user254: My mother and I come from a non-Buddhist culture/background/society/country/family.
At one point when I had an opportunity to explain to her what Buddhism is, I was doing well (i.e. she was listening and accepting what I was saying) when I was explaining that Buddhism includes a non-fixed identity-view and explaining why a non-fixed identity view is skillful (e.g. because an attitude such as attachment to your job/profession might be unpleasant when you retire, and because people's abilities and health change with age).
But then what I mentioned the first Noble Truth she seemed to object, saying "Sorry you think life is suffering/dissatisfaction, I don't agree: I like life, I think life is good."

So

Do you ever try to explain Buddhism to someone who barely knows the first thing about it, and if so what is your strategy for how to explain it?
Do you explain 'dukkha' using the classic 'death/poverty/illness/old age', and/or is there a better way to explain the first noble Truth?
Are there any alternate way to introduce Buddhism which don't begin with the first Noble Truth?
Might it be better to explain what I think Buddhism might mean to me (why it appeals to me) personally? I fear that might make it less strange to her ("yes I see why you like it") but at the same time less acceptable ("but it isn't for me because I'm not like you").
Should I understand that if that's her reaction it's because she's already doing a lot of things right (e.g. not spending her life feeling angry)?


user11836: There is no need to explain what Buddhism is.  If outsiders get curious, just tell them it is about purifying your mind, being aware, and serving your debt to the universe.
Sometimes, when you feel the need to explain (and you are not indebted to an asker), you are seeing a me-ism (what's the Buddhist word?) -- an ego artifact whereby you try to bolster your confidence or power by getting others to agree.  Be aware of it -- it may or may not be part of a healthy personal reaction.

user11074: Start off with skilful means. This requires knowing your audience well, and having established a good rapport and relationship which opens up the ability to listen.
Secondly, know the world-view of your audience. Explain Buddhism in accordance with the audience.
Buddhism is a word.  Despite it's usage - an attempt to encapsulate several thousand traditions over two thousand years that span half the world's surface with no centralisation - what it boils down to is Bodhi - enlightenment, from the verbal root "budh": awakening.  We can define 'Buddhists' to be those who consider Bodhi to be a worthy goal and who aspire towards it. However, that is quite a broad scope - it includes many other religions.  So if we feel a need to narrow it, then we can say that Buddhism recognises Sakyamuni Buddha as an individual who both experienced awakening, and also decided to teach it to others.
The purpose of Buddhism, however, remains the same - our purpose is to be awake.  Why? Well, once we are awake we won't be sleepily drifting around making trouble for ourselves and everyone else any more!
This covers many Buddhist traditions, but not all– The pure land schools don't really acknowledge the need to practice the three higher trainings in this life, and instead concentrate on developing a strong relationship with Buddha Amitābha in order to be reborn in Sukhāvatī in their next life, where training in awakening is much easier.  But the training in Sukhāvatī is the same as here - three higher trainings.

user14324: The First Noble Truth is sometimes misunderstood; it doesn't mean that life is "bad".  (Assigning the labels "good" and "bad" to conditioned states is unskillful.)  The First Noble Truth, is not that all living things are in excruciating pain constantly, but that suffering, at least intermittently, is inevitable; and that any source of lower-order happiness, from physical pleasure, novelty, or companionship, is fleeting.
In fact, the parable of the darts explains that the uninstructed worldling does not actually desire happiness, does not desire pleasure for its own sake; whether he acknowledges it or not, he rather desires happiness and pleasure as a diversion, a distraction from unhappiness and pain, even if that unhappiness and pain is merely the awareness of his own mortality.
I think that "happiness" is not the ultimate good: because "happiness" is conditioned, caused by something: either physical pleasure, artistic novelty, or companionship.  Possibly other things--but there is always a cause.  Something has made you happy.  Nirvana, on the other hand, is a state of un-caused, and therefore un-disturbed and un-disturbable, calm.

user3597: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCX0muRLJWc
Buddhism in a nutshell,
"Avoid all sin
Do good
purify the the mind 
this is the teaching from all the Buddhas"

user10100: By my experience, Tipitaka is Buddhism; Buddhism is Tipitka.
I develop my life to be happy every way follow to tipitaka. Then I always show my happiness every time to everyone by smile. When someone ask me for the reason of smile, I tell them "because buddhism make me happy".

user12005: 
Do you ever try to explain Buddhism to someone who barely knows the first thing about it, and if so what is your strategy for how to explain it?

