It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
OP, perhaps what you have in mind is related to the Mahayana development of dedicating oneself to the liberation of all sentient beings. The original canon certainly includes teachings about compassion, but it doesn't take that final step of committing to the cessation of suffering for all beings.
However, studies of ancient Buddhist scrolls from Gandhara, a region in Pakistan and part of Afghanistan, reveal that the seeds of what later came to be called "Mahayana" were already sewn in the Buddha's time. Scholars say that what occurred is that different members of the sangha, or different factions, perhaps, were interested in different aspects of the Buddha's teachings, and emphasized those aspects in their studies, which ultimately came to be recorded in the Gandhari language. So we see the beginnings of a branching that ultimately lead to the development of two different schools: Mahayana and Hinayana (as it was called at the time). But according to scholars of the Gandhari scrolls, these co-existed as tendencies within the Buddha's community during his lifetime.
It's pretty fascinating. Here's a link to an earlier thread on New Buddhist about it:
Article on the research, from Tricycle magazine:
Oh no no, there's nothing medical about this. It's just a beauty treatment using 'intense pulsing light' that removes hair from the body eg. leg hair, underarm hair, hair in the nether region etc. It's a 2 year process and a requirement is we shouldn't shave or wax, so the hair that grows out is prickly most of the time (namely on my legs and bikini area).
Never heard of it. Thanks for explaining. But....have you noticed the irony in getting a 2-year beauty treatment process while at the same time fretting that dressing more attractively might be un-Buddhist?
If he wants you to be "hot" to stoke his desires that is placing the responsibility on you. Manifestly unfair. It's a two way street. What is he willing to do. If after four years of marriage he wants you to get all tarted up to turn him on then what is the rest of you worth to him?
This also raises the question: what were you like when you two were dating and engaged? Did you suddenly adopt a different style after marriage? We can only assume he found you attractive enough to marry you....
That said, I would point out that attending to one's fashionability is not necessarily anti-Buddhist. A clear example would be dressing for the workplace. Those where the norm is more formal vs. casual might push some people beyond their preferred choices. We do what we need to do in order to be effective on the job; don "power suits" or whatever. That doesn't mean we're vain. As long as we're not attached to fashion, and are only using it as a tool, that wouldn't go against prohibitions re: feeding the ego. See what I mean?
So, OP, maybe it would be a simple matter of changing into something a little more tailored, or whatever, when your husband comes home, or for dinners out, or for weekends. Maybe you could experiment while shopping, and find a couple of items a little outside your usual style, as a compromise. And I'd also add that dressing attractively doesn't have to mean wearing anything overly revealing. Well-tailored items can be both modest and attractive, if that's your concern. If you're wearing baggy sweatshirts or workshirts, consider something more close-fitting. As long as you don't suddenly become addicted to shopping sprees, or start checking yourself out in the mirror constantly, I don't see any conflict with Buddhist principles.
Also--congratulations on practicing good communication, and airing your concerns with your husband. And continuing to the point of getting an honest response. Hopefully, he won't require a radical change, and you two can find a happy medium.
Thank you for that, Federica. "Encephalomyelitis" would indicate that the tissues of the brain are involved--inflamed, or something. How would they know this? How did the medical community arrive at the conclusion that brain tissue is involved?
I know that "chronic fatigue syndrome" has been studied or puzzled over in North America and Europe for quite awhile--since at least the 90's, but I'm wondering how they arrived at choosing this term or diagnosis for it. I ask, because as someone who had long-term chronic fatigue that got diagnosed (I had to go to a doctor who didn't accept insurance in order to get tested and treated) as adrenal fatigue, I always wonder about CFS. I wonder if some of those patients might benefit from getting an Adrenal Stress Index test, a saliva test.
Was he an anti-magician? Is this a serious question? Of course he was; he preached against soothsaying and casting spells. Those things do nothing to advance one's practice. They're not about cultivating mindfulness, egolessness, and compassion--the Dharma.
Dakas and dakinis are un-buddhists? The awakened and awakening use the magic they find. For example the benefits of mantrayana are skilful. Possesion by embodiments of principles have deep impact on those doing deity practice.
However being an egoic, uncultivated anti-muggle I iz probably all wrong and de-skilled ... again ...
haha, well, mantrayana is basically Hindu, and those Hindus in many respects knew how to induce altered states of consciousness of various sorts. They knew what worked. Then some Buddhists took that and added a Buddhist twist to it, so that it becomes skillful means for developing compassion or whatever. I guess.
(Did I just contradict my earlier statement? Now look what you made me do! )