Buddhists Really Are Happier

bjornte writes "For anyone that wonders what Richard Gere is up to, the BBC explains: 'Scientists say they have evidence to show that Buddhists really are happier and calmer than other people. Tests carried out in the United States reveal that areas of their brain associated with good mood and positive feelings are more active.' So, if you're suffering from the ongoing IT slump..."

Comments

Might be better than chemical happyness

[Golthar]

Sounds like the next best thing compared to chemical happynes :P

Think of the computers that get saved if IT personel have more peace of mind

mentality not the religion

[Joe the Lesser]

These findings would be better stated as 'calm and stressless lifestyle is happier'. It has nothing to do with religion, just that fact that Buddhists are smart enough not to get worked up over stupid things like getting cut off in traffic or being late to a meeting.

Or even simpler, as was taught when I was younger: Don't worry, be happy.

Re:mentality not the religion

[dharmawan]

mentality is certainly important but i think the research shows that there are additional, long lasting benefits from regular practice of meditation

Re:mentality not the religion

[torpor]

You're perverting the sense and definition of religion here.

Religion is *supposed* to give you the tools to lead a calmer, less stresseful, happier life. If it doesn't, its not working as a religion.

Those who would stand to benefit from an un-calm, stressy society (WMH, Eli Lilli and Co.) seek to actively denigrate religions' potential for delivering calm, stressless people, and those who have bought the humanist party line from the last 20 years that "All Religion Is Bad, The pseudo-science of Psychology is the Only Way" support them in their effort to discount the positive effects which religion can have on a persons well-being.

All religion is not bad. Buddhists *do* lead happier lives than the anti-religion types... most of whom are pretty stressy people. I'm yet to meet a Buddhist (true buddhist, not dilletantes) who wasn't a happy, fun person to be around, generally.

Make your own determination of the value of religion in modern society if you will, but discount its worth and positive value at your own peril ...

Re:mentality not the religion

[ichimunki]

The salient point of the article is not that Buddhism per se is a "happier religion" (which you kind of pointed out) but that there seems to be scientific evidence for the idea that a regular program of a certain kind of meditative practice can have a positive effect on the brain.

The activity, which meditation most certainly is, is not unlike parts of standard hypnotherapy or yoga. Concentrating on nothing or simply on breathing, putting the body into a state of complete relaxation, etc, are not unique ideas to Buddhism. In fact, the same positive effects may well flow from other more overtly religious activities like saying the Rosary.

But scientists haven't studied that as much I'm guessing-- perhaps because prominent Catholics aren't as interested in working with science as prominent Buddhists are. The Dalai Lama meets regularly with western scientists and pseudo-scientists to discuss similarities and differences between Buddhist thought and scientific theory. Further, Buddhism generally says that there is no infallible word of God, which may or may not be contradicted by scientific evidence, so Buddhists do not cling to their beliefs out of "faith", but generally welcome any opportunity for greater understanding.

And when it comes to Buddhist doctrine, reincarnation and/or non-rebirth are certainly more comforting "afterlife" theories than the prospect of eternal torment. Once you stop worrying that the slightest mistake on your part could result in infinite pain after death, you can relax a bit. ;)

Re:mentality not the religion

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because there is a correlation between Buddhists and happiness does not mean that religion has any soothing abilities. It may very well be that those who are calmer, happier people would be the most likely to take up/continue to practice Buddhism. Especially in the United States, where Buddhism is not at all a majority religion.

Re:mentality not the religion

[speaker4thedead]

In Buddhism, Karma is not seen as a physical or metaphysical force that forces you to pay back your evil deeds, but rather as a psychological principle.

I could go on for a while about this, but I'll try to keep it short.

Ideally, once an action has happened, it is gone. Our mind, however, likes to hold on to what was and will not let go. Since the past is already gone, it is not a good place for the mind to dwell. Your karma is the part of you that holds onto the past and measure the present in terms of the past. If you measure the present in terms of the past, then you see more of what was than what is. A buddhist strives to see things as they are in the present (this is what meditation teaches) No buddhist claims that they will ever be free of karma, of their attachment to the past, but if they could be, they would be "enlightened."

