Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@newbuddhist.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take up to 48 hours. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

"Idiot Compassion"

edited February 2010 in Advanced Ideas
What does the term "Idiot Compassion" mean? What is its source?
«1

Comments

  • edited January 2010
    idiot compassion is a disease sort of like syphillis but less bodily fluids involved. you get it if you knock twice on the door of denial, and three times on the window of foolishness, and it comes secretly and it slaps your cheek but without you knowing and it tastes like a flower but it sits in your stomach like a worm, and you usually get it around 3 o clock.

    as far as i know it's compassion that tho driven with a good heart, is done in folly and so leads to follysome results, but i'm not actually really familiar with the term so like i said i dont kno haHAHAHA
  • edited January 2010
    .

    The term 'idiot compassion' was first used by Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche and then later by his student Pema Chodron.

    It means compassion without wisdom - rather like being a 'do gooder' without really understanding the consequences of our actions.

    Here's a link to Chogyam Trungpa using the term :

    http://lists.shambhala.com/pipermail/oceanofdharma/2006-January/000319.html


    Here's a link to Pema Chodron explaining it:

    http://www.shambhala.org/teachers/pema/qa5.php



    Kind regards,


    Dazzle
  • edited January 2010
    and maybe in another sense it can be compassion, but compassion lacking in dharma, that is something that is not infused with dharma enough for it to have more than short-term and worldly effects you know. compassion that is good nonetheless, though could be better and more skillfully exercised, with a kernel of teaching, subtly, or just that small touch that impresses itself on the receiver of the compassionate act. well, not really. well somewhat. well, yes and no. moo hoo ha ha ha
  • edited January 2010
    It's like going through the motions. Doing what is a compassionate act without the deep emotional connection. When you aren't doing what is authentic to you... I think, I could have grabbed the wrong end of the stick.

    I love Pema Chordon's books, she is very easy and direct to read. Conscise. Although I may misinterpret or only grasp parts of the concepts expressed.
  • edited January 2010
    Pietro Pumokin;80098 said:
    idiot compassion is a disease sort of like syphillis but less bodily fluids involved. you get it if you knock twice on the door of denial, and three times on the window of foolishness, and it comes secretly and it slaps your cheek but without you knowing and it tastes like a flower but it sits in your stomach like a worm, and you usually get it around 3 o clock.


    I'm so sorry but that is hilarious!
  • edited January 2010
    Idiot compassion is doing something for someone else that looks compassionate but really is for our own benefit or peace of mind.

    Palzang
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Palzang;80204 said:
    Idiot compassion is doing something for someone else that looks compassionate but really is for our own benefit or peace of mind.

    Palzang


    In Transactional Analysis, we call this "Rescuing", i.e doing something for someone when it has not been asked for but is based on our guess at the wants or needs. It is part of the "Drama Triangle" which is at the heart of all "games". As "games" are played in order to meet the players' 'benefit or peace of mind', or, more compellingly, to assert their very existence, bolstering the ego.

    So often, there is a real symbiosis between the "Rescuer" and the "Victim" which needs to be addressed as well. This can be seen in global politics when 'aid' encourages dependency rather than growth or is linked to favourable trade or imposition of an alien ethic.

    On the other hand, compassion which is unconditional is often deemed "idiot" by the powerful or the market believers.
  • edited January 2010
    Simonthepilgrim;80205 said:


    In Transactional Analysis, we call this "Rescuing", i.e doing something for someone when it has not been asked for but is based on our guess at the wants or needs. It is part of the "Drama Triangle" which is at the heart of all "games". As "games" are played in order to meet the players' 'benefit or peace of mind', or, more compellingly, to assert their very existence, bolstering the ego.

    So often, there is a real symbiosis between the "Rescuer" and the "Victim" which needs to be addressed as well. This can be seen in global politics when 'aid' encourages dependency rather than growth or is linked to favourable trade or imposition of an alien ethic.

    Yeah, that's it exactly.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    So in other words most "compassion" is Idiot Compassion.
  • edited January 2010
    The thousand armed chenrizig has eyes on each of his thousand hands hence a thousand ways of helping sentient beings and a thousand ways of looking deeply at how to help. True love needs understanding.
  • edited January 2010
    Richard, I think most of us always put a hook into whatever we do, even if it's for a good cause, whether it's to feel good about ourselves, make us feel important, get revenge, whatever. It's really hard to do something just for the sake of compassion. One good way to practice doing that is to do something really nice for somebody anonymously, preferably somebody you'll never meet or even know.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    Palzang;80259 said:
    Richard, I think most of us always put a hook into whatever we do, even if it's for a good cause, whether it's to feel good about ourselves, make us feel important, get revenge, whatever. It's really hard to do something just for the sake of compassion. One good way to practice doing that is to do something really nice for somebody anonymously, preferably somebody you'll never meet or even know.

