HomeJewelryPendantsThe Feeling Buddha: A Buddhist Psychology of Character, Adversity and Passion |
|  | | | Customer Reviews: | | | Average Customer Review:
Write an online review and share your thoughts with other customers.
0 of 1 found the following review helpful:
 Not What Buddha Taught Jan 21, 2010
I read half of both of David Brazier's books. I actually thought that they were really good and both went along with my own beliefs, beliefs that I formed while in Buddhism when I didn't agree with what I was hearing. But after studying Buddhism for some time and leaving because I couldn't accept certain teachings, teachings that Brazier himself has changed for the better due being much more loving and compassionate, I could not accept that Brazier's views were that of Buddha. He offers little proof other than his own common sense, which common sense I admire. I only wish his teachings were the Buddha's.
0 of 15 found the following review helpful:
 just a thought Jun 16, 2006
i'm new to buddhism, and i haven't read any of the book yet but i just noticed a contradiction that bothered me. This psychiatrist dude says that buddhism is not offer an end to suffering, but he couldn't be more wrong. If you become enlightened, you will not suffer personally. If everyone follows the buddhist beliefs, then no one will suffer. Period. thats what buddhisms about.
4 of 9 found the following review helpful:
Everything has merit, including this. But not 5 stars. May 08, 2006
Brazier's "The Feeling Buddha" is a worthy work. It introduces new ideas, and as such, is bound to attract scrutiny. Some of the ideas are good ones. Others are just puzzling.
What has me puzzled the most is Brazier's switching back and forth from literal to non-literal interpretations of Buddha's teachings. Why he switches back and forth for particular topics, I have no idea.
For instance, many Buddhists interpret the first noble truth to mean suffering (dukkha) is a mental state caused by death, illness, birth, sorrow, etc. But Brazier takes a very literal view of dukkha. He even goes as far as to say Buddha "defines" dukkha as birth, ageing, sickness, death, sorrow, pain, grief, etc. He then goes on to explain that since dukkha is "defined" as death, then death itself is dukkha and not our reaction to it.
I find this interpretation flawed. It does not seem to fit the context of Buddha's teaching.
Later, Brazier takes on the idea of the literal interpretation that suffering can be abolished through a lack of attachment. Does this mean we should not love others? Did Buddha not love his family, who traveled with him? And in this, I'd say Brazier got it right. It is not for us to become machines without feeling, but to understand sorrow and its root causes.
Why is Brazier so literal for the first noble truth, and non-literal later? What criteria does he use for choosing to be literal or not literal? I have no idea. It appears entirely arbitrary.
Will I call Brazier's views right or wrong? No. There are 84,000 paths to enlightenment. We are just on somewhat different paths.
14 of 14 found the following review helpful:
What did the Buddha really teach? Mar 23, 2006
Most Buddhists can recite the catechism of the four noble truths taught by the Buddha, and most believe they understand these timeless truths as a logical progression: human existence is marked by suffering (also translated as affliction, dis-ease, or stress); suffering is caused by thirst (desire, grasping); suffering can be extinguished; the way to extinguish suffering is by following the eight-fold path. There has been little dissent about these basic truths and their sequence. Brazier sets 2500 years of teaching on its ear with a startling and yet completely plausible interpretation that reverses this sequence and furthermore offers a convincing case for his view. In the process he clarifies why these truths can be understood as both *noble* and *ennobling*. This interpretation challenges the conventional notion of Buddhist practice as the earnest attempt to live the eight-fold path in order to extinguish our suffering through ending the desire that causes it.
By Brazier's account, the Buddha taught that suffering is the inescapable fact of human existence: to face this fact squarely, clearly, is noble. Arising *together with* suffering is thirst, the natural human response to suffering. Recognizing this dependent arising of thirst with suffering as the second truth is also noble. The third noble truth is not about cessation or extinction of suffering but *containment*, the "banking" of the fire of suffering and thirst so that its energy becomes transforming, rather than destructive. The consequence of this containment is a life that unfolds as the eight-fold path. This truth, too, is both noble and ennobling. The perfectly logical exposition of this original perspective on the fundamental teachings shared by all branches of Buddhism seems eerily natural. Consider the lives of so many of the figures we revere as spiritually enlightened throughout history and it is clear that not one managed, through whatever practices, to transcend human suffering: even the Buddha grew old, became terribly ill, and died. He saw his disciples die before him, his country ravaged, and those he loved killed. His teachings were the product of the transformation of this suffering, not its ending.
Read this book and be prepared to have your convictions challenged and your mind freshened as if a window had been thrown open on a crisp spring day. Whether you end up in agreement or disagreement with Brazier's view, you will gain a new perspective and appreciation for the subtlety of the four noble truths, the Buddha's most fundamental and enduring teaching.
1 of 6 found the following review helpful:
This book spoke to me. Sep 16, 2005
I want to learn more now. Thank you David.
|
| | |
|
|
