two factors:
          1. Buddhism actively encourages the practice of meditation and contemplation, which (it seems to me) would have a larger effect on the calmness of an individual than the tenets of a religion in general. I rarely see a similar emphasis on daily meditation and contemplation in Christian churches.
          2. Anecdotally, but rele
          • Those are some very insightful observations.

            1. Christ prayed often and for long periods of time. Many who are "Christians" don't take time out of their busy lives to follow in this example.

            2. "except for the fact they go to church every so often" These people you describe here are a dime a dozen. I wouldn't necessarily call them Christians as the word itself denotes a follower of Christ. How can one be a follower of Christ when he/she is not able to dedicate 3+ hours a week to worship?

            Christianity
            • The Bible says that we were created for the purpose of worship.

              It's not just Sunday morning for a couple of hours. Recognizing that God is God and I was made for the purpose of bringing Him glory means that "whether you eat or drink or whatever you do - do it for the glory of God."

              I don't worship only on Sunday. I worship God as I live my life to please Him - optimally it's 168 hours per week.

              Sadly the vast majority of so-called Christians merely attend church. They are missing the point.

              Respectfully
              • The majority of then attend neither church and do not live to please anyone. They say they believe in God, but in truth he is no more real to them than the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus that they pay more attention to during those respective popular holidays. It would be better for them to be truthful and realise what it is they are living rather than making their limited time a big sham.

                There are those that live their lives well and advance humanity, but do now know God. In essence, they have not learned
          • Buddhism actively encourages the practice of meditation and contemplation, which (it seems to me) would have a larger effect on the calmness of an individual than the tenets of a religion in general. I rarely see a similar emphasis on daily meditation and contemplation in Christian churches.

            This is absolutely true in terms of general cultural presentation, but you can find more than a few churches and individuals who advocate meditation, prayer, and contemplation. Usually they couple it with the study of
      • Perhaps part of the reason is that Buddhism in particular focuses on living your life better in the here and now by ridding yourself of negative emotions and practices.

        Some people might practice this kind of discipline as a path to follow to the aims of their religion, in Buddhism (if I understand correctly) this is THE path.

      • Since the ultimate goal of Buddhism is to achieve nirvana, which is also known as nothingness, it would seem to be the most amazingly depressing religion around. Christianity offers eternal fellowship with our perfect Creator, a remarkable difference from buddhism's goal of achieving relief from a cycle of reincarnations.

        Some examples of buddhist teachings:

        If desire or craving, which is the complex system or process of constantly becoming, is the cause of suffering, then the elimination of desire would al

        • Re:But... (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward
          So which makes more rational sense: to achieve nothingness by relief from an otherwise unending cycle of pain through reincarnations, or eternal joy with our Creator God?

          None of the above?

        • Re:But... (Score:3, Insightful)

          by sjames ( 1099 )

          Dissolution into nothingness is really not an adequate description. Since no language has an appropriate word or phrase since language must at least draw analogies from common experiance.

          You woulkd have to achieve a state of Zen awareness in meditation to gain some understanding of that phrase. A friend once aptly described the state as a sort of mental white out, but that probably doesn't make it any clearer if you haven't experienced it.

      • A difficulty that some Buddhists find with an article like the one authored by the BBC here is that it makes assumptions about what it is to be a Buddhist.

        Goronguer fails to mention that the SGI is an exclusivist sect of Buddhism, in that it repudiates all other Buddhist movements. This sort of sectarianism is non-buddhist by nature, and is damaging to mental development.
        Secondly, groups like SGI engage in another, non-Buddhist behaviour- that of socio-political evangelism, (which of course follows as a n
    • Does the study factor in other issues? I would assume that the profile of Buddhists in America is strikingly different from the average. They would be mostly immigrants (who are a more educated class, by and large), and citizen converts would likely be more educated as well. How does this factor in? I am always peeved by these kinds of studies, which end up telling us nothing, and the media's love for them.

  • Dalai Geek (Score:4, Informative)

    by dmorin ( 25609 ) <dmorin @ g m ail.com> on Thursday May 22, 2003 @08:20AM (#6014508) Homepage Journal
    I just learned that in September, the Dalai Lama is coming to MIT to participate in a Life Sciences seminar that appears to be on exactly this topic. He's then speaking at the Fleet Center. I've already got my tickets.
    • I saw the Dalai Lama a few years ago in LA, and it was a great event - truly an interesting crowd of people attended this event, and it was a very nice day.

