A man said to the Buddha, “I want Happiness.”
Buddha said, first remove “I”, that’s ego,
then remove “want”, that’s desire.
See now you are left with only Happiness.
I only recently started seeing this one doing the rounds, and at first I ignored it, because it was so obviously fake that I didn’t think anyone would take it seriously, any more than they would think that the Dalai Lama really had gone to a hot dog vendor and asked him to make him one with everything.
And yet, it seems some people really do think that this play on words really is a conversation from some Buddhist scripture. It ain’t.
For a start, this joke wouldn’t even work in Pāli because its conjugation of verbs is rather different from English. So for example, hoti is the Pāli verb to be. While in English we indicate the first person use of this verb by adding a personal pronoun, forming “I am,” in Pāli it’s the ending of the verb that changes. To say “I am” the verb hoti becomes “homi.”
So there’s no separate word for “I” that we can remove from whatever verb would represent “want” (it might be the verb kāmeti, to desire). We’d have to remove “I” and “want” at the same time, since they’re inseparable. And maybe that’s a more Buddhist teaching, since in Buddhism the problem with our sense of personal identity is that we cling to it.. The Buddha didn’t eradicate references to himself from his speech, but he made it clear that there was nothing that he clung to as part of his sense of self. We get rid of the problem of the self by ceasing to cling to the self. The clinging and the clinging to self vanish simultaneously.
I’ve no idea where this quote originated. I’m assuming that someone was making a little Buddhist-themed joke rather than trying to claim that this is actually a canonical quote, but I haven’t, so far, managed to find a source. Or at least not an original one.
Anyway, it would be silly to take this little pun too seriously. I only decided to write it up because so many people have been concerned about people who seem to think it might be a genuine scriptural quote. If you’re one of those people, I have the address of the Dalai Lama’s hot dog vendor, if you’re interested. But be warned, you have to have the exact money, because he can’t issue change. Change, after all, comes from within.
Thank you for providing this necessary service. The Buddha should not be used to validate random platitudes and glib nonsense. Buddha soda can’t be far behind.
You’re welcome. I can’t offer you any Buddha soda, but if you’re thirsty here’s some Buddha-brand coconut water, courtesy of The Worst Horse, which is always worth keeping up with.
I’m a Buddhist from Sri Lanka. I’m sorry to say this but using Buddha for brands and businesses is not much of a good thing, in another way it’s kind of insulting. And I wonder what kind of a Buddhist you are, promoting those disgusting brands which happened to be using Buddha in such inaccurate ways. That’s no good for Buddhism
Sorry, but what are you talking about? Who is promoting what “disgusting brands”?
Earliest I can find is Reddit about 6 months ago
I don’t think it’s important if the Buddha actually said it. The important thing is that the phrase makes sense with the Buddhas view of happiness and ego… and I think it does. Buddha himself didn’t want to be no one’s master, he said we should be our own masters, so in that order if someone makes his own phrase out of Buddhas teachings, there is nothing wrong with that. Now, if the phrase goes with or against Buddhas teaching, that’s another discussion, but I think it does a good job. Cheers!
“The important thing is that the phrase makes sense with the Buddhas view of happiness and ego… and I think it does.”
Unfortunately it doesn’t make sense at all and could be considered to be “wrong view”; the Buddha never used the term “ego” and such a psychological concept didn’t even exist at that point in history. When asked whether or not there was such a thing as a self, he did not reply. Why? Because to posit the existence or non-existence of a self would be to invoke it’s opposite in ignorant minds, thus causing the perpetuation of ignorance and continued suffering. In directly experiencing anatta (not-self), as taught by the Buddha, it becomes immediately apparent why quotations like this, while entertaining, are not accurate.
If you want to learn what the Buddha taught, go read his words and not the words of others who misrepresent the dharma. There are plenty of good sources for genuine quotes from the Buddha, this site being one of them, so don’t waste your time on trying to force-fit fake quotations.
May you find an end to suffering in this lifetime.