    Palzang

    Thank you.
  • edited January 2010
    So we have to suffer in order to have the empathy to feel compassion?

    No suffering= no compassion?
  • edited January 2010
    If you never suffer, you have no impetus to develop compassion or seek a way out.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    There is also that ordinary goodness, that isnt "goodness" in any self conscious way. Like when someone stumbles in front of you and you automatically reach forward to hold the person, or when someone distractedly steps into an busy intersection and you automatically put your hand on his shoulder. Moving a snail off a busy sidewalk after a rain. That kind of thing. There is no notion of compassion at all, its like one hand comforting another wIthout a thought. I,m not sure if this basic goodness is the same as a cultivated compassion, or maybe it is the base for cultivation.
  • SimonthepilgrimSimonthepilgrim Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Richard Herman;80323 said:
    There is also that ordinary goodness, that isnt "goodness" in any self conscious way. Like when someone stumbles in front of you and you automatically reach forward to hold the person, or when someone distractedly steps into an busy intersection and you automatically put your hand on his shoulder. Moving a snail off a busy sidewalk after a rain. That kind of thing. There is no notion of compassion at all, its like one hand comforting another wIthout a thought. I,m not sure if this basic goodness is the same as a cultivated compassion, or maybe it is the base for cultivation.


    Richard,

    One of my favourites, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, spoke about "depth" when considering the compassion and goodness that are God, in his cosmology. He taught me to consider every act of kindness, every expression of love, however defective, as partaking of this "depth", from the shallows in which we paddle from day to day to the self-emptied deeps of Compassionate Wisdom. As the cynics would put it: "No good deed goes unpunished." They are right, IMHO, insofar as they recognise that no good deed goes to waste.

    If we spend our time worrying about the degree of idiocy of our own attempts at compassion, we have little time or energy left to act compassionately.

    On the subject of 'sensible' compassion, I refer you to the story of Martin of Tours who gave half his cloak to the freezing beggar so that both survived.
  • edited January 2010
    You're quite right, Simon. We should never hesitate to help somebody just because we're not sure we're being completely pure about it. If that were the case, we'd never do anything! So you do the best you can, being aware that self-cherishing is always present in everything we do until we reach enlightenment. In other words, just do it. Examine your motivations later and then make any necessary changes.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    Moral culpability lies within one's intent, as it follows neither the inference nor conjecture of another who simply chooses to observe or comment. The momentum of mediocrity is swift within a heart that beats not compassion for every living thing, as the reasoning of a compassionate heart is often beyond the mind's understanding.
  • edited January 2010
    So it is better to have good intentions warped with self-view than bad intentions. But to truly act without a hook, isnt it best to act with no intention? The acts that seem to truly benefit , without blowback, are like that arent they? Not impulsive, but spontaneous and situational.
  • AllbuddhaBoundAllbuddhaBound Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Just to interject another view, I have heard of an interesting story that relates to phony compassion where none truly existed to begin with.

    I have heard this story often and from enough sources to know that there is some truth to it.

    There was a little boy who lost his mother at an extremely early age. He was from a poorer family, and following the death of his mother, his hygiene and overall presentation went downhill rapidly. His marks and self-esteem also suffered.

    While in school, he had a teacher who feigned approval of him in a sarcastic way, but he did not see this sarcasm so he began to love this teacher. He decided to bring her a gift one day. He brought this obviously used, dirty bottle of perfume for her. The teacher held up this bottle of perfume for the other students to see, sarcastically claiming the perfume was such a beautiful gift. The other children got "the joke" but this little fellow felt he had been cherished and appreciated. The boy's marks and achievements soared. The teacher discovered the perfume was something that the little boy had received from his mother, and she became ashamed of what she had been doing.

    She began to encourage and support him in ernest. He always remained in touch with this teacher and let her know of his achievements (which were many). Apparently, he became a soldier, then a doctor and he ended up being something like the surgeon-general of the United States.

