Reason would suggest that a correct understanding of the Four Noble Truths should not lead to contradictions. Correct understanding of the Four Noble Truths should not lead to attachment to a rigid view on reality or an aim for rejection of life.
Theravada explanation of this basic teaching of the Four Noble Truths can be described as attachment to one-sided rigid views on life.
Why did the Buddha mention “suffering” in the First Noble Truths?
A wise person would always start from clarifying the focus of the intended subject of his discussion. The Buddha started by confirming a fact to define the subject of his teachings. A statement of fact is necessary to identify the subject, or the scope of focus, in the teachings to follow.
Thus, the First Noble Truth was a statement of a well-known fact that part of our life is marred by suffering. The Buddha did not start by a subjective negative judgement condemning all life as being pain.
Theravada scholars’ explanation about the first of the Four Noble Truths shows their unreasonable generalisation of suffering as “universal”: (dukkha sacca), which means “Universal Sufferings”. But the Buddha did not say that sufferings in life are “universal”. He stated the truth that sufferings exist in life, and that part of life (of suffering) was what he intended to cure.
Lack of logic in Theravada’s hasty generalisation
To illustrate the difference between “true fact” and “false generalisation”, take into consideration the sentence: “There is happiness in life”. This statement is true, because sometimes we do experience happiness in life. But to generalise the sentence into “ALL life is happiness” – is incorrect.
Similarly, the Buddha’s first statement that “There is suffering in life” does not mean that “All life is suffering”.
For “suffering” to exist – there must be a state of “non-suffering” (and which includes a neutral state as well as a state of happiness). Life includes all such states. No single case or state can logically claim itself as being “All and everything”.
But to enforce the view of suffering on every other aspect of life, Theravada diminishes the value of harmony with life and happiness – as being just transient, not to be counted. Happiness is transient and will end in suffering, Theravada teaches, making thus all states of life either suffering or leading to suffering.
Fate: The wrong view that suffering cannot be avoided.
The Law of impermanence applies to both facts of life: suffering and non-suffering. Theravada teachings, however, imply that this Law of change applies only to the state of happiness, but does not apply to the state of suffering (regarded as a “fixed unchanging fate”).
Mistakenly viewing that “All life is suffering” leads to regarding happiness as transient, insignificant and impermanent, while suffering have the dominant existence:
“In the Dukkhata sutta of samyutta Nikaya, the Buddha has described […]
“Viparinama dukkha – sufferings caused by the fact that everything including happy and pleasant experiences are not stable but are transient and subject to change”.
Making of suffering an unavoidable fate is just the opposite of the intention of the Buddha. It is unreasonable to claim that the Buddha stated that “happiness ….will lead to suffering” – as Theravada literature claims in the following:
“Gautama Buddha did not deny the existence of different aspects of happiness and pleasure…. but emphasised that each aspect of such happiness is likely to be transient and will eventually lead to sufferings”.
The Buddha could not have “emphasised” to monks that:
“… each aspect of happiness …. will eventually lead to suffering”.
It is rather “attachment to wrong views” - which the Buddha warned people of - as being a cause leading to suffering.
Attachment to rigid views
The obvious tendency of Theravada scholars is evident in their strong attachment to explain every single desire in life as leading to sufferings. This unreasonable bias in thinking leads to regarding: the desire for happiness - as leading to suffering and the desire to avoid unhappiness – as leading to suffering.
“Craving includes not only the desire to seek happy and pleasant experiences
and to avoid any unhappy or unpleasant experiences,
but also attachment to ideas, beliefs, theories and opinions”.
The abovementioned statement states that:
- “desire to seek happiness” is one form of craving that will lead to suffering, and that
- “desire to avoid unhappiness” is also a form of craving that will *lead to suffering. *
This attachment to explain everything as a cause leading to suffering has no logical support.
And the concluding statement in the quote above perfectly describes Theravada’s attachment to fixed “ideas and theories and opinions”.
It is a self-evident proof that Theravada is based on the unreasonable attachment to the “idea, theory and opinion” that “all life is suffering”.