I find this line of questioning to illustrate the First Noble Truth to be more useful:
Are you aware what you do all the time ? You seek pleasure and pleasurable experiences. Sometimes it appears that this seeking does produce some pleasure, some pleasurable experiences. But does it make you happy? does it ever satisfy? If it does, why are you back at seeking pleasure again instead of being happy with what you have found?  Is it because everything changes and soon you have to redo it again and again? When does this ever end?

Do you explain 'dukkha' using the classic 'death/poverty/illness/old age', and/or is there a better way to explain the first noble Truth?

It depends on the listener. For someone who is family/relationship oriented, clarifying that dukkha is interleaved in all of these aspects (death/aging/illness) can help. For the intellectually inclined, similar response to the one I have prescribed above may be of more help... at the least to get them thinking along these lines.

Should I understand that if that's her reaction it's because she's already doing a lot of things right (e.g. not spending her life feeling angry)?

Nobody wants to be pointed out that what they are doing is not right, especially when they are doing somethings right according to some metric. You have to point them to what they are not seeing, what they are missing. It is not an easy task, from my limited experience.
Hope this helps.

user8157: 
But then what I mentioned the first Noble Truth she seemed to object, saying "Sorry you think life is suffering/dissatisfaction, I
  don't agree: I like life, I think life is good."

It seems like your non-Buddhist mother understood the Dhamma (Truth) better than you. The 1st noble truth summarises all suffering as attachment (upadana) to the five aggregates. It is not about 'life' but about mental suffering. Birth, aging, death, sorrow, separation from loved, etc, are just examples of attachment (upadana). 
If you explain to your mother Buddhism is about happiness & suffering and it explains suffering occurs when there is clinging; be it clinging to life, clinging to a person or clinging to a view or opinion, your mother might agree; given mothers are prone to worry about their children because of clinging. This is how Queen Mallika explained the Dhamma to King Pasenadi in the Piyajatika Sutta.
This said, be sure to explain the happiness (Nibbana) part of Buddhism, particularly the moral teachings about skilful kamma in relationships, such as metta & gratitude, including family relationships. Here, you can demonstrate how Buddhism nurtures your relationship with her. 
If you focus too much on suffering, your mother may think you are unhappy rather than happy. 
Its important to try to make your mother comfortable & happy. 

user3551: It may be useful to choose certain aspects of Buddhism that people can relate to such as Cause and Effect. This reminded me of the dilemma The Buddha had when he almost didn't teach The Dhamma because he thought it was too hard to grasp.But Brahma persuaded him that there some people who can understand.Perhaps the best way to approach this is by treating Buddhism completely as a philosophy something to ponder about in the distance and not to be experienced as this can be met with aversion.Create that distance so your mother can feel safe and not like her views are being threatened.Just like we don't see the need to disagree that Christians believe in Jesus Christ as it makes no difference your mother should be put in a position where she is aware what these so called Buddhists believe but does not feel threatened by it.Try watching a documentary on the life of The Buddha visit a Buddhist temple or attend
A Buddhist ceremony maybe travel to a buddhist country.just like a curious tourist where you can explain some of the symbolism or mythology.
But for her to be able to grasp the teaching would depend on her karma.The Buddha himself did not start by explaining complex teachings such as Annata or Dependent Origination to people who could not understand.He mainly just started with explaining the importance of Generosity or being Good. Because you needq sufficient merits to clear the mind enough to grasp the teaching or the essence of what the Buddha taught.a
imagine if you were a stranger what could you say to make your then self understand Buddhism.Remembera how you first understood buddhism was it like somebody telling you what to accept or was it kind of likke something you forgot then went oh that's right!an aha moment a moment of insight.

user3556: I think a brief overview of Buddha's life is an excellent way to explain Buddhism, because the listener can follow the train of observation and reasoning that led Buddha to renounce a life of ease for a difficult life as an ascetic, then wandering teacher.
To me the most salient feature of Buddhism is that there is no central role for a "god". Other salient features are the stress on self-insight, and the importance of intention in judging the morality of action.
If someone asks why Buddhists bow before statues, I usually say it is to pay respect to the wisdom of Buddha and his teachings.
In explaining the Noble Truths, I usually say "all people suffer at some point in their lives" and "the reason people suffer is that they desire something, even if it's only desire for things not to change". The third and fourth noble truth I usually explain as "we can limit our suffering to the extent we can master our desires" and there is a way to master desire, the Eightfold Path.
Harder to explain are anatta and "what is reincarnated after we die?".