Do wonder why people get so hung up on whether a particular saying is attributable to someone or not. Doesn’t any teaching, if it provides what the person needed in order to advance them a bit further down the path to enlightenment, have value? Isn’t this what the ‘Parable of the raft’ teaches? Don’t get hung up on whatever it is that enables you to cross the river because once it has achieved what it has set out to do you will put it aside anyway.
“Hung up” is a rather tendentious term. To say that “the Buddha said x” when the Buddha did not, as far as we know, say x, is to make a statement that is false. I’m bothered about making false statements, myself. I’d rather speak the truth if I at all can.
Also, many of the things put into the mouth of the Buddha are not even in accord with the Buddha’s teaching. If you’re talking about rafts, don’t you want to get on a raft that’s taking you in the right direction
I hate that false Buddha quotes are being posted, but this one does have a lot of relevance to the teachings of Buddha. Although I may be wrong in the way I view things, I have never worried on whether the Buddha said this or that, or if he was even real. To me his memory, his image motivates me, teaches me to be a person who accepts their own truths and paths. Yes this quote may not make sense in the Buddha’s native tongue. Yes it may even offend others because of it being posted in the form of a lie. But if you strip away the circumstances and the origin, this quote can be seen as an enlightened way of thinking. As long as the quote is not spreading hate or false impressions, I have no hard feelings about the deceit. Since many non- Buddhists will look at this quote and find motivation to study up on the ways of the real Buddha, I am content.
There were many Buddha, which one specifically was it “not”?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha_%28disambiguation%29
Buddhism
Gautama Buddha, founder of Buddhism, clan name Gautama (Sanskrit; Pali: Gotama), personal name said to be Siddhārtha (Sanskrit; Pali: Siddhattha), epithet Śākyamuni (Sanskrit; Pali: Sakyamuni or Shakyamuni), commonly known as “The Buddha”
Other figures considered to be Buddhas by various Buddhist groups include:
Budai, the Laughing Buddha, a figure in traditional Chinese culture
Adi-Buddha, the primordial Buddha
Akshobhya, one of the Five Wisdom Buddhas of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism; lord of the Eastern Pure Land Abhirati
Amitābha, one of the Five Wisdom Buddhas of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism; principal Buddha of the Pure Land sect
Amoghasiddhi, one of the Five Wisdom Buddhas of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism
Dipankara, First Buddha of the current world age
Tonpa Shenrab, Buddha of the Bön religion
Ratnasambhava, one of the Five Wisdom Buddhas of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism
Vairocana, one of the Five Wisdom Buddhas of the Vajrayana tradition of Buddhism; embodiment of Dharmakaya
When a quote is attributed to “the Buddha” it’s being attributed to the historical Buddha, Shakyamuni. So if something is being said here to not have been said by the Buddha, it’s being said not to have been said by Shakyamuni. Of course we don’t know what the Buddha did or did not say, so to say that something was not said by the Buddha is shorthand for “it’s not in the scriptures attributed to the Buddha.”
…But in this particular case, this play on words was, I’m quite sure, not said by any of the figures you mentioned
Ain’t, ain’t a word
Yes it is: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ain't
One can create a story with anyone as the protagonist. Perhaps this story isn’t “true” in that the words actually came out of the Buddha’s mouth, but it is still a good story that illustrates an excellent point.
Another thing to consider is that Buddha probably didn’t have a transcriptionist at his service throughout his entire life. Who knows what actual stories may surround the Buddha that we may never know…
It seems like the hundredth time I’ve said this on this blog, but no doubt I’ll say it hundreds of times more
…
Saying that a quote is not recorded as having been said by the Buddha is not the same as saying that the quote is invalid. All I’m saying is that this quote does not come from the Buddhist scriptures.
I think everyone’s aware that not everything the Buddha said was recorded, but that’s not of any relevance.
admin, change your banner style… I don’t think you are Buddha or Buddha told you to write his name….