A quick example: Let's say that you spent the past two years building your own house by hand. On the night that you move into the house, it burns down. If you hold on to the past and your memories of what was, then you will suffer at the thought of loss and the "wasted" time you spent building the house. If you see things as they are, then you will be happy that you are alive and start planning for a new place to live and perhaps rebuilding the house.

Re:mentality not the religion

[Synic]

"All religion is not bad."

I would beg to differ. The majority of spiritualist traditions have been perverted by organized religion. The Bible warns of the dangers of institutions, and we see the prophecy come true with the Vatican selling redemption for money before the schism of the Reformation. Buddha taught that there are no gods, but only a single universal truth that we are all connected to each other (AFAIK). Somehow, traditional culture has perverted this ideology with the deification of the Buddha, and the creation of a pantheon of future and past Buddha incarnations. I have a hard time believing that this was Gautama's intention.

Re:mentality not the religion

[limekiller4]

Joe the Lesser writes:
"It has nothing to do with religion, just that fact that Buddhists..."

Not a flame, but Buddhism isn't a religion. No god(s), which is probably a bare minimum to meet a western standard of religion-ness.

Re:mentality not the religion

[Mr. Slippery]

I don't know if you've noticed, in general, but most religion's add a lot of stress to people's lives, and to the world...To the extent that it tells people to stay calm, meditate an hour a day, and treat other people as though they were yourself, I don't consider it a religion.

The problem, as usual, is one of definition.

According to ESR's neopagan FAQ, "religion" comes from roots "re ligare", meaning "to rebind" to roots, to strengths, to the basics of things. In that sense, of rebinding, reconnecting, us to our true natures, I'm all for religion.

But in Western society, our experience of religion is very much formed by authoritarian dogma, so that we assume religion implies belief in supernatural entities and unquestioning faith. In that sense, I hold no truck with it.

It's worth noting that there are dogmatic Eastern practices and non-dogmatic Western ones (the Society of Friends, a.k.a. Quakers, leaps to mind), so it's not a strict East/West split by any means.

(BTW, for any neopagan geeks out there, I'll be presenting a workshop on "Zen Paganism" at the Starwood Festival again this year.)

Re:mentality not the religion

[kavau]

Somehow, traditional culture has perverted this ideology with the deification of the Buddha

Very true. People tend to transform religious ideas into worshipping cults, or into institutions that claim to have sole authority on moral issues. But you can nevertheless search for the true value of a religion on your own, or with like-minded people. This of course applies to all religions, not just to Buddhism.

I remember hearing about a Zen koan, which basically said: "If you meet Buddha on the way, kill him." I guess it means that you cannot succeed if you just follow in somebody's footsteps, but only if you find the way yourself.

Re:mentality not the religion

[SewersOfRivendell]

I would believe just the opposite, actually. If you're happy, and you believe in Christ/Satan/the Pope/Shrub/nobody, why change religions/lifestyles? No, it's the unhappy, the seekers, who convert to Buddhism. To paraphrase Shaw, "All progress depends on the unhappy man."

Re:mentality not the religion

[rithvik]

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me .

Note the different emphasis? Now repeat the above biblical statement, and when I comes, slap your chest with emphasis. You will get it.

I am my own master. No other man is the master. No other man is my master. No other man can lead me on the right path. It is I (not you or he or them) who is my own master. I is Unique, He isn't. If you have to seek God, do it within yourself, don't depend on others (Even Jesus Christ) to do it for you. A person like Jesus or Gautama who have walked the path to Nirvana can only show the way, they won't carry you with them again.

A person who has attained Nirvana cannot put his experiences in words, because words are limited in use. When they mean I, they mean 'I' without changing its meaning from person to person. But languages are inadequate. The other person interprets it as 'He' which is not what They meant.

Without practicing some sort of Vipassana meditation (insight), these people never get it right. They stick some philosophy to it and write, and rewrite their books. How many Testaments of the Bible are there, and how many interpretations? The Buddhists also stuck the Sankhya Philosophy (given by a sage called Kapila) and made sects out of their own interpretations (Mahayana and Theravada) and stuck daggers at each others. Every religion is the same

If Jesus or Gautama were alive today they would have slapped their foreheads in frustration, or perhaps died of shame

It is you 'Christians' who have been trying to prove Christ a liar all along

I know you will find this statement harsh, but it is the bitter truth. Why don't you take 12 days off and join your nearest Vipassana center? They are worldwide. Vipassana is a technique which emphasizes on self observation. Each has his own observaions and experiences. So be it. Don't listen to what 'Others' tell you. Acceptance of a fact or fiction by a fraternity of fools does not make it a truth, even if the fools make the majority. If you are a devout Christian, you will only become more devout, but differently. For a change you will begin to appreciate the Bible by interpreting it properly

Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[Jerf]

There's not enough detail in the article to know whether this is a problem, but it looks like there's at least potential for a serious "correlation implies causation" error. Does Buddhism make people happy, or do people who are already happy become Buddhists?