      He spoke on the need to recognize the infinite void in our lives which can only be described as "Eternity", and that as humans its our task to attempt to live outside the box which a single lifetime offers. I found it quite enriching, even though I am not a devout Buddhist (I am interested in all religious philosophy, frankly, not just one), and it cer
    • dmorin writes:
      "I just learned that in September, the Dalai Lama is coming to MIT to participate in a Life Sciences seminar that appears to be on exactly this topic. He's then speaking at the Fleet Center. I've already got my tickets."

      Thank you thank you thank you thank you.

  • hmm (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I became a buddhist about 2 years ago after being raised a catholic. The article is most definitely true. People I work with comment how laid back I am, and how happy I seem. Its just a different story at home when you have a bitchy wife. How the heck is a person supposed to become enlightened when their wife is constantly picking fights and yelling. hehe

  • Reincarnation. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by I am Jack's username ( 528712 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @10:50AM (#6015527)
    "The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality." - George Bernard Shaw, 1912, Androcles and the lion

    "Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition." - Freedom from religion foundation

    "Thus that which is the most awful of evils, death, is nothing to us, since when we exist there is no death, and when there is death we do not exist." - Epicurus, 341/270 BCE

    I do however agree with: "Doubt everything. Find your own light." - Siddhartha Gautama (circa 563/483 BCE).

    • "Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition." - Freedom from religion foundation

      True. However, don't confuse dogma with religion. The former is belief without reason; the latter is practice, to be tested by experience.

      The core of Buddhism - and of neopaganism, and of several other paths - is experience, not dogma.

      That's why I claim the label "Zen Pagan Taoist Atheist D

      • However, don't confuse dogma with religion. The former is belief without reason; the latter is practice, to be tested by experience.

        Dogma is just doctrine or beliefs, with or without reason. Nothing more. Examples: 1. There is one God. 2. There is no god. 3. Bill Gates is the devil. 4. Cars cause global warming.
        Religion wouldn't be religion without dogma, but it's more than dogma.

        Experience and human reason have an important place in determining truth. However, divine revelation is infinitely more reli

        • However, divine revelation is infinitely more reliable and beneficial

          It's only reliable if you can reliably determine what is "divine revelation" and what is imagination, delusion, hallucination, etcetera, and if you can explain why your divine revelation conflicts with the next guy's.

    • Re:Reincarnation. (Score:4, Informative)

      by limekiller4 ( 451497 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @07:57PM (#6020291) Homepage
      First, let me start this off by saying that I have been involved in skeptic groups online prior to the internet being available to the public (read; local boards and nets).

      Also, I am the guy who runs and owns nofaith.org [nofaith.org].

      Now...

      I am Jack's username quotes George Bernard Shaw as:
      "The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality."

      True, but that makes the not-so-subtle implication that Buddhism endorses an ostrich approach. Ie, the happiness is merely a benefit of ignoring certain problems. I don't agree that this is so. Buddhism, in my experience, involves recognizing that problems will exist regardless of your efforts. So just deal with it instead of trying to quash every bug in your life. It isn't going to happen.

      Jack quotes the FFRF:
      "Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition."

      I agree, but Buddhism encourages facing a problem squarely and firmly embraces rationality and reason, not to mention science. The Dalai Lama, IIRC, has said that if it comes to pass that a finding of science were to contradict a Buddhism teaching, Buddhism would have to change.

      I think you're doing skeptics in general a disservice by automatically assuming that a thing which tends to be looked at as a religion by westerners is automagically invalid. Skepticism involves looking at the facts but I don't think you know a lot about Buddhism.
      • > The Dalai Lama, IIRC, has said that if it comes to pass that a finding of science were to contradict a Buddhism teaching, Buddhism would have to change.

        I've long suspected that the Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of J.R. "Bob" Dobbs! You've clinched it. :)

        • Tackhead writes:
          "I've long suspected that the Dalai Lama is the reincarnation of J.R. "Bob" Dobbs! You've clinched it. :)"

          Who is J.R. Dobbs?

          No joke, I stopped watching TV around 1994, stopped listening to commercial radio around 1997 and I work from home (no billboards and no co-workers to idly chat with).

          I can get as far as knowing which one of Mulder and Scully is the girl but not much further...
          • > Who is J.R. Dobbs?

            High Epopt of Sales and Living Slack Master, Church of the SubGenius [subgenius.com].