user801: In addition to my comments, I quote Ajahn Brahm from his book "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond"

The Highest Happiness 
The Buddha said, “Nibbāna is the highest happiness” (Dhp 203, 204). This is, perhaps, the most helpful
  description of enlightenment. Not only is it straightforward and
  lacking in gibberish, it is also very appealing. It reveals why men
  and women have been striving for nibbāna throughout the past
  twenty-six centuries. We all want happiness, and if the highest
  happiness is on offer, then that’s what we want. Thus Buddhism’s
  perennial teaching is how to be happier and happier, until one reaches
  the summit of all happiness in this very life: nibbāna. 
These days, I
  present the Buddha’s special teaching of the four noble truths having
  rearranged them. I have found that if I begin with the noble truth of
  suffering, then my audience is turned off. They know enough about that
  already in their lives. They didn’t give up their evening to come and
  listen to more suffering. As any salesperson knows, first impressions
  are paramount. Therefore I introduce the four noble truths as follows:

Happiness
The path leading to happiness
Unhappiness
The cause of unhappiness 

This is essentially the same as the Buddha’s teaching, but reordered for greater impact. Some might call
  this rearrangement “marketing,” but it emphasizes the goal of Buddhism
  by placing it first.
Nibbāna portrayed as the highest happiness also
  reveals that the noble eightfold path is the way of ever-increasing
  happiness. Those who follow the path wholeheartedly get happier. As
  the Buddha said in the Araṇavibhanga Sutta, “One should know how to
  define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within
  oneself.” One pursues such inner pleasure, which is jhāna, without
  fear until one reaches the highest happiness.
What is the highest
  happiness that you have experienced? Drugs? Sex? Music? Falling in
  love? Seeing the birth of your first child? You will find that the
  happiness of jhāna exceeds all of these. That is why one’s first
  experience of jhāna blows apart all one’s old conceptions about the
  meaning of happiness. Jhāna provides deep insight into happiness. Not
  that jhāna is the highest happiness, but it is so close that, as we
  said earlier, the Buddha called it sambodhi sukha, “the bliss of
  enlightenment.” From jhāna one proceeds to a happiness a little bit
  higher, and that is nibbāna. 
Recent scientific studies support the
  assertions that meditation makes one happier and that Buddhist monks
  may be the happiest people of all. Therefore, anyone who wants a
  really good time should be a really good meditator. And if one wants
  the highest happiness of all, then go for nibbāna.


user289: 1) It's hard to summarize Buddhism in brief without resorting to one of sometimes inaccurate or misleading summaries. A summary that starts with the Hindu-style cosmology, imho, misses the point. Also depends on the audience, i.e. do they see other religions as being different kinds of Christianity or essentially Christian heresy or as superstition. The worst misunderstanding is that Buddhism is only a devotional religion just Christianity with the words Buddha/God, Pure Land/Heaven, and so on swapped.
2)I've been reading about the different forms of Buddhism, a lot. What is surprising is that each branch has a slightly different take on what the problem is that Buddhism is meant to solve.

Shin Buddhism. The fundamental problem is arrogance, particularly with respect to the idea that we think we can engage in practices to solve our other problems.
Theravada. The fundamental problem is suffering, particularly suffering associated with grasping and desiring things. I don't like to waffle-- this view really does say the problem is akin to depression. I visualize the historical Buddha as suffering from depression, but not everyone suffers from depression. The flip reading of this is, that the fundamental problem is to figure out how to be happy. The Dalai Lama sometimes uses this in public speeches to summarize the goal of Buddhism.
Mahayana. The fundamental problem is ignorance, particularly with respect to the question of who we are, and that we think our fundamental problem can be solved individually
Tathagata-Garba. The fundamental problem is that we think we have a problem, particularly of the sort that could be solved by realizing our problem is already solved. (I certainly don't claim to grok this, it sounds like the fundamental problem is we don't think we are good enough, but eventually we realize we were good enough all along. Personally I think it's nonsense, my opinion of myself has no bearing on anything except for people trapped in a society that obsesses about relative rank)