    The point I am trying to make is that even pretend-compassion can have its' place. Obviously, in the above example, even the person who was being phony grew from the experience.
  • edited January 2010
    Richard Herman;80385 said:
    So it is better to have good intentions warped with self-view than bad intentions. But to truly act without a hook, isnt it best to act with no intention? The acts that seem to truly benefit , without blowback, are like that arent they? Not impulsive, but spontaneous and situational.
    Yes, it is best to act with no hooks, but that's very difficult for us ego-cherishing sentient beings to realize because most of the time we don't see the hooks ourselves that we're throwing out there. That takes a lot of time and contemplation in order to uncover all that. So like I said, we just do the best we can and try to act unselflishly and with pure intent to the best of our ability. That's what's important, I think.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    Allbuddha Bound, that story kind of reminds me of the story of the dog's tooth, if you're familiar with it. In other words, it's not so much what was intended but what is perceived by the recipient.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    Richard Herman;80385 said:
    So it is better to have good intentions warped with self-view than bad intentions. But to truly act without a hook, isnt it best to act with no intention? The acts that seem to truly benefit , without blowback, are like that arent they? Not impulsive, but spontaneous and situational.

    The idea of compassion is a typical reflection of how difficult it is to translate Eastern ideas in Western terms. The term compassion, in the West, sometimes suggests condescending pity, a commiseration which presupposes a certain distance between oneself and the person who’s suffering. However in Tibetan, nyingjẻ, which we translate as compassion, means literally ‘lord of the heart’, that’s to say that which should reign over our thoughts. It is the influence by which we seek to remedy all forms of suffering, and especially its causes – ignorance, hatred, desire, and so on.

    As even dirty water may serve to quench a thirst, so does compassion. For compassion here is total and unconditional for all beings without any distinction or partiality. Compassion is neither degraded when we fail to recognize it nor improved when we do recognize it. What we can change is our mistaken perception of the nature of things. It is within the framework of that transformation that we apply an ever greater mastery of thoughts, of intent, and the altruistic approach that consists of offering others the means of bringing about such transformation.

    I suggest the ‘hooks’ of which you speak are rather the veils of mental obscurations and not evidence of errant, wayward, or impertinent compassion or irreverent intent. All living beings possess within themselves the potential to attain perfect liberation and wisdom. Everything that veils that potential and prevents it from expressing itself in its totality is adventitious and ephemeral.
  • AllbuddhaBoundAllbuddhaBound Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Palzang;80564 said:
    Allbuddha Bound, that story kind of reminds me of the story of the dog's tooth, if you're familiar with it. In other words, it's not so much what was intended but what is perceived by the recipient.

    Palzang

    I am unfamiliar with the story you mention, but I can see times where Idiot Compassion, may be of benefit to all. Especially when one thinks of an innocent person.

    Are there exceptions to Idiot Compassion? Does mindless compassion ever come to a desired end? I believe it may.
  • edited January 2010
    The story of the dog's tooth involves an old woman and her son who live in a remote part of Nepal or Tibet or somewhere like that. The son has grown up and wants to explore the world, so he decides to make a pilgrimage to India and see the holy places of the Buddha. When he leaves, his old mother pleads with him to bring back a holy relic of the Buddha to strengthen her faith. So the son sets off and spends several years on his journey, seeing many wonderful things that he never dreamed of back in his small mountain village. He has such a wonderful time, in fact, that he completely forgets about his old mother's request. Finally he turns homeward and as he nears his village, he suddenly remembers the request. Not knowing what to do and having nothing to give her, he becomes very sad and depressed. Then he spots a dead dog lying by the side of the road, which gives him an idea. He removes a tooth from the dog, thinking that he will give to his mother and tell her that it is one of the Buddha's own teeth. He knows that it is deceitful, but at least it will make it look like he remembered his mother and that he is a good son.

    When he arrives home, he is greeted joyfully and tearfully by his mother, who had been worried that he might never return and that she might never receive the holy relic she had requested. When he presents the tooth to her, along with the cock-and-bull story he had invented to go along with it, she bursts into tears and takes the tooth in a white kata to place it on her altar. The son feels somewhat dirty having told her the lie, but seeing how happy it made her, he shrugs it off.

    The woman prizes the "relic" until her death and develops a deep, abiding devotion for the Buddha such that when she dies, she displays the rainbow body, indicating that she had attained liberation.

    So even this cowardly act of false compassion had a good result. It didn't matter if the tooth came from the Buddha or a dead dog; what really mattered was the devotion of the woman.

