As humans on Earth, from a very young age, we’re told that we must strive to outperform others, that we must achieve success. Within our education system, there isn’t a single parent or teacher who advocates for their children to become the lowest of the low. The use of such words might displease some, yet those who understand me know that I’m not one to lie for the sake of political correctness — this is also why I appreciate Donald Trump.
Although our society provides a myriad of job opportunities, it must be acknowledged that there are jobs you would absolutely refuse to take. We are educated to aim to become the highest of the high; if everyone aspires to this, then who will carry out the work of the lowliest? You must realize that many tasks necessitate someone’s labor: someone must clean up your excrement, someone must clear your table after you dine, someone must assemble your Apple iPhones, and someone must provide manicure services for you. Your parents would undoubtedly be dismayed if, upon graduating from college, you decided to work as a garbage truck driver — because most people would agree that it’s not a job that can be proudly paraded. Nevertheless, someone must perform this job. Those who have been educated to strive to be superior — which is virtually everyone — due to various reasons, in reality, only a tiny fraction can become those who have others at their command. The majority, in order to survive, must engage in jobs they would absolutely dislike. The hotel waiter, standing for dozens of hours each day, surely did not dream of being a waiter in his childhood — perhaps he aspired to become a Super Saiyan. It’s hard to find people who genuinely love their jobs in our society. Most people work simply to get by, to put food on their table. And our society is far from being one that is filled with tolerance and benevolence towards the poor.
Imagine, if all turtles were educated from birth with the notion that, with hard work, they can fly. But you and I both know, no matter how hard a turtle tries, it can’t take flight. Yet, having been instilled from infancy with the belief that they could soar like eagles and that flight equates to happiness, these turtles have become accustomed to this idea. Yet they must face the stark reality that they will never be able to fly. I believe this is one of the reasons why depression is so rampant in the world today.
Our society has a very singular definition of success, which restricts the possibilities in our lives. Children only know about the success model of individuals like Mark Zuckerberg, ignorant to the fact that there are also paradigms of success like Zhuangzi and Milarepa in the world. Their range of options is actually quite narrow, and most people lack the courage to tread a path of success that is not widely accepted — such as becoming an Indian ascetic.
Upon deeper examination, it appears that most of our modern perspectives stem from the influence of Western civilization. While Chinese Confucian culture does promote the idea of standing out from the crowd to some extent, its core principle is self-restraint.
I once spent some time exploring Western civilization. I read numerous Western historical and philosophical works, and was surprised to find that Western civilization is built on the foundation of satisfying the self. In the eyes of Western civilization, the fulfillment of one’s desires is considered a natural right. The belief is that as long as an individual doesn’t infringe upon the rights of others, any act in pursuit of self-satisfaction is unimpeachable and deserves respect. This notion seems reasonable on the surface and is widely accepted by most laypeople and intellectuals. However, it’s important to note that many actions might not directly infrict on a specific individual’s rights, but they can infringe upon the rights of everyone. Our civilization has not evolved to a point where we can immediately discern the full impact of all actions. Many behaviors and viewpoints seem harmless, even beneficial, in the short term. It may take decades before the harm of certain actions, particularly those damaging to the environment, are fully recognized by the public.
In other words, some infringements on public interests aren’t quickly detected by society, and it is often nearly impossible to pinpoint the primary culprits. For example, the results of global warming are borne by all earth’s citizens, but you can hardly accuse a specific individual as the root cause of global warming. In fact, the erroneous lifestyles born from flawed perspectives are the true culprits. You might not link global warming with luxury consumption, and leaders of developed nations tend to focus their discussions on reducing emissions. However, few discuss the connection between the killing of a mahi-mahi and global warming. Over a hundred years ago, the aristocrats of London were fond of hunting tigers in India. Killing a Bengal tiger appeared to infringe upon no one’s rights, but in reality, it encroached upon everyone’s rights. If you’re a wealthy gemstone collector and you enjoy collecting various gemstones, and you have sufficient funds to support your hobby, it seems as though you’re not infringing on anyone’s rights. Everything is legal — you paid money, and someone provided the gemstones. However, in the long run, you are encroaching on the Earth, as many people are hollowing out the Earth to satisfy your needs, and we live on this planet that has been dug full of holes.
Do you understand what I’m saying? I’m saying that infringement doesn’t necessarily occur only when someone barges into another person’s house with a knife. If a businessman legally obtains the rights to deforest a certain area, it seems as if he’s not infringing on anyone’s rights and there’s no problem legally, but everyone must pay the price for the consequence of having one less forest on Earth. Imagine a city opening a new flagship supermarket where you can buy anything you desire, and the prices are definitively cheaper than those at smaller supermarkets. This, in fact, constitutes a type of infringement. Every time the big supermarket sells an item, the small supermarkets are infringed upon — their rightful customers have been taken away. It must be pointed out that the true beneficiaries of these giant multinational corporations are very few. And these select few really don’t need to accumulate so much wealth; they won’t become happier because of it. Their accumulation of wealth stems from their belief that wealth can bring them happiness. This is, in reality, a lie.
