In Buddhism "the very real issues of fear, discouragement and depression", and indeed the entire range of human emotions, are themselves considered fabrications of the mind that are laid bare and exposed as such through the practice of meditation, mindfulness and rejection of ego. To me that pretty much qualifies as being at the heart though I certainly don't claim any solid expertise.
This position takes quite a reactionary view of mental health. If you have PTSD, it doesn't work like that. If you have schizophrenia, it doesn't work like that. If you have BPD, it doesn't work like that. If you have ADDHD, it doesn't work like that.
These are all known mental health issues, with physiological markers, but ultimately they are aspects of human mentality that are present in everyone.
So, to ignore these, and ignore the myriad other mental and environmental issues, and suggest that 'just do it' is actionable advice goes against the grain of much that is valuable in Bhuddism: namely mindfulness and the purposes of meditation. Essentially, it is telling people to achieve presence through force of will, instead of using insight to accommodate their mental situation: only the unencumbered can succeed.
Time to step back a bit and consider how we reached this stage of the discussion in the first place. The OP essentially quoted Matthieu Ricard's book, "The Monk and the Philosopher". It was all about Buddhism and without anything close to a "'snap out of it' ideology". Your initial comment thus came across more as Buddhism is a simplistic 'snap out of it' ideology, which is the point I sought to refute. I'm certainly not saying 'snap out of it' is the essence of Buddhism. So in a roundabout way, we agree more than we appear to. :)
Returning to your points on PTSD, schizophrenia, BPD and ADDHD, I can state quite positively that I've read no Buddhist texts so far that discuss these disorders, let alone prescribe Buddhism as the cure. So again, we are more in agreement than not, unless of course you believe that all fear, discouragement and depression amount to PTSD, schizophrenia, BPD and ADDHD (in which case I would have to level the round trip fallacy charge at you!).
However, personally I believe modern medicine is far from understanding properly any of these disorders, and the treatment for them - mainly drugs - is an unhappy one even if that's all we have.
At the same time I also believe that there is a tendency to find the quick fix (what better than a drug) or a solution outside of ourselves (psychotherapy). Not every condition requires this sort of intervention, but there is a very strong trend and tendency to provide it and that's a pity.
Are there times when it's helpful to say "stop being such a crybaby"? You betcha! That's the only way to move away from over indulgence in our selves, a decidedly big problem in this day and age.
Is anyone saying "stop being such a crybaby" is the solution for all problems? No way. And certainly not the Buddhist way.
You can't reject your ego, you can only detach from it. Egolessness and egofullness are two sides of the same coin. And fabrications of the mind, if you will, are all that there is. Form is emptiness, emptiness is form. Reality and illusion are the same thing. Buddhism is really trying to teach you to honor and understand your thoughts, emotions, and ego as fundamental parts of the human body you live in, not to destroy or be impervious to them. It's not about escaping from your life but living more fully within it. If somewhat is afraid, ask why? How does the experience of fear feel? Is it connected to other emotions? What thoughts accompany it? What experiences from childhood are connected?
What are loving kindness, compassion, joy, and equanimity if not emotion?
My choice of words is intended to convey their meaning in everyday parlance. If I seek egolessness over egofullness, is that not a rejection of the latter over the former in everyday parlance?
As you have correctly stated, Buddhism is not about escaping from life but meeting it head on. I don't think I've said anything that would suggest I'm for escaping.
Things which are polar opposites are actually identical, in this case 0% ego and 100% ego, because 0% ego is all about how spiritually pure you are, a.k.a. 100% ego. I'm sure you've met some of the seemingly enlightened meditators I'm talking about. Buddhism teaches you to deal with this paradox or duality and others like it by seeking the middle road. Some ego is good, not too much, not too little. That's all I was reacting to, I probably could've been nicer about it.
"That's all I was reacting to, I probably could've been nicer about it." Not at all, you were nice enough. :)
Yes going beyond the everyday meaning of the words we use, I agree with you fully. I'm just a beginner on the path, full of the fabrications and paradoxes we all live with, and I'm really looking forward to having them all blown away, or more likely - dissolved - as I dive deeper into it. Ah, aspiration!