    Palzang
  • edited January 2010
    Allbuddha Bound;80639 said:
    I am unfamiliar with the story you mention, but I can see times where Idiot Compassion, may be of benefit to all. Especially when one thinks of an innocent person.

    Are there exceptions to Idiot Compassion? Does mindless compassion ever come to a desired end? I believe it may.
    yeah definitely, i think that even if an act of compassion is not imbued with a spirit of compassion in the moment, even if it is kind of empty it still has an element of compassion in it even it is only a fraction of it. if one gives a seed rather than a fruit there is still compassion there, even though it cannot yet be felt.
  • AllbuddhaBoundAllbuddhaBound Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Would a parent who tells a child "you are very bright and the future holds a lot for you" even if they thought the child was not very bright, gifted or have much of a future, would that be idiot compassion?
  • edited January 2010
    I think we have to have compassion for our selves, as well as all of the other persons around us in this life.

    The term "Idiot Compassion” seems a little harsh to me, no matter who first said it. I wonder could we really call someone’s acts idiotic, and still feel good about ourselves offering up such a put down to another?

    Maybe we need to lighten up a little bit, and wash such terms right out of our vocabulary, once and for all.

    Any act of kindness is a good beginning.

    Peace,
    S9
  • ValtielValtiel Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Actions don't have feelings; I think the term is fine. :lol:
  • edited January 2010
    Subjectivity9;80755 said:
    Maybe we need to lighten up a little bit, and wash such terms right out of our vocabulary, once and for all.

    Thats a funny sentence is it not? We need to lighten up.... and purge our whole language.

    I remember being at the recieving end of some galloping idiot compassion as a kid. I had a nasty lactose intolerance, but my aunt, who loved to reflect on her "goodness", liked milk. Milk was good. She forced milk down my throught over and over again because it was good , and she was good. I would be doubled-up with cramps but she would have none of it. This is petty form of something that can cause great suffering.
    The notion of goodness and compassion can crystalize into a monster, and history has many roads to hell paved with these good intentions.
  • edited January 2010
    For a somewhat more horrific example, go to Wikipedia, look up "frontal lobotomy", and read the section on Walter Freeman.
  • edited January 2010
    Mundus,

    When was the last time you saw an ‘action’ (walking down the street) totally disconnected from a person? Let's not dehumanize people to such an extent that we can call their actions “idiotic,” and not think we are also being rude to that person, at the very least.

    Peace and compassion starts in the heart. Does the word “idiot” spring to mind when you are trying to think of something nice to say to a friend?

    Compassion asks us to think of everyone as a friend...in need.

    “Won’t you be my valentine, you idiot.” Ya, that works.

    Smiles,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Ren,

    Are we going to lay every mistaken ever made at compassions door?

    Isn’t that painting with a rather big brush?

    I guess that would prove that whole idea of family should be scraped, seeing how many problems start in our childhood? Don't get me started. ; ^ )

    Respectfully,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Do you think of everyone as a freind S9? Hmmm?


    This term is not a slag against anyone. Its worth looking look into the context cited by Dazzle (Trungpa).:)
  • edited January 2010
    Richard,

    Trungpa was a very wise person in many ways, a personal favorite of mine.

    But like every one of us, he also had things in his character that were not laudable. For instance, he was known to have a very bad temper, and to be quite a womanizer.

    In other words, lets admit that he wasn’t a poster child for compassion. Or if you looked in the dictionary for the word 'compassion,' you would not be likely to find his picture there too.

    Thinking of every one as a friend is probably a work in progress, for all of us. But, so is Liberation. ; ^ ) Let's shoot for the stars.

    The word idiot isn’t even a good choice of words even in polite company.

    However, if we don’t say the word idiot, but simply think "What an idiot," there is still a lot of work to do.

    One of the things that most people fear, most often, is harsh judgment. Such judgment causes quite a lot of suffering, and it is an epidemic in our society.

    So, if we want to get rid of suffering, perhaps we had better start using words like "forgiveness" in place of our harsh judgmental words like "Idiots," especially since actions follow rapidly behind our thoughts.

    Just a thought,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    I see where you are coming from. Perhaps the term is harsh, but it has helped me see when my own "goodness" is not coming out of spontaneous compassion. Ofcouse goodness however mixed up with ego is better than nihilism and aggression.

    But how can for instance a faith that has at its heart Unconditional Compassion, devolve into people literally torturing others in the name of that Virtue? as in the European middle ages. It seems that any virtue no matter how virtuous can become pernicious when crystalized.
  • edited January 2010
    .