Shortcuts lead to confusion
The Buddha’s aim was to stop the cycle of birth and death in samasara. The aim was to stop falling into the cycle of rebirth in samsara in each journey of a new rebirth. Theravada makes a shortcut. Instead of presenting the Buddha’s aim as “stopping the cycle of rebirth in samsara” – a shortcut is made to “stopping the cycle of rebirth” – altogether.
Mahayana interpretation of the Buddha’s aim is that, when one exerts efforts to transform suffering (one meets in this lifetime) then one creates a karma, or a life-tendency, an ability to do so in the future as well. Karma is a mental energy driving to continuity of one’s quality of actions made. Because mental energy - as any energy - cannot vanish, its essence is transferred to the next life.
The mechanism of Cause and Effect leads to continuity of rebirth. If past causes of action were foolish then one will experience the effects in a future life of suffering. The same mechanism of Cause and Effect works if one avoids foolish actions and creates wise and compassionate actions – the result will be carried over to the next life.
This is the essence of being reborn with a Bodhisattva’s fortunate karma, that can transform sufferings into meaningful experiences – helping others in this way attain the Buddha way.
To continue its contradictions, Theravada does not deny that it is possible to overcome the causes of foolishness and attain the Arahant state in this life:
“The Tripitaka abounds with interesting and self-elevating sayings that describe the peaceful and happy state of an arahant, who abides in the world, till the end of his life, serving other seekers of truth by example and by precept”.
Source: The Buddha and his teachings
Having achieved such a wonderful stage in this world, the monk-arahant has already created a tendency for living a peaceful and happy state among the people in this world, helping others by his example. This great spiritual achievement becomes the culmination of the monk’s karmic energy (of the life he earned and reached at the moment of his death).
Mahayana Buddhism views such a stage of Arahathood as the starting stage towards continuity to help people: the stage of the Bodhisattva. This was the Buddha’s intent encouraging the individual to create karma of inner power to overcome sufferings in this lifetime – a capacity which will be carried over to the future (in this way: turning the cycle of birth and death into a cycle of enlightenment – helping others do the same).
Aversion to life
Following its misunderstanding that “all life is suffering” – Theravada implies the false conclusion: if there is no life, then there is no suffering.
Birth becomes accused as the origin of the journey of misery and all evil suffering to follow:
“Birth is suffering because it is due to the birth itself that one is predisposed to all the other experiences of suffering during one’s lifetime”.
Regarding “Birth” as the cause of all evil suffering to come - explains Theravada psychological aversion to life, manifested in:
- aversion to be reborn again,
- seeking permanent death of the Arahant and - of course –
- aversion to women who are the carriers, the agents, of giving birth.
If birth leads to suffering, and suffering is evil then a rebirth should be avoided. But, being already born – one has then to aspire to NoRebirth in this world, and to do so one has to strictly avoid women, whose natural function dictates their instinct for motherhood.
The Buddha never taught aversion to life.
Mahayana perceives the journey between birth and death as a journey of learning, experiencing all aspects of life, helping each other overcome hardships and aspiring to a future continuity of one’s karmic tendency for the state of enlightenment, wisdom, compassion and creativity.
Was the Universe mistaken that life exists in this world?
In essence, Theravada regards life as a mistake. It regards the Universe and the natural mechanism of life’s renewal in cycles of inevitable rebirths - as repeating the evil of suffering. Implying that the Buddha taught that life in this world is a mistake leading to evil of suffering – Theravada teaches defiance and aversion to life itself and consequently avoidance of women (who – according to Theravada’s understanding) bring only suffering to the world.
Mahayana teaches that the Buddha aimed at awakening to the power that operates reality: the Dharma. The Dharma manifests in Impermanence of both living and death, of all living beings, plants, animals and human beings. The cycle of continual birth and death is inevitable in nature. Because life is inevitable, the Buddha taught to make it worthy and meaningful, overcoming hardships, helping others and enjoying the wonder of enlightenment to the Dharma.
____________________________________________