I'm also not sure how "calm" got transformed into "happy" in the article. My personal definition of "happy" doesn't really have much to do with "hard to scare".

The study is interesting to some degree but drawing conclusion from it is unwarrented, until more data is collected from more sources.

Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[Goronguer]

Does Buddhism make people happy, or do people who are already happy become Buddhists?

Here's an anecdotal, unscientific answer for you. In the nine years since I became a practicing Buddhist, I have become happier and happier, and I am definitely happier than I was before I became a Buddhist. I know many other Buddhists who could tell you the same thing about their own experience.

I'm also not sure how "calm" got transformed into "happy" in the article. My personal definition of "happy" doesn't really have much to do with "hard to scare".

Though I might quibble with the particular wording, here is an example of what is meant.

When you encounter an obstacle in your life, do you freak out and ask "WHY ME?", or do you face it calmly and rationally, with the confidence that you are up to the challenge. Since I have become a Buddhist, I increasingly find myself taking the latter approach.

Less time spent freaking out = more time spent being happy.

Take a look at the website of the SGI-USA if you are interested in learning more.

Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[Jerf]

I go more for

"Don't collect for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy and where thieves break in and steal. But collect for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves don't break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. "The eye is the lamp of the body. If your eye is generous, your whole body will be full of light. But if your eye is stingy, your whole body will be full of darkness. So if the light within you is darkness--how deep is that darkness! "No one can be a slave of two masters, since either he will hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot be slaves of God and of money.

"This is why I tell you: Don't worry about your life, what you will eat or what you will drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Isn't life more than food and the body more than clothing? Look at the birds of the sky: they don't sow or reap or gather into barns, yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Aren't you worth more than they? Can any of you add a single cubit to his height by worrying? And why do you worry about clothes? Learn how the wildflowers of the field grow: they don't labor or spin thread.Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was adorned like one of these! If that's how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and thrown into the furnace tomorrow, won't He do much more for you--you of little faith? So don't worry, saying, 'What will we eat?' or 'What will we drink?' or 'What will we wear?' For the Gentiles eagerly seek all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided for you. Therefore don't worry about tomorrow, because tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[Zeriel]

I think the reason that more people are willing to point directly to buddhism as opposed to religion in general in this sort of thing, despite the bible passages you quote, is due to two factors:

1. Buddhism actively encourages the practice of meditation and contemplation, which (it seems to me) would have a larger effect on the calmness of an individual than the tenets of a religion in general. I rarely see a similar emphasis on daily meditation and contemplation in Christian churches.
   
2. Anecdotally, but relevant is the fact that most people who are known to be Buddhist tend to rather closely follow Buddhist ideals--when the average American thinks of Buddhism, he thinks of monks and maybe a few actors. Wheras the tendency is to assume that the average greedy overstressed Westerner is "Christian" of some flavor, when in reality they're not really practicing much of anything except for the fact they go to church every so often.
   

Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[sdjunky]

Those are some very insightful observations.

1. Christ prayed often and for long periods of time. Many who are "Christians" don't take time out of their busy lives to follow in this example.

2. "except for the fact they go to church every so often" These people you describe here are a dime a dozen. I wouldn't necessarily call them Christians as the word itself denotes a follower of Christ. How can one be a follower of Christ when he/she is not able to dedicate 3+ hours a week to worship?

Christianity has been blamed for alot of things. Violence, hatred and various other things but it isn't Christianity that is doing these things but people who call themselves Christians but don't even follow what the Bible itself teaches

Re:Correlation/Causation strikes again?

[mrthoughtful]

A difficulty that some Buddhists find with an article like the one authored by the BBC here is that it makes assumptions about what it is to be a Buddhist.

