Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Rejecting and clinging
Greetings,
I've been watching a couple of Ajahn Brahm's video's on youtube after seeing them posted here, but I've seen one potential issue with these talks. He often talks about not letting bad things influence your life so much, letting the bad things go etc. However I've rarely seen him talk about letting the good things go aswell. I doubt an ajahn doesn't know about being attached to good things and rejecting bad things, but why doesn't he teach these things in his videos?
Incase my above question isn't clear:
He obviously means that the bad things shouldn't dominate your life, but often he goes so far that - to me - he seems to say you have to reject the bad things but accept the good things. Is this just me misinterpreting his video's (because I know buddhism doesn't teach it this way) or is this an issue everybody that watches these videos experiences?
Or am I just simply wrong about what buddhism teaches? I thought buddhism teaches that we should just accept everything as it is and not cling nor reject. So not cling to the good things and reject the bad things either.
This post probably has some things mentioned twice or thrice, but that's just because I know things can get lost in translation.
I've been watching a couple of Ajahn Brahm's video's on youtube after seeing them posted here, but I've seen one potential issue with these talks. He often talks about not letting bad things influence your life so much, letting the bad things go etc. However I've rarely seen him talk about letting the good things go aswell. I doubt an ajahn doesn't know about being attached to good things and rejecting bad things, but why doesn't he teach these things in his videos?
Incase my above question isn't clear:
He obviously means that the bad things shouldn't dominate your life, but often he goes so far that - to me - he seems to say you have to reject the bad things but accept the good things. Is this just me misinterpreting his video's (because I know buddhism doesn't teach it this way) or is this an issue everybody that watches these videos experiences?
Or am I just simply wrong about what buddhism teaches? I thought buddhism teaches that we should just accept everything as it is and not cling nor reject. So not cling to the good things and reject the bad things either.
This post probably has some things mentioned twice or thrice, but that's just because I know things can get lost in translation.
0
Comments
This is purely and simply my PoV, and not necessarily associated with a specific teaching, but in context with the above, it's logical.
Say you buy a new garment.
you really like it, the cut, the colour and the fit.
You wear it one day.
You ask 100 people what they think of it.
99 people think it's really nice. It suits you, it's a perfect colour, and the fit is very tailored and you look great in it. Well done you.
One person though, says they hate it.
What were you thinking?
It looks dreadful, and frankly, you've wasted your money. They really thought you had more taste and sense. take it back if you can, because it was a huge mistake.
So, at the end of the day, whose remarks are going to stay in your mind, the longest?
The overwhelming majority of those which were complimentary and positive....?
Or the one, single, isolated comment that said basically, it sucks?
The odd thing is, the human mind seems programmed to focus on negative aspects, far more than it does the positive ones.
Great memories are wonderful to think and reflect on, but negative experiences can actually colour who we are, and condition our character, temperament and self-perception.
I believe this is what he might be getting at.....
EDIT TO ADD:
In conjunction with the above, this is a pleasant read....
http://inwardpathpublisher.blogspot.com/2010/06/basic-metta-meditation-instructions-by.html
In retreat talks for more advance practitioners, you can see more emphasis on letting go of worldly desires and letting go of resisting the negative aspects as well. If you want to go deeper in your practice, perhaps listen to retreat talks instead of the talks for the general audience.
http://www.dhammaloka.org.au/downloads/itemlist/category/32-easter-2007.html
Two days before leaving for home one summer I went to a national arts and crafts fair at a government venue. There was one of the most exquisite Buddha statues (suitable, for example, to place on a home altar) I have ever seen, made of stone (I have forgotten which rock type). Okay, so a Buddha statue to assist in meditation at home. Nothing bad about that...a good thing...much as you visit a temple to meditate in front of their large Buddha image. A means of focusing thought.
The only problem was that to take a Buddha statue out of Thailand you have to take it to the Fine Arts Division and have it examined to assure that it's not an antiquity (it wasn't), and then to another government office to get a permit. It's not a big deal, but the process take 3-4 days, and I was down to just one more day. I couldn't delay my flight due to my schedule to get back to work. I got extremely agitated.
Then suddenly, after hours of plotting and planning and being agitated, I thought -- whoa! I've become attached to the idea of having this statue of Buddha! What better example of relaxing, letting go, and moving on...even though I was letting go of something that was good.
:clap:
I fail to see your point, I’m afraid.
Good things end. That’s a bad thing, right?
Clinging is letting a bad thing (i.e. the end of a good thing) dominate your life.
Ajahn Brahm would advise against that.
Happiness in itself is a good thing, not a bad thing.
Why would it be a problem to enjoy?
Craving, okay that’s something else; it is a bad thing; a hunger; but joy, joy is okay!
This is not my kind of text really, but I’m trying to understand your logic; as I don’t see the flaw you apparently see in Ajahn Brahms style of teaching.
Is that the element you think Ajahn Brahm is skipping?
I don’t think equanimity is intended to prevent joy, bliss even.
I’d say it is about deepening joy and bliss; not being emotionally like the weather in April but being like the higher layers of the atmosphere; lifted above the weather.
I don’t think there really is any disagreement.
Maybe I just get confused with the use and meaning of words.
That’s a bad thing!
I thought Federicas post was insightful.
The traditional Lam Rim teaching is that suffering is the antidote to aversion. Why should you be angry when there is already enough suffering? Impermanence is the antidote to attachment to this life. Loving kindness and compassion is the antidote to attachment to peace. The negative side of pleasure would again be aversion. We are somewhat averse to a cheese and bacon soup. Perhaps karma is the antidote to the richness, the danger of it clouding our senses.
Equinimity is a immeasurable mind. Not sure if it is a paramita in theravada, but in mahayana no. But yes I think it is what you need and it is again going back to the quote of yours I have at the top which I think is correct spot on.
In Therevada upekkha (equanimity) is a paramita (and a brahmavihara too).
For canonical sources see Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pāramitā
Example 1: Say a bad thing happens to MR X, like physical injury. The "letting go" here is the letting go of his "aversion" to the pain, rather than the letting go of the pain itself. The physical pain will be there, but his mental suffering will be reduced in proportion to the extent he can let go of his "aversion" for the pain.
Example 2: Say a good thing happens to Mr X, like he won a lottery. There is no need to let go of the money or the happiness derived from it. He can enjoy himself to his heart's content, provided he does not "cling" to his wealth and happiness (...nothing is permanent and lasts forever). What he lets go here is just "clinging" and not the "good thing" that happened to him.
This is how I have understood most dhamma teaching for lay people. It's not about letting go of your good fortunes and the happiness it brings, it's about not "clinging" it them. Or so I think .....
Ajahn Brahm is mostly teaching the mundane path to Heaven
Get rid of the obvious cause of suffering first, then attack the more illusive suffering of happiness.
With all the depressing stuff on tv, we probably should watch youtube clips of kittens first to counteract that!