Not for a better Samsara

[Dharmasherab]

No matter how much we help other beings in worldly ways, the benefits of them are temporary. This is why the Enlightened Beings never taught the Dharma to create a better Samsara. The Buddhist path starts with realizing that there is no refuge for us in Samsara. Our house, our job, our partners, our insurance, our choice of a political party as well as anything else which is Samsaric we depend on, are all subject to change, for all things are impermanent. Therefore there is no protection within any of them from the dangers of Samsara. This is why we go for the Refuge in the Three Jewels by understanding that depending on Samsaric ways for Samsara's problems is not only unreliable but it is also delusional.

The Buddha, during his time as Siddhartha the Ascetic prior to his Enlightenment, did not engage himself with anything else other than striving to reach Enlightenment. Only after reaching Enlightenment, did he start to help other beings. But till then he focussed on his practices to bring him closer to dissolving the Ignorance (Moha) in his mind because the root cause of all suffering experienced by all sentient beings is because of this Ignorance. It is true that the Fully Enlightened Buddha, did help in worldly ways such as speaking out against the injustices of the caste system. But his main efforts were directed toward helping people gain freedom from the fangs of Samsara rather than be distracted by encouraging people to make a better Samsara.

However, speaking from a realistic point of view, it is not like any of us will become Buddhas or Arahants anytime soon. Therefore it can be important to engage in ways which would bring benefit to other beings in ways which are outside of spiritual development. Whether we choose to be active in helping the homeless, helping refugees to find shelter, saving animals from slaughter or taking care of the environment, the underlying principle behind all of this is to exchange ourselves with others and see what we would need in situations faced by them. Helping others starts with empathizing.

We may have our own views as to what is best for others who we think should benefit. Some may think that a welfare state is important whiles other may think that we need more charity organizations. Whichever views you have it is important not to consider these solutions as ideal. We as deluded beings may unknowingly use our deluded ways of looking at the world when thinking what is best for others and therefore we shouldn't put full confidence in our righteousness and instead develop some humility.

Always reflect in the mind that no matter what Samsaric measures we take to benefit other sentient beings, those benefits will not last forever. We have to keep the Three Jewels in mind, reminding ourselves that there is no ultimate refuge for any being other than the Three Jewels. As a part of Dana (Generosity), we should work to make the lives of others better than what they experience at present. But we also should be careful not to get distracted and deviated from the ultimate purpose of the Dharma - to transcend Samsara and not for a better Samsara.

[Simon E.]

Yes...but.

I don’t ever remember quoting Martin Luther on these pages before, but here goes..

“If I knew that the world was going to end this evening, I would still plant this tree this morning”.

[Bristollad]

I agree with both of you

[Grigoris]

No matter how much we help other beings in worldly ways, the benefits of them are temporary. This is why the Enlightened Beings never taught the Dharma to create a better Samsara.

I recommend you go read the vows of the Buddha Sangye Menla (Medicine Buddha Sutra), it seems he disagrees with you.

And what about the Eightfold Noble Path, do you think that if sentient beings practiced the path, it would not create a better Samsara?

For a better Samsara too!

[Queequeg]

Buddha counseled lay people to fulfill their responsibilities and obligations; sages like Nargarjuna counseled rulers on how to reduce suffering and promote dharma...

I don't think the conventional world is the after thought OP is making it out to be.

[Johnny Dangerous]

Bodhisattvas are all about hopeless causes

[Queequeg]

Bodhisattvas are all about hopeless causes

All bodhisattvas are St. Jude...

[well wisher]

No matter how much we help other beings in worldly ways, the benefits of them are temporary. This is why the Enlightened Beings never taught the Dharma to create a better Samsara.

I recommend you go read the vows of the Buddha Sangye Menla (Medicine Buddha Sutra), it seems he disagrees with you.

And what about the Eightfold Noble Path, do you think that if sentient beings practiced the path, it would not create a better Samsara?

For a better Samsara too!