    [QUOTE S9]
    "Trungpa was a very wise person in many ways, a personal favorite of mine.

    But like every one of us, he also had things in his character that were not laudable. For instance, he was known to have a very bad temper, and to be quite a womanizer.

    In other words, lets admit that he wasn’t a poster child for compassion. Or if you looked in the dictionary for the word 'compassion,' you would not be likely to find his picture there too. "




    Knew him did you, S9 ?

    It always amuses me when people who never met Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche make statements about him.

    He was my first teacher and was pretty amazing as well as compassionate from my own experience.

    Lets not get silly and over-sensitive, 'idiot compassion' is just fine as an expression and describes the practice of an emotional reaction which we think is compassion but doesn't actually have any accompanying awareness or wisdom. Reading the links I gave #3 might be helpful. :buck:


    .
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Excellent historical documentation is an adequate basis for judging at least some aspects of character.
  • edited January 2010
    Whatever, fivebells. There's always going to be somebody who wants to 'put the boot in' eh?

    I'm just speaking from my own personal experience of Chogyam Trungpa when I was very young. Anything else is not within my own sphere of reference - and I will always be indebted for the one-to- one teachings and interaction I had with him. Nobody can take that away from me whatever they choose to say ! ;)


    .
  • edited January 2010
    Dazzle,

    I am sure your beloved teacher was very fine fellow in many ways, (I love his book, ' No Escape'). But saying that his choice of words, in this particular instance, left something to be desired doesn't take him away from you, and what you shared, now does it?

    Feathers need not fly over this. ; ^ )

    If we say that he was perfect, in every way, that boarders on worshipping him, doesn't it?

    I don't believe that he would have wanted you to do that.

    Take a deep breath, and let's all be friends. : ^ )

    Peace is a skill,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Subjectivity9;80798 said:
    Are we going to lay every mistaken ever made at compassions door?
    How is this relevant to anything I or anyone else has said in this thread?

    Getting back to the discussion:

    There are two types of idiot compassion being discussed in this thread. The first is compassion from bad intentions. As some people have pointed out, an act can have good results even if the intention behind it was faulty.

    The other type of idiot compassion involves good intentions that are carried out incompetently. Walter Freeman had good intentions, but he was so enthusiastic about his procedure that he ignored evidence that it was doing harm.

    In regard to Chugyam Trungpa, the first time the penny dropped for me was when I read his statement that there can be awareness without an observer. I'm grateful to him for his teaching, and humbled by the fact that it came from someone as screwed up as him.
  • edited January 2010
    Richard,

    Interestingly, Alan Watts wrote quite a bit on being spontaneous, in his early years, and how "we should do it." Finally, however, in his later life, he came to believe that absolutely everything was spontaneous, (AKA automatic).

    In other words, like the Bhagavad Gita (Hindu) says, “You are not the doer.”

    And like (Taoism) Lao Tzu says, ‘Life flows through us,” or “Life does us.” (Para)

    R: But how can for instance a faith that has at its heart Unconditional Compassion, devolve into people literally torturing others in the name of that Virtue?

    S9: There is obviously a complex of reasons involved in this problem. It is a tangled mess. I do, however, believe that the answer to this problem lies within each and every individual heart and not in some grand group movement.

    I always ask myself, “What can I do?” “How can I be better?” Even, “What does this particular person need?” This brings any possible solution into the land of do-able.

    So very often, we feel powerless as the larger world goes on about its business without asking us our (insignificant) opinions.

    R: It seems that any virtue no matter how virtuous can become pernicious when crystallized.

    S9: Well said. That is why we must stay personally flexible, and adapt to each situation in a new way. (AKA customized adjustments) Habitual thinking lacks creativity and any real chance for real improvement. Habitual living is a dead thing, painfully lacking in stimulation or love of life. These ideas are covered in a little jewel of a book called, “Beginner’s Mind.”

    Thanks for your interesting reply,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Subjectivity9;80825 said:
    Dazzle,

    I am sure your beloved teacher was very fine fellow in many ways, (I love his book, ' No Escape'). But saying that his choice of words, in this particular instance, left something to be desired doesn't take him away from you, and what you shared, now does it?

    Feathers need not fly over this. ; ^ )

    If we say that he was perfect, in every way, that boarders on worshipping him, doesn't it?

    I don't believe that he would have wanted you to do that.