In Western culture, no one is reprimanded for purchasing a lot of things as long as they can pay the bill and their income is legal. Everything seems perfectly reasonable. However, if a person’s possessions far exceed what’s needed for survival, in truth, all of us are being infringed upon, and we all have to pay the price. The reason someone wants to own things beyond their capacity to enjoy, is nothing more than to satisfy their ego. From the perspective of Buddhism, they are also accruing karmic debt as a result. Behind the bosses of these large corporations, there’s a sea of unemployed people. You might argue that these wealthy individuals are also creating jobs, but when one person amasses the wealth of a million people, in effect, a million people become impoverished as a result. The people who clear entire forests, the gem collectors, the people whose homes are filled with luxury goods, they might not fully understand the consequences of their actions, but they will still accrue karmic debt. Karmic debt is not visible like a growth on your hand, you can’t see it, but you can feel it. You might feel an inexplicable sense of oppression, and carrying too much karmic debt can lead to persistent unhappiness.
Eastern civilization, on the other hand, emphasizes self-restraint — the suppression of the ‘self’ and precaution against recklessness — whether it’s ancient Chinese civilization or ancient Indian civilization, both are characterized by this. Under such cultures, it’s clear that your desires will be much more restrained, you are less likely to go out and buy fifty BOSS shirts — this also means there will be far less harm to the planet and to other people. Upon closer inspection of Western civilization, you’ll discover that everything created by the West — from their systems to their laws, their economic models, their various inventions, and even Hollywood films — all emphasize the righteousness of satisfying the self. Westerners believe that satisfying the self is a natural right, and that suppressing the self is the source of evil. Yet strangely, their belief that “self-satisfaction leads to happiness” never seems to materialize.
Over the past few thousand years, the business models in the West and the East have not been significantly different, but in the last century, business models have undergone a dramatic transformation. Modern business models spend much of their time creating things you don’t actually need, then bombard you with advertisements to make you believe that your life is incomplete without them. We buy many things that we don’t actually need because we are bewitched by advertisements. Western businessmen understand that the human ego needs constant satisfaction, so they create a variety of things that we don’t actually need, sell them to us, and make a fortune in the process. In this process, our life-sustaining planet is damaged, and many evils arise in order for us to have the purchasing power — there are junior high school girls who resort to prostitution for a Dior lipstick. I’ve heard that in the near future, artificial intelligence will replace human workers. I’m curious to know, if most workers become unemployed, who will buy the products made by robots? Such technology and such business models are extremely unethical.
Chinese attitudes toward Western culture have evolved over several centuries, from contempt to resistance to acceptance. In today’s globalized world, apart from political models, almost all of the Chinese people’s life and business models are directly copied from the West. Especially in the last few decades, through the bombardment of movies, TV, and various advertisements, Western models of success have been fully accepted and replicated in the East. In order to assert their individuality, Easterners have also learned to fill their homes with material possessions. China’s rich may own 50 fur coats, live in houses with 20 bathrooms, have private planes, use gold toilets; they may even be more extravagant than Westerners. In fact, this is a massive waste of Earth’s resources and a violation of the rights of all Earth’s citizens. They do this because they subscribe to a Western concept: such actions can satisfy the self, and satisfying the self leads to happiness.
However, I would like to offer some insights from Buddhism. From a Buddhist perspective, the self cannot be satisfied. Satisfying the self is like pouring water into a leaking bowl, you can never fill it up. No matter how much you possess, your ‘self’ can never be fully satisfied. I know many wealthy people who, in private, are actually quite depressed. I heard about a Buddhist master who once stayed in a rich man’s villa for a few days. When he used the rich man’s bathroom, he found it filled with medications for treating depression. This rich man, one of the wealthiest in the world, was clearly not happy. It’s easy to understand why. These affluent individuals have experienced all there is, and nothing excites them anymore. That is the most terrifying aspect. A Russian tycoon wished to personally participate in a certain American space program, suggesting he can no longer find a sense of existence on Earth. In the Middle East, the oil tycoons, who went from nothing to being as rich as nations by selling oil, seek their existence through terrorism after experiencing grand palaces, hordes of beautiful women, and private zoos. The sense of existence, as I see it, is the hunger of the self. All our activities aim to satisfy the self, to feed the self. But you must understand, the self can never be fully fed.