Agreed, it seems for many of us, having better Samsaric condition would be more conductive for further Buddhist practices: like more free time, less materialistic worries about starvation or dehydration , closer connections with the local Sangha .... etc.
Although I think this should only be an intermediate stage, not the end goal.
I believe a better end-goal is the full liberation AWAY from any forms of Samsara and suffering - i.e. Nirvana, no more re-births in the reincarnation wheel of the 6 desire realms (deva/human/asura/animal/ghost/hell) after this human life, etc.

[tkp67]

Am I wrong in thinking the human condition as expressed by us all contributes to or denies samsara according to our buddhist practice (or lack thereof).

If we where to all deny it successfully at the same time would our connection to the material world cease or would we simply interact as harmoniously?

Are samsara and nirvana two perceptive dualities of the same phenomenon? and are they meant to be simply neither mutually exclusive or inclusive?

This is how I interpret things but I may be wrong.

[well wisher]

Am I wrong in thinking the human condition as expressed by us all contributes to or denies samsara according to our buddhist practice (or lack thereof).

If we where to all deny it successfully at the same time would our connection to the material world cease or would we simply interact as harmoniously?

Are samsara and nirvana two perceptive dualities of the same phenomenon? and are they meant to be simply neither mutually exclusive or inclusive?

This is how I interpret things but I may be wrong.

Samsara and Nirvana are like two sides of the same coin, just like the concept of light and dark, and yin-vs-yang in Daoism. This is the nature of duality.
You won't really know one side until you seen both sides to compare. Yet the actual levels are relative, with a wide spectrum, not absolute. I would think denying it all would help give rise inner peace (at least temporarily), but may be falling towars nihilistic/ignorance trappings.

But I think it's more important to keep in mind about this point: It is pointless to suffer repeatedly, or make the same mistakes, too many times. I think a better process is: Learn the lesson from Samsaric events, find the solution, then move on. Make the effort to strive beyond duality, for total liberation and pure happiness.

Anyways this is just according to my limited understanding. Feel free to consult a more experienced monk / dharma teacher about these questions.

[Grigoris]

Am I wrong in thinking the human condition as expressed by us all contributes to or denies samsara according to our buddhist practice (or lack thereof).

If we where to all deny it successfully at the same time would our connection to the material world cease or would we simply interact as harmoniously?

Are samsara and nirvana two perceptive dualities of the same phenomenon? and are they meant to be simply neither mutually exclusive or inclusive?

This is how I interpret things but I may be wrong.

We would have a different connection to the world (material and immaterial).

[PadmaVonSamba]

Samsara and Nirvana are two different ways of experiencing the same phenomena.
Everything Buddha talked about relates to our experience.
It's not as though he was way out there and nobody could understand what he was rambling about.

Even though it is true that making samsara cozier is not the goal of buddhist practice,
it does provide an opportunity to practice generating compassion towards oneself and others,
which is essential to attaining enlightenment.
.
.
.

[Fortyeightvows]

People say that Buddhism is to end suffering. We always talk about 3 types of sufferings. So why not try to address all 3?

[tkp67]

People say that Buddhism is to end suffering. We always talk about 3 types of sufferings. So why not try to address all 3?

We can't work outside the confides of genetic reality but if our minds are not suffering we can accept genetic reality and work to our full potential in that regard.

When I see someone with a physical handicap adapt and thrive in light of it I think wow this person has an excellent mind.

This is how suffering of mind can be viewed as cause that can effect all suffering but not directly. The mind isn't growing back limbs but it isn't limited by the loss either because the mind knows the loss isn't the limit rather the perception of loss is. Now it can find a way regardless.

[Simon E.]

Samsara and Nirvana are two different ways of experiencing the same phenomena.
Everything Buddha talked about relates to our experience.
It's not as though he was way out there and nobody could understand what he was rambling about.

Even though it is true that making samsara cozier is not the goal of buddhist practice,
it does provide an opportunity to practice generating compassion towards oneself and others,
which is essential to attaining enlightenment.
.
.
.

This..well said.