3) I don't start with the 4 noble truths or 8 fold paths. I'd rather start with what practices I do and to what goal.
4) You can't help but say something about what you personally think, else you'll be parroting the party line  of a particular institutionalize form of Buddhism or boring people with an encyclopedic listing of Buddhist schools.
5) If someone really has no problems, that's great, they are Enlightened! The historical Buddha (According to Stephen Batchelor's retelling) said as much on his death bed, when he asked if anyone had any questions left, no one did, so he said, well you all must be enlightened then. People need Buddhism when their current raft has sunk. If there is food on the table, a comfortable place to sleep, and they have no complaints about their daily routine, then our jobs as Buddhists is to rejoice in their success (mudita).
I was reading "Wicked" the retelling of "Wizard of Oz" from the witch's standpoint. In one scene, the main character was looking through a glass as a child and saying "Horrors, horrors" as she could see something no one else could. Later in the book, she grows up to be a political radical and rebel because she was one of the few that saw the horror of the consequences of the government (the Wizard's) policies.
Anyhow, I don't claim to have a good solution for the problem-- how do we stay optimistic and positive or happy once we realize the muddle we are in, but at least the Mahayana version, provides a path towards how to find happiness-- by taking action to solve everyone's problems.

user295: In a nut shell Buddhism revolves around the 3 trainings:

Living a life of morality so we do no create misery for one self and others
Developing mastery over the mind so we do not react but be proactive so we can be at peace with our selves and other
Developing wisdom of your cognitive process to identify how misery is generated so we can come out of misery


254: <p>My mother and I come from a non-Buddhist culture/background/society/country/family.</p>

<p>At one point when I had an opportunity to explain to her what Buddhism is, I was doing well (i.e. she was listening and accepting what I was saying) when I was explaining that Buddhism includes a non-fixed identity-view and explaining why a non-fixed identity view is skillful (e.g. because an attitude such as attachment to your job/profession might be unpleasant when you retire, and because people's abilities and health change with age).</p>

<p>But then what I mentioned the first Noble Truth she seemed to object, saying "Sorry you think life is suffering/dissatisfaction, I don't agree: I like life, I think life is good."</p>

<hr>

<p>So</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Do you ever try to explain Buddhism to someone who barely knows the first thing about it, and if so what is your strategy for how to explain it?</p></li>
<li><p>Do you explain 'dukkha' using the classic 'death/poverty/illness/old age', and/or is there a better way to explain the first noble Truth?</p></li>
<li><p>Are there any alternate way to introduce Buddhism which don't begin with the first Noble Truth?</p></li>
<li><p>Might it be better to explain what I think Buddhism might mean to me (why it appeals to me) personally? I fear that might make it less strange to her ("yes I see why you like it") but at the same time less acceptable ("but it isn't for me because I'm not like you").</p></li>
<li><p>Should I understand that if that's her reaction it's because she's already doing a lot of things right (e.g. not spending her life feeling angry)?</p></li>
</ul>
 11836: <p>There is no need to explain what Buddhism is.  If outsiders get curious, just tell them it is about purifying your mind, being aware, and serving your debt to the universe.</p>

<p>Sometimes, when you feel the need to explain (and you are not indebted to an asker), you are seeing a me-ism (what's the Buddhist word?) -- an ego artifact whereby you try to bolster your confidence or power by getting others to agree.  Be aware of it -- it may or may not be part of a healthy personal reaction.</p>
 11074: <p>Start off with skilful means. This requires knowing your audience well, and having established a good rapport and relationship which opens up the ability to listen.</p>

<p>Secondly, know the world-view of your audience. Explain Buddhism in accordance with the audience.</p>

<p><strong>Buddhism</strong> is a word.  Despite it's usage - an attempt to encapsulate several thousand traditions over two thousand years that span half the world's surface with no centralisation - what it boils down to is <strong>Bodhi</strong> - enlightenment, from the verbal root "budh": <strong>awakening</strong>.  We can define 'Buddhists' to be those who consider Bodhi to be a worthy goal and who aspire towards it. However, that is quite a broad scope - it includes many other religions.  So if we feel a need to narrow it, then we can say that <strong>Buddhism</strong> recognises Sakyamuni Buddha as an individual who both experienced awakening, and also decided to teach it to others.</p>

<p>The purpose of Buddhism, however, remains the same - our purpose is to be awake.  Why? Well, once we are awake we won't be sleepily drifting around making trouble for ourselves and everyone else any more!</p>

