Thursday, November 12, 2009

Question A

In the Eastern religions and philosophies that we've studied we have seen people "willingly" give up their conscious in search of a higher one and for that individual the outcome seemed to be a positive one. Siddhartha was willing to starve himself and do everything possible to rid himself of the things that consume man, like bathing, with the asceteics in order to achieve enlightenment. It wasn't until he left the ascetics that he acheived enlightenment while meditating under a tree. For Siddhartha, yes, it was wise for him to give up his consciousness because he was doing it to end suffering. Not only ending suffering for himself but also for his wife and father which he believes he is able to do after he reaches enlightenment.
Are the kinds of self-sacrifices promoted by the Eastern religions and philosophies neccesarily healthy I have to disagree. Physically Siddhartha went for a long period of time without eating or keeping basic hydriene. Emotionally Siddhartha just up and left his family behind without any word as to whether he will ever come back. That doesn't seem to help make Siddhartha and his wife's relationship stronger and Siddhartha wasn't even around to see his first child being born.
I personally don't think that it is wise to willingly give up your conscious. Even though it may have worked out in some cases for Siddhartha, growing up in the time and society that I have grown up in today I don't need to reach a "higher" conscious, not in the religious sense at least. I understand that there will always be some kind of suffering in the world but that it is balanced out with the good also. There are other ways to try to end suffering without changing who I am and how I think. Yes, my conscious thoughts may be influenced and slightly different than they were when I was younger because I continue to learn and grow, but I would still have some element of my past conscious intact.

3 comments:

  1. You make a good argument about giving up consciousness but if one truly believe that by dedicating your life you could end something such as suffering shouldnt they try? If they did find a way, wouldnt you want it to be preached to the rest of the world?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you that giving up consciousness and self-sacrifice is not a necessary practice. But in regards to what you said about Siddhartha, I could be wrong, but wasn't it not until Siddhartha chose to leave the ascetics and indulge in some of those things that consume humans, such as bathing and eating, did he reach enlightenment? I know that he did not indulge in these things as much as we do today, but to me this does not demonstrate complete self-sacrifice and further proves that self-sacrifice to the extent many eastern religions encourage is not necessary, as you said before.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi, Kia. You raised some very good points (and did so BEFORE you took a position)--well done. Some things to consider:

    Lily is right: Siddhartha preached taking the "middle path." You couldn't reach enlightenment if you tried to deprive the body of food, clothes, etc. It was through a middle path that one could hope to become enlightened.

    You say you don't need to reach a "higher" consciousness. But, of course, it's not a matter of "have to" is it? It is a question of how best to live one's life, not about what we have to do.

    Let me ask you this? Do you see any value in meditation? Of trying to free your mind for a period of time from all thoughts of wordly things? What might be the benefit of doing this?

    ReplyDelete