    Take a deep breath, and let's all be friends. : ^ )

    Peace is a skill,
    S9



    feathers? ...worshipping?... deep breath...? Peace is a skill ?......... Huh? :confused:



    image
  • edited January 2010
    Ren,

    R: The first is compassion from bad intentions.

    S9: Compassion with bad intentions isn’t compassion at/all, is it? The definition of compassion is basically good intentions, is it not? If I called a dog a rose, would you put him in a vase with his feet in the water? ; ^ )

    R: As some people have pointed out, an act can have good results even if the intention behind it was faulty.

    S9: Perhaps that is because we humans are not so powerful that we can control the results.

    R: The other type of idiot compassion involves good intentions that are carried out incompetently. Walter Freeman had good intentions, but he was so enthusiastic about his procedure that he ignored evidence that it was doing harm.

    S9: Yes, we are often blinded by our concepts. When you invest a lot of hope and effort into something, it gets even harder to see past wishful thinking...sad, but true.

    G: The first time the penny dropped for me was when I read his statement that there can be awareness without an observer.

    S9: Yes IMPO, he is one of the most advanced teachers available in our time. He spoke of advanced understandings that are often hard to come by, so much is “beginning this” and “beginning that” or “Intro to,” because it has a bigger audience, and sells more books.

    G: I'm grateful to him for his teaching, and humbled by the fact that it came from someone as screwed up as him.

    S9: Please don’t be hard on him. He was just human, like all the rest of us, on the more human (egoic) level of existence. Liberation is not synonymous with sainthood.

    Warm Regards,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Dazzle,

    D: feathers? ...worshipping?... deep breath...? Peace is a skill ?

    S9: Yup! And I’m sticking by my story. : ^ )

    When someone’s a pain in your ‘you-know-what.’ It’s a good opportunity to practice metta.

    No, don’t thank me. It’s the least I could do. ; ^ )

    Warm wishes back at you,
    S9
  • ValtielValtiel Veteran
    edited January 2010
    S9,

    I'm just saying, that there are things I've done in my life where the only suitable adjective would be "idiotic." Everyone has. It's a fact. We all have moments of "idiot compassion" and calling it such doesn't hurt my feelings. I haven't seen anyone else offended by this either. Are you?

    I just don't see the big deal. It just seems like grasping at straws to find something to be offended by. :lol:
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Subjectivity9;80832 said:
    In other words, like the Bhagavad Gita (Hindu) says, “You are not the doer.”

    Exactly. This is why the term "idiot compassion" is not necessarily a personal attack. To assume that it is assumes some personal identification with the supposed compassion and associated actions.
  • edited January 2010
    5 Bells,

    You make some good points. but...

    I think sometimes it gets confusing because we live on multiple levels, at once, and they do not mix and match easily.

    Some rules seem to apply to the more egoic world, and some seem to apply to the more Spiritual understandings. I am not sure that I have sorted all of these out, myself.

    For instance, just because "you are not the doer" doesn’t mean you can go on a killing spree and not be culpable, now does it? Even if we do realize, on one level that, there is no self in the victim.

    To call someone an “idiot” just isn’t a nice thing to do, even if they do have the good sense not to take it personally, lets face it. Why should the victim of your words, take up the slack, and you can just go about flailing your arms?

    And:

    The fall-out, from using a word like 'idiot' as a definition, could easily be that people would be afraid to be compassionate, out of fear and confusion, because they didn’t understand enough yet to do so correctly.


    There is little enough kindness in this world that we can afford to cut off the supply in any way.

    Peace,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Mundus,

    If the word ‘idiot’ works good for you, when defining your own acts to yourself, “hey, go for it.” I can’t argue with success. : ^ )

    No, I am not offended, as I guard my own emotions. But, I find it distasteful and uncivilized. If someone spoke to me using that word, I would think it lacked sophistication, and probably showed a lack of good will on their part.

    A person doesn't have to be 'drop dead hurt,' in order to make certain observations.

    : ^ )

    M: I just don't see the big deal.

    S9: No, perhaps you don’t.

    M: It just seems like grasping at straws to find something to be offended by.

    S9: That’s your right to do so. But, I find very often you make assumptions about my behavior that I equally think are incorrect. I like to examine things closely and learn from doing so.

    Be well,
    S9
  • edited January 2010
    Theres been some really good replies. To be honest i think idiot compassion is mainly drawing yourself closer to the state of being or condition of the people you are trying to help, which isnt healthy.
«1
Sign In or Register to comment.