<p>This covers many Buddhist traditions, but not all– The pure land schools don't really acknowledge the need to practice the three higher trainings in this life, and instead concentrate on developing a strong relationship with Buddha Amitābha in order to be reborn in Sukhāvatī in their next life, where training in awakening is much easier.  But the training in Sukhāvatī is the same as here - three higher trainings.</p>
 14324: <p>The First Noble Truth is sometimes misunderstood; it doesn't mean that life is "bad".  (Assigning the labels "good" and "bad" to conditioned states is unskillful.)  The First Noble Truth, is not that all living things are in excruciating pain constantly, but that suffering, at least intermittently, is inevitable; and that any source of lower-order happiness, from physical pleasure, novelty, or companionship, is fleeting.</p>

<p>In fact, the parable of the darts explains that the uninstructed worldling does not actually desire happiness, does not desire pleasure for its own sake; whether he acknowledges it or not, he rather desires happiness and pleasure as a diversion, a distraction from unhappiness and pain, even if that unhappiness and pain is merely the awareness of his own mortality.</p>

<p>I think that "happiness" is not the ultimate good: because "happiness" is conditioned, caused by something: either physical pleasure, artistic novelty, or companionship.  Possibly other things--but there is always a cause.  Something has <em>made</em> you happy.  Nirvana, on the other hand, is a state of un-caused, and therefore un-disturbed and un-disturbable, calm.</p>
 3597: <p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCX0muRLJWc" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCX0muRLJWc</a>
Buddhism in a nutshell,
"Avoid all sin
Do good
purify the the mind 
this is the teaching from all the Buddhas"</p>
 10100: <p>By my experience, Tipitaka is Buddhism; Buddhism is Tipitka.</p>

<p>I develop my life to be happy every way follow to tipitaka. Then I always show my happiness every time to everyone by smile. When someone ask me for the reason of smile, I tell them "because buddhism make me happy".</p>
 12005: <blockquote>
  <p>Do you ever try to explain Buddhism to someone who barely knows the first thing about it, and if so what is your strategy for how to explain it?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>I find this line of questioning to illustrate the First Noble Truth to be more useful:</p>

<p>Are you aware what you do all the time ? You seek pleasure and pleasurable experiences. Sometimes it appears that this seeking does produce some pleasure, some pleasurable experiences. But does it make you happy? does it ever satisfy? If it does, why are you back at seeking pleasure again instead of being happy with what you have found?  Is it because everything changes and soon you have to redo it again and again? When does this ever end?</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Do you explain 'dukkha' using the classic 'death/poverty/illness/old age', and/or is there a better way to explain the first noble Truth?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It depends on the listener. For someone who is family/relationship oriented, clarifying that dukkha is interleaved in all of these aspects (death/aging/illness) can help. For the intellectually inclined, similar response to the one I have prescribed above may be of more help... at the least to get them thinking along these lines.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Should I understand that if that's her reaction it's because she's already doing a lot of things right (e.g. not spending her life feeling angry)?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Nobody wants to be pointed out that what they are doing is not right, especially when they are doing somethings right according to some metric. You have to point them to what they are not seeing, what they are missing. It is not an easy task, from my limited experience.</p>

<p>Hope this helps.</p>
 8157: <blockquote>
  <p><strong>But then what I mentioned the first Noble Truth she seemed to object, saying "Sorry you think life is suffering/dissatisfaction, I
  don't agree: I like life, I think life is good."</strong></p>
</blockquote>

<p>It seems like your non-Buddhist mother understood the Dhamma (Truth) better than you. The 1st noble truth summarises all suffering as attachment (<em>upadana</em>) to the five aggregates. It is not about 'life' but about mental suffering. Birth, aging, death, sorrow, separation from loved, etc, are just examples of attachment (<em>upadana</em>). </p>

<p>If you explain to your mother Buddhism is about happiness &amp; suffering and it explains suffering occurs when there is clinging; be it clinging to life, clinging to a person or clinging to a view or opinion, your mother might agree; given mothers are prone to worry about their children because of clinging. This is how Queen Mallika explained the Dhamma to King Pasenadi in the <a href="http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.087.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Piyajatika Sutta</a>.</p>

<p>This said, be sure to explain the happiness (Nibbana) part of Buddhism, particularly the moral teachings about skilful kamma in relationships, such as metta &amp; gratitude, including family relationships. Here, you can demonstrate how Buddhism nurtures your relationship with her. </p>

<p>If you focus too much on suffering, your mother may think you are unhappy rather than happy. </p>

