The Buddha’s wrong
question
The question
which the archaic Sakya (i.e. Scythian) Buddha asked was: “What is the cause (and
what is the ending) of dukkha”, whereby
dukkha
can be variously translated to mean: unpleasantness, sorrow, suffering,
distress, dissatisfaction and so on. The question
which the archaic Sakya Buddha would have asked had he been a more discrete
observer, and which would have satisfied his actual question, would have
been: “What purpose does dukka serve?” The naïve
and wholly insufficient answer achieved by the archaic Sakya Buddha, and
which triggered his enlightenment and subsequent joy, was: “Dukkha is caused by impermanence! (later, and even less sufficient, by craving)”. What extraordinary nonsense, but a golden
herring that served as the phoney goal of a vast (misdirected) religion. The far more
awakened understanding of dukkha given (by the modern Buddha, Maitreya)
is: “Dukkha signals (system’s performance) failure.” Dukkha is a warning signal (or
symptom, actually a syndrome of sensory functions), hence an essential human
resource in that it compels a change of performance (and with it behaviour).1 Were dukkha not a vital
self-regulation means, evolution would have eliminated it long ago. Later
Buddhist morality stated: ‘Dukkha ends when craving ends.’ For instance, when craving is satisfied and
which is signalled with sukkah. Modern
Buddhist behaviour theory states: ‘Dukkha ends
when failure ends.’ 1 … Viz. “Suffering is a great
teacher!”; “No pain, no gain!” |