Goronguer fails to mention that the SGI is an exclusivist sect of Buddhism, in that it repudiates all other Buddhist movements. This sort of sectarianism is non-buddhist by nature, and is damaging to mental development.
Secondly, groups like SGI engage in another, non-Buddhist behaviour- that of socio-political evangelism, (which of course follows as a necessary activity for any organisation that believes it has a monopoly on truth).

Regardless, It is a good idea to follow Buddha's own advice- Don't trust authority for authorities sake, but work things out for yourself. Buddhism promotes discriminating awareness, so it encourages the individual to break the mould and 'think different'. Personal experience (as a practicing Buddhist of 30 years) suggests that meditation based upon removing what are known as 'self-grasping' and 'self-cherishing' (which actually includes any form of self-based attention, including self-hatred) does decrease unhappiness, and increase happiness.

Moreover, the promotion of acceptance of full responsibility for the world plays an important part in the construction of one's identity as a Buddhist, in that our ambitions become purposed for the benefit of all, rather than merely for the benefit of self, the family, the state, or humankind.

Dalai Geek

[dmorin]

I just learned that in September, the Dalai Lama is coming to MIT to participate in a Life Sciences seminar that appears to be on exactly this topic. He's then speaking at the Fleet Center. I've already got my tickets.

Re:Why always those budda statues?

[qengho]

No worship of gods and deities indeed, but worship of budda.

Not worship, but reverence. The Buddha is not considered a deity like Christ, or someone with a direct line to God like Mohammed, but rather a regular guy who thought real hard about What It's All About and came up with an interesting insight, for which his followers are grateful.

Re:yea?

[Henry V .009]

Sounds like a soul mate. Well, except for the virus and attachment part. But you gotta expect that from a chick. Get her phone number for me.

Buddhism != Apathy

[torpor]

That's more like Taoism, which is best described, probably incorrectly, as a form of apathy wrapped in ancient dogma.

Of course, that is just my opinion having met 4 very, very apathetic, pathetic so-called "Tao'ists" over a period of 10 years. They really were hopeless to work with, and put me off studying the Tao until I'd matured a little more.

Re:Why always those budda statues?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Dude, Buddha is spiritually enlightened, and fat and happy. What more can you ask for?

Re:Off to the chinese buffet I go, then...

[FroMan]

... between the sheets.

Hmm, that one has got to be the first fortune cookie fortune that I have not been able to add "... between the sheets" to and even crack a smile. Damn, you have ruined my entire chinese food experience.

Now I want to slip in one of your fortune cookies, "I hope you die." Between sheets or not.

Re:Why always those budda statues?

[Pall Agamemnides]

Piano players are often depicted as having a bust of Beethoven on their piano. But they don't worship Beethoven.

Adolescents often have posters of various famous people on their bedroom walls, but they don't worship them.

You probably have photos of your loved ones on the walls of your house, and perhaps in your wallet, but you don't worship them. Nor do you consider having those pictures there a temptation to worship them.

Catholic don't worship saints, but consider them "heroes" of the faith, examples of ordinary people who lived extraordinary, holy lives. They offer examples that we can emulate in our own lives, just as you may try to emulate someone you know who is saintly. To say that Catholics worship saints just shows that you've been influenced by anti-Catholic propaganda.

Reincarnation.

[I am Jack's username]

"The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality." - George Bernard Shaw, 1912, Androcles and the lion

"Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition." - Freedom from religion foundation

"Thus that which is the most awful of evils, death, is nothing to us, since when we exist there is no death, and when there is death we do not exist." - Epicurus, 341/270 BCE

I do however agree with: "Doubt everything. Find your own light." - Siddhartha Gautama (circa 563/483 BCE).

Re:Reincarnation.

[limekiller4]

First, let me start this off by saying that I have been involved in skeptic groups online prior to the internet being available to the public (read; local boards and nets).

Also, I am the guy who runs and owns nofaith.org.

Now...

I am Jack's username quotes George Bernard Shaw as:
"The fact that a believer is happier than a sceptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one. The happiness of credulity is a cheap and dangerous quality."

True, but that makes the not-so-subtle implication that Buddhism endorses an ostrich approach. Ie, the happiness is merely a benefit of ignoring certain problems. I don't agree that this is so. Buddhism, in my experience, involves recognizing that problems will exist regardless of your efforts. So just deal with it instead of trying to quash every bug in your life. It isn't going to happen.