<p>Its important to try to make your mother comfortable &amp; happy. </p>
 3551: <p>It may be useful to choose certain aspects of Buddhism that people can relate to such as Cause and Effect. This reminded me of the dilemma The Buddha had when he almost didn't teach The Dhamma because he thought it was too hard to grasp.But Brahma persuaded him that there some people who can understand.Perhaps the best way to approach this is by treating Buddhism completely as a philosophy something to ponder about in the distance and not to be experienced as this can be met with aversion.Create that distance so your mother can feel safe and not like her views are being threatened.Just like we don't see the need to disagree that Christians believe in Jesus Christ as it makes no difference your mother should be put in a position where she is aware what these so called Buddhists believe but does not feel threatened by it.Try watching a documentary on the life of The Buddha visit a Buddhist temple or attend
A Buddhist ceremony maybe travel to a buddhist country.just like a curious tourist where you can explain some of the symbolism or mythology.</p>

<p>But for her to be able to grasp the teaching would depend on her karma.The Buddha himself did not start by explaining complex teachings such as Annata or Dependent Origination to people who could not understand.He mainly just started with explaining the importance of Generosity or being Good. Because you needq sufficient merits to clear the mind enough to grasp the teaching or the essence of what the Buddha taught.a</p>

<p>imagine if you were a stranger what could you say to make your then self understand Buddhism.Remembera how you first understood buddhism was it like somebody telling you what to accept or was it kind of likke something you forgot then went oh that's right!an aha moment a moment of insight.</p>
 3556: <p>I think a brief overview of Buddha's life is an excellent way to explain Buddhism, because the listener can follow the train of observation and reasoning that led Buddha to renounce a life of ease for a difficult life as an ascetic, then wandering teacher.</p>

<p>To me the most salient feature of Buddhism is that there is no central role for a "god". Other salient features are the stress on self-insight, and the importance of intention in judging the morality of action.</p>

<p>If someone asks why Buddhists bow before statues, I usually say it is to pay respect to the wisdom of Buddha and his teachings.</p>

<p>In explaining the Noble Truths, I usually say "all people suffer at some point in their lives" and "the reason people suffer is that they desire something, even if it's only desire for things not to change". The third and fourth noble truth I usually explain as "we can limit our suffering to the extent we can master our desires" and there is a way to master desire, the Eightfold Path.</p>

<p>Harder to explain are anatta and "what is reincarnated after we die?".</p>
 801: <p>In addition to my comments, I quote Ajahn Brahm from his book "Mindfulness, Bliss and Beyond"</p>

<blockquote>
  <p><strong>The Highest Happiness</strong> </p>
  
  <p>The Buddha said, “Nibbāna is the highest happiness” (Dhp 203, 204). This is, perhaps, the most helpful
  description of enlightenment. Not only is it straightforward and
  lacking in gibberish, it is also very appealing. It reveals why men
  and women have been striving for nibbāna throughout the past
  twenty-six centuries. We all want happiness, and if the highest
  happiness is on offer, then that’s what we want. Thus Buddhism’s
  perennial teaching is how to be happier and happier, until one reaches
  the summit of all happiness in this very life: nibbāna. </p>
  
  <p>These days, I
  present the Buddha’s special teaching of the four noble truths having
  rearranged them. I have found that if I begin with the noble truth of
  suffering, then my audience is turned off. They know enough about that
  already in their lives. They didn’t give up their evening to come and
  listen to more suffering. As any salesperson knows, first impressions
  are paramount. Therefore I introduce the four noble truths as follows:</p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>Happiness</li>
  <li>The path leading to happiness</li>
  <li>Unhappiness</li>
  <li>The cause of unhappiness </li>
  </ol>
  
  <p>This is essentially the same as the Buddha’s teaching, but reordered for greater impact. Some might call
  this rearrangement “marketing,” but it emphasizes the goal of Buddhism
  by placing it first.</p>
  
  <p>Nibbāna portrayed as the highest happiness also
  reveals that the noble eightfold path is the way of ever-increasing
  happiness. Those who follow the path wholeheartedly get happier. As
  the Buddha said in the Araṇavibhanga Sutta, “One should know how to
  define pleasure, and knowing that, one should pursue pleasure within
  oneself.” One pursues such inner pleasure, which is jhāna, without
  fear until one reaches the highest happiness.</p>
  