            If you meet the Buddha on the road to enlightenment, sell something to him, and then kill him!

    • The BBC recently also authored an article about a scientific study, that 'proves' the non-existence of ghosts.
      The issue over rebirth/reincarnation will remain open for a while, regardless of our individual or societal 'scientific' views because, simply put, the realms of life after death fall outside empirical science.
      1) It cannot be proved or disproved, and
      2) It isn't redundant, so Ockham's razor cannot be applied.
      3) Lack of evidence is not proof of non-existence.
      It is easy to see from a hard science view
  • My job gets moved to India because the worker is happier.

    Just my luck to be stuck with The depressing religion of Christianity.

  • Ah ha, I KNEW it! (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward

    So, if you're suffering from the ongoing IT slump...

    ... I should kill Buddhists and eat the "happiness" part of their brain??

    Trust me, it sounds like a good idea at first but it definitely doesn't work.

    • ... I should kill Buddhists and eat the "happiness" part of their brain??

      Well, cannibals get the equiv of mad cow desease from doing that. So I suppose you might get Happy Cow desease. Insane but smiling.
  • The philosophy behind buddhism is nicely captured by Zen, which I think is a practical philosophy of life. Zen tries to capture the essence of what buddha tried to teach.

    "Zen flesh, zen bones" by Paul Reps is an excellent book to start, and some would argue the only one you'd ever need. I just like its collection of weird and wonderful stories.
  • Happyness shouldn't be a goal. If you spend your life trying to figure out how to make the world a better place and doing whatever you think will help transform the place then you'll probably be happy. When you discover that something you did with the best of intentions actually made things worse you will feel bad, but you won't make the same mistake and you'll try figure out how to tell others you see making the same mistake about it. Before long you'll feel good again. Is it some kind of revelation that b

  • Buddhism, or Meditation? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Fished ( 574624 ) * <amphigory@@@gmail...com> on Thursday May 22, 2003 @12:51PM (#6016701)
    From the article, it appeared to me that the association was less with being a Buddhist from a doctrinal point of view (i.e. holding a belief in the four-fold truths, reincarnation, etc.) than with Buddhist practices. I wonder if you would not find a similar correlation with people who pray regularly or meditatie within the context of another meditative tradition? Having known more than a few Franciscans, my impression is on a whole that they are happier than the non-meditative orders (e.g. the Jesuits) -- yet they are not Buddhists. They are just people who practice spiritual disciplines.

  • an old saying (Score:3, Insightful)

    by u19925 ( 613350 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @02:50PM (#6017897)
    there is an old saying, "it is hard to understand other's pain". don't read BBC to find out the pain of buddishts. ask buddhists.

  • A little clarification... (Score:3, Informative)

    by zakureth ( 28956 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @03:39PM (#6018386) Homepage
    I think there may be some misunderstanding here as to the nature of buddhism.

    First of all, it wouldn't be truely accurate to call it a religion, at least not in a conventional sense. More of a philosophy or way of living, coincidentally named for the budha for having providing it's foundation and core teachings.

    The nature of buddhism centers around learning through practice, meditation, and consistant right thinking to overcome the desires and compulsions that lead us to suffering.

    To say that budhists are generally happies isn't the same as saying that, by having faith in something, one can be happy and relaxed even as all falls apart around you.

    Buddhism doesn't take one out of the world nor does it abdicate responsability for it to a greater power. It actually sharpens ones focus on the things that need to be done by helping to control the emotional cruft that distracts us and drives us towards suffering.

    To that end, being about the elimination of desire and it's resultant suffering, a successful buddhist would tend to be happier and calmer. That being an obvious hypothesis, the article meerly relates an attempt to apply the scientific method by testing the hypothesis.
  • it is not BEING a buddhist that makes one happy, but PRACTISING buddhism that does it......
    why! this is true of ALL religions.

    btw, Happiness, as we know, is not permanent. Bliss is.

  • this is not unique to Buddhists. It's entirely up to the spirituality or approach of each individual.

    There are also plenty of suffering Buddhists amongst us. Yet at the same time I do feel that there are teachings within Buddhism that are treasures of humanity.

    I have found that studying and practicing Buddhism has given me a greater appreciation of other teachings, cultures, methods, ways of life, and the human spirit (in general).

    At the same time, I feel it often cheapens and can be misleading a

  • They think they are happy now - but they all will burn in hell. God loves you - or else!

Slashdot Top Deals

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.

Close