Jack quotes the FFRF:
"Not only is there nothing to be gained by believing an untruth, but there is everything to lose when we sacrifice the indispensable tool of reason on the altar of superstition."

I agree, but Buddhism encourages facing a problem squarely and firmly embraces rationality and reason, not to mention science. The Dalai Lama, IIRC, has said that if it comes to pass that a finding of science were to contradict a Buddhism teaching, Buddhism would have to change.

I think you're doing skeptics in general a disservice by automatically assuming that a thing which tends to be looked at as a religion by westerners is automagically invalid. Skepticism involves looking at the facts but I don't think you know a lot about Buddhism.

Theravada & Mahayana

[yet another coward]

As I recall from a college course several years ago, the attitudes toward the Buddha are very different between the broad, general schools of Theravada Buddhism and Mahayana Buddhism. Theravada Buddhists believe as you describe. Siddharta Gautama, the first Buddha, was a man who had a great insight into living. Mahayana Buddhism, in contrast, contains a diversity of mystical, magical beliefs that vary across its many divisions including ones that Siddhartha lived as a demonstration or revelation of what he knew before his human birth rather than as a regular human life that included a great insight. Pure Land Buddhism, in my understanding, does involve worship.

These generalizations are general, vague and not true for every Buddhist, but the original post, to me, glossed over the diversity of beliefs regarding the Buddha and the mystical nature, including worship, contained in many of them.

Re:Theravada & Mahayana

[qengho]

(Much of the following comes from The Shambala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen).

Mahayana Buddhism...contains a diversity of mystical, magical beliefs

Mystical, perhaps, but I wouldn't call them magical beliefs. Theravada (the only surviving school of the Hinayana, or "Lesser Vehicle" branch of Buddhism), emphasizes the liberation of the individual. The ideal figure of Theravada is the arhat, a person who has achieved true enlightenment through his own efforts and whose existence will be extinguished following this life, i.e., no more reincarnations.

Mahayana buddhists, in contrast, seek to attain enlightenment for the sake of the welfare of all beings. Their ideal figure is the bodhisattva, a person who has achieved perfect wisdom but renounces complete entry into nirvana until all beings are enlightened. Some of these bodhisattvas are considered to be "transcendent beings" who appear in various forms to lead others to wisdom. That's pretty mystical, but no supernatural powers (loaves and fishes, anyone?) are attributed to bodhisattvas.

Now Tibetan buddhists, they have magic and deities out the wazoo. A truly interesting and baroque variant.

the original post...glossed over the diversity of beliefs regarding the Buddha and the mystical nature, including worship, contained in many of them.

Guilty as charged. I was trying to address the original generalization, but fell short. I'm most familiar with Zen buddhism, which definitely does not worship the Buddha. It's not even a religion, really.

The clearest explanation of the core concepts of Buddhism I've run across is What the Buddha Taught by Walpola Rahula.

Nevermind the religion, consider the philosophy

[hlee]

The philosophy behind buddhism is nicely captured by Zen, which I think is a practical philosophy of life. Zen tries to capture the essence of what buddha tried to teach.

"Zen flesh, zen bones" by Paul Reps is an excellent book to start, and some would argue the only one you'd ever need. I just like its collection of weird and wonderful stories.

Buddhism, or Meditation?

[Fished]

From the article, it appeared to me that the association was less with being a Buddhist from a doctrinal point of view (i.e. holding a belief in the four-fold truths, reincarnation, etc.) than with Buddhist practices. I wonder if you would not find a similar correlation with people who pray regularly or meditatie within the context of another meditative tradition? Having known more than a few Franciscans, my impression is on a whole that they are happier than the non-meditative orders (e.g. the Jesuits) -- yet they are not Buddhists. They are just people who practice spiritual disciplines.

an old saying

[u19925]

there is an old saying, "it is hard to understand other's pain". don't read BBC to find out the pain of buddishts. ask buddhists.

A little clarification...

[zakureth]

I think there may be some misunderstanding here as to the nature of buddhism.

First of all, it wouldn't be truely accurate to call it a religion, at least not in a conventional sense. More of a philosophy or way of living, coincidentally named for the budha for having providing it's foundation and core teachings.