  <p>What is the highest
  happiness that you have experienced? Drugs? Sex? Music? Falling in
  love? Seeing the birth of your first child? You will find that the
  happiness of jhāna exceeds all of these. That is why one’s first
  experience of jhāna blows apart all one’s old conceptions about the
  meaning of happiness. Jhāna provides deep insight into happiness. Not
  that jhāna is the highest happiness, but it is so close that, as we
  said earlier, the Buddha called it sambodhi sukha, “the bliss of
  enlightenment.” From jhāna one proceeds to a happiness a little bit
  higher, and that is nibbāna. </p>
  
  <p>Recent scientific studies support the
  assertions that meditation makes one happier and that Buddhist monks
  may be the happiest people of all. Therefore, anyone who wants a
  really good time should be a really good meditator. And if one wants
  the highest happiness of all, then go for nibbāna.</p>
</blockquote>
 289: <p>1) It's hard to summarize Buddhism in brief without resorting to one of sometimes inaccurate or misleading summaries. A summary that starts with the Hindu-style cosmology, imho, misses the point. Also depends on the audience, i.e. do they see other religions as being different kinds of Christianity or essentially Christian heresy or as superstition. The worst misunderstanding is that Buddhism is <em>only</em> a <em>devotional</em> religion just Christianity with the words Buddha/God, Pure Land/Heaven, and so on swapped.</p>

<p>2)I've been reading about the different forms of Buddhism, a lot. What is surprising is that each branch has a slightly different take on what the problem is that Buddhism is meant to solve.</p>

<ul>
<li><strong>Shin Buddhism</strong>. The fundamental problem is arrogance, particularly with respect to the idea that we think we can engage in practices to solve our other problems.</li>
<li><strong>Theravada</strong>. The fundamental problem is suffering, particularly suffering associated with grasping and desiring things. I don't like to waffle-- this view really does say the problem is akin to depression. I visualize the historical Buddha as suffering from depression, but not everyone suffers from depression. The flip reading of this is, that the fundamental problem is to figure out how to be happy. The Dalai Lama sometimes uses this in public speeches to summarize the goal of Buddhism.</li>
<li><strong>Mahayana</strong>. The fundamental problem is ignorance, particularly with respect to the question of who we are, and that we think our fundamental problem can be solved individually</li>
<li><strong>Tathagata-Garba</strong>. The fundamental problem is that we think we have a problem, particularly of the sort that could be solved by realizing our problem is already solved. (I certainly don't claim to grok this, it sounds like the fundamental problem is we don't think we are good enough, but eventually we realize we were good enough all along. Personally I think it's nonsense, my opinion of myself has no bearing on anything except for people trapped in a society that obsesses about relative rank)</li>
</ul>

<p>3) I don't start with the 4 noble truths or 8 fold paths. I'd rather start with what practices I do and to what goal.</p>

<p>4) You can't help but say something about what you personally think, else you'll be parroting the party line  of a particular institutionalize form of Buddhism or boring people with an encyclopedic listing of Buddhist schools.</p>

<p>5) If someone really has no problems, that's great, they are Enlightened! The historical Buddha (According to Stephen Batchelor's retelling) said as much on his death bed, when he asked if anyone had any questions left, no one did, so he said, well you all must be enlightened then. People need Buddhism when their current raft has sunk. If there is food on the table, a comfortable place to sleep, and they have no complaints about their daily routine, then our jobs as Buddhists is to rejoice in their success (mudita).</p>

<p>I was reading "Wicked" the retelling of "Wizard of Oz" from the witch's standpoint. In one scene, the main character was looking through a glass as a child and saying "Horrors, horrors" as she could see something no one else could. Later in the book, she grows up to be a political radical and rebel because she was one of the few that saw the horror of the consequences of the government (the Wizard's) policies.</p>

<p>Anyhow, I don't claim to have a good solution for the problem-- how do we stay optimistic and positive or happy once we realize the muddle we are in, but at least the Mahayana version, provides a path towards how to find happiness-- by taking action to solve everyone's problems.</p>
 295: <p>In a nut shell Buddhism revolves around the 3 trainings:</p>

<ul>
<li>Living a life of morality so we do no create misery for one self and others</li>
<li>Developing mastery over the mind so we do not react but be proactive so we can be at peace with our selves and other</li>
<li>Developing wisdom of your cognitive process to identify how misery is generated so we can come out of misery</li>
</ul>