Today, Chinese parents can easily learn many child-rearing methods from the West through the Internet. I’m not here to judge the merits of Eastern and Western education. We won’t discuss whether these methods are truly ‘Western’. But I do want to remind Chinese parents, and those who are about to become parents, not to give their children too much freedom. If you give your child excessive freedom, they are likely to develop depression in the future. I’ve seen many parents who never deny their children anything, who never scold them — no matter how outrageous their behavior. They say that they should not suppress the natural instincts of the children. I don’t believe this approach benefits children in any way. If your child experiences setbacks, they will develop strong psychological resilience. But if no one ever says ‘no’ to them during their upbringing, they will find it hard to cope when people start saying ‘no’ to them as they grow up. However, in reality, many people will say ‘no’ to them. The girl they like may say ‘no’, the company they apply to may say ‘no’, and even strangers might say ‘no’ to them. If they happen to be timid, facing so many ‘nos’, they might fall into depression. If they are prone to violence, they might resort to violent behavior against those who deny them. We often see news about teenagers who have killed classmates because their feelings were rejected. Such children must have grown up in an extremely liberal environment. Their parents must never say ‘no’ to them, turning a blind eye to their crude and impolite behaviors, or even tacitly encouraging such behavior. Such a child is unable to accept anyone saying ‘no’ to him. As they grow up, they become a disaster for everyone around them.
If a person’s ego is always indulged, soon they will lose control over it. Even if they know their actions are wrong, they are powerless to stop. Depression stems from the huge gap between one’s expectations and reality. You are always unable to achieve what you think you can. You have no control over yourself. Your habits can easily defeat you. You can’t even get up on time. You can only passively accept. This is the result of indulging the self.
Under the influence of Western culture, many parents hope that their children do not see bloody and frightening images, their reasoning being that they are protecting the children. Their idea coincides with that of King Suddhodana. The king also hoped that Prince Siddhartha would never see the truth of the world, never witness sickness, aging, and death, and made great efforts to this end, moving the elderly and the sick to other places. But history has proven how futile his actions were. When the young Gautama Buddha saw sickness, aging, and death, he chose to become a monk, while most ordinary people, powerless to solve these problems, could only fall into depression. Therefore, I don’t think it is wise to set barriers between children and the truth. If a person spends the first twenty years in a fairy-tale world and the next twenty years in real society, when they find out that everything is not as they thought and they are powerless to change, then depression is a natural consequence.
Western culture tends to hide things that might bring us closer to reality. There’s an American movie called “He’s Just Not That Into You,” which I think represents the American way of communicating: after a girl goes on a date, the boy never contacts her again. None of her female friends tell her the truth, they just encourage her. They say, “Maybe he’s very busy, he definitely likes you. You’re so cute. He must be very busy if he didn’t call you.” They love to preserve other people’s egos and are unwilling to tell the truth. American cemeteries are designed in such a way that you cannot think of death. When someone dies, they hold a funeral for them. At the funeral, they say, “He is now with God. He was a good person, a good father, a good husband. We will always remember him.” They dress up death in a very poetic way: velvet-lined coffins, solemn crowds, priests, and flowers. However, from a Buddhist perspective, none of these things will help the poor deceased who is in an intermediate state and in desperate need of help.
In this regard, Eastern civilization is no different. We also pretend that death does not exist. We don’t like the topic of death. We are always astonished by the death of others, as if death is an accidental event. This is strange. If no one ever dies, and no one has ever died, and suddenly someone dies, then your surprise would be understandable. But, everyone will die. Why would you be surprised by this? We live in a world where everyone avoids facing reality. So, when we collide head-on with reality, we naturally become depressed. We turn a blind eye to impermanence.
Depression also stems from a lack of understanding of causality. Because we can only see some very superficial causes and conditions, those surface-level ones are obviously incapable of explaining the world we observe. The world always seems so unreasonable to us. We often find ourselves puzzled, wondering “why is it like this?” When we can’t make sense of an increasing number of things, depression follows.
As a Buddhist, what I want to remind you of is this: if you feel uneasy while doing something, you should stop. You might think that the feeling of unease will pass after a few days, but it won’t. These feelings accumulate. When you’ve built up enough unease, you’ll find it hard to fall asleep. If you’re feeling uneasy, it’s possible that your subconscious is aware that your actions are harming someone.
Finally, I would like to say that Dharma, the teachings of Buddhism, may be the best treatment for depression. I have known people with depression and those on the verge of it who have achieved good results through the practice of Dharma. If you are a person with depression, you might want to give it a try.
Ling Shan Hermit wrote this on October 14, 2016, first published on October 14, 2016.
All rights reserved, no infringement intended. All articles of the Ling Shan Hermit, in both Simplified and Traditional Chinese, English and other languages, are copyrighted to the natural person who owns “Ling Shan Hermit”. Please respect copyright laws. Any media or individual (including but not limited to Internet media, websites, personal spaces, blogs, WeChat public accounts, print media) wishing to use this content must first obtain authorization from Ling Shan Hermit. No modifications to the article are permitted (including the author’s name, title, body of the text, and punctuation). We reserve all legal rights.
灵山居士：抑郁症的成因
评论
发表评论