The nature of buddhism centers around learning through practice, meditation, and consistant right thinking to overcome the desires and compulsions that lead us to suffering.

To say that budhists are generally happies isn't the same as saying that, by having faith in something, one can be happy and relaxed even as all falls apart around you.

Buddhism doesn't take one out of the world nor does it abdicate responsability for it to a greater power. It actually sharpens ones focus on the things that need to be done by helping to control the emotional cruft that distracts us and drives us towards suffering.

To that end, being about the elimination of desire and it's resultant suffering, a successful buddhist would tend to be happier and calmer. That being an obvious hypothesis, the article meerly relates an attempt to apply the scientific method by testing the hypothesis.

Re:But...

[Anonymous Coward]

So which makes more rational sense: to achieve nothingness by relief from an otherwise unending cycle of pain through reincarnations, or eternal joy with our Creator God?

None of the above?

I'm a Buddhist of more than 25 years, but...

[AShocka]

this is not unique to Buddhists. It's entirely up to the spirituality or approach of each individual.

There are also plenty of suffering Buddhists amongst us. Yet at the same time I do feel that there are teachings within Buddhism that are treasures of humanity.

I have found that studying and practicing Buddhism has given me a greater appreciation of other teachings, cultures, methods, ways of life, and the human spirit (in general).

At the same time, I feel it often cheapens and can be misleading and deceptive when any spiritual teaching presents itself to sell it as a means to happiness.

This may be the goal, but it can be misleading to say that the journey is full of happiness. Even if some experience this to be true, still, it is uncompassionate to present it in a general way like that.

Often what is involved in the path is a lot of reflecting, and discovery of the tyranny of self deception (on many levels). That may lead to happiness (through liberation from self deception), but that process may not necessarily be a happy one (but it can be).

An individuals path or journey through life is not always so smooth. It's how they learn from, deal with, and adapt to what happens to them that counts in the long run, and how they share their life with their community (and fellow beings) as a whole.

As HH Dalai Lama says, it is a good thing that there are so many paths to suit the diversity of human beings.

Re:But...

[sjames]

Dissolution into nothingness is really not an adequate description. Since no language has an appropriate word or phrase since language must at least draw analogies from common experiance.

You woulkd have to achieve a state of Zen awareness in meditation to gain some understanding of that phrase. A friend once aptly described the state as a sort of mental white out, but that probably doesn't make it any clearer if you haven't experienced it.

Re:Why is it

[young-earth]

Oh, there you go again. How many times must you be told that the Roman Catholic Church does NOT follow the bible, that Catholicism is not the same thing as biblical Christianity. The RCC is much closer to the Babylonian mysticism (and therefore to Hinduism) than it is to Christianity. Charlemagne was following directions of the Pope to commit his atrocities; there is zero biblical justification for his actions.

You state

I believe in Christ, I was educated in a Christian School and attended Mass. So I am a christian too. But I am a Hindu too. No one has excommunicated me from my religion. Dr Frawley is another example.

Yet again you make the error of equating the RCC with Christianity. Question for you: what will it take for you to realize that is an error? Then you say

Don't go by atlan.org. It is badly written. Better use your brain

You are the one who suggested atlan.org as a source, it's a bit late to disclaim it. Next you say

Where is Christ Now? Do you know? I would love to meet Him!

Here is an example of the deficiency in biblical education for one who is a Catholic. It quite clearly states many times in the NT that the Lord Jesus Christ is at the right hand of the Father now. The next event on His calendar, from our perspective, is His coming in the clouds to gather the born-again believers, dead and alive (1 Thessalonians 4:15-4:17), in the Harpazo (known in the popular press as the rapture). After that will be (with zero to some time of delay) a seven year period of judgment known as the Tribulation. The only way to avoid that is to confess that He is Lord, accept His gift of salvation by repenting of your sins to Him, and make Him the Lord of your life. Then you will meet Him in love, either at your death or at the Harpazo.

However if you reject Him as your writing indicates you are doing (by not admitting that He is Lord), you will meet him at the great White Throne judgment (Revelation 20:10-20:15). Without your name in the Book of Life, you will meet Him as your Judge, not as your Saviour. That is a terrible fate, and I pray you will realize your need for His salvation.