Apparently some people are immune to irony
May I please post this on Facebook on my page? I love it and of course agree…:-) This was made up by either some well-meaning person or someone who is simply mocking Eastern teachings. I have seen a poster with HH Dalai Lama’s name on it with some of the most pedantic New Age sayings on it…
Of course!
I’m very new to the teachings of the Buddha. My comment here has 2 purposes, one, I understand that the above quote was not in the scripture, and as such has no attributes to the Buddha, but doesn’t it fit into a modern interpretation? If you saw a man with a limp and using a stick to walk, but the stick was old and hard to use, and you, having knowledge of a newer, more sturdy stick, would you not offer it to the older man in order to better help him on his way?
Second, as previously stated, I’m very new and any insight that you can share on where a good place to start reading and meditating, would be most appreciated.
Thank you.
Well, I gave my opinion of the quote above, and I don’t find it very helpful. Happiness is not exactly the point of Buddhist practice, for example. It’s not dreadful, just lame.
I’m not making a general point that “old is good” and “new is bad.” In this particular case this quote is misattributed to the Buddha, and to say its his words is false speech, which is an unskillful act in Buddhist terms. And in this case I just don’t think the “stick” is a very good one.
I think an excellent place to start researching the buddha’s teaching is Bhikkhu Bodhi’s “In the Buddhas’s Words,” which is a compilation of translations from the Pali along with superb essays by the good Bhikkhu.
Thank you. I appreciate your time, and your “mission”.
It’s more of a hobby than a mission. And it’s rather fun.
If the quote itself has value, then why not attribute it to it’s true speaker? The problem with the fake quotations is that they exploit the respect that people have for the Buddha and his teachings. I actually like this quotation, rather it came from the Buddha or Phil from Reddit. This is not to say that I believe it agrees with Buddhist teachings.
I figured it probably wasn’t a real quote seeing as I saw it in cartoon-form first, but at the same time it really is a pretty good, basic description of some of the teachings of Buddhism.
Specifically when it comes to shedding ego and desire. Happiness is not the goal of Buddhism, but Buddha also understood that not everyone could live the life of the monk. For those not seeking the path of spiritual enlightenment, basic teachings like shedding ego and desire would most certainly help them achieve a level of happiness or contentedness.
No enlightment comes from discussion. It is not something you learn outside yourself, but within. You are not going to find enlightment in Siddhārtha’s words nor in, Adi-Buddha word´s nor in Dalai Lama’s word. You will find only within yourself. These words are not diminished because they don´t belong to buddha nor these words were to be exalted if they belonged to buddha.
Well, historically it seems as if quite a lot of people have gained enlightenment through discussion. There are many examples of such in the Buddhist scriptures. And that’s one of the values of studying the Dharma — it challenges your preconceptions and opens you to new possibilities.
Enlightenment is indeed to be found internally, but that doesn’t rule out benefitting from the words of the Buddha or from other spiritual teachers. Few of us would have made any progress without guidance from those wiser than us.
Historically, scriptures…what other said, what others lived…You show great knowledge about others and too little about yourself. You will only find what you seek only when you start looking within yourself.
Dhamma is not suposed to be intelectual amusement.
Ricardo. Please don’t fall into the delusion of thinking you know me. You don’t know me, or know what I have sought or found.
Any why are you wasting your time on the “intellectual amusement” of reading a blog about fake Buddha quotes? Shouldn’t you be off “looking within”?
Well, if my words were of no use to you then I wasted my time, if they were of any use to you or anyone who is reading this then the time was not wasted.
And I do know this, one can become enlighted in a monastery without ever hearing the word dhamma, than one that holds all the scriptures in the memory.
I hope to see a blog about your own words not others…
See beyond the words of others…Sometimes people use different, even oposite words to express the same experiences.
“I hope to see a blog about your own words not others… See beyond the words of others.”
You do know about my other blogs, and my books?
No, but I would be glad to take a look. Could you point them out for me? It is always good to get to know other people experiences…Even though I could never really tell what you´ve been through, through your words.
My main website is http://www.wildmind.org, where there are extensive structured guides to meditation as well as a blog.