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.
Lower Fetter "Q"
1.Self-identity views,
Is love, being a totally subject word, a "Self-identity view?
Deep Peace
0
Comments
no-attachment to any ego/being... and so on.
We can cultivate love as something we feel and express, rather than something we possess. Metta is usually translated as loving-kindness, and is the warmth that we easily feel for people we are fond of... though with practice we can sit and expand it for everything.
@Vincenzi
@aMatt
Because it is a subjective word, which symbolizes a perception if what is felt for another and the self. It would be just as well to view it as the like of lust in disguise. Wouldn't "love" then be just another deception?
It is not the emotion that is a deception, but that the self has a limit to the qualities it can apply that emotion toward. The self does not in itself generate the sensation in the body, but decreases its amplitude when it craves/repels based on delusions. http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/snp/snp.1.08.than.html
As far as love being lust, as a parent I'm sure you can see how that is not the case. One is craving for sensuality, one is just an emotion.
I believe that is now two threads today where you are trying to refute the idea of love as an essential aspect to the path. Is everything okay? Is something going on in your life that is making you lose faith in love for others? If I could I would give you a hug
Love lifts us up where we belong
All you need is love!
Love is an experience as it is. The conceptual overlay says it is a self. But the love remains when non-self is realized.
Khenpo Gyamptso Tsultrim Rinpoche specifically made a point to tell his students that love is real. He is very old.
Respectfully:
SimpleWitness
That is really cute. It brings joy to read such kind and compassionate words, Talisman. Thank you, and ({hug accepted}).
With no hostilities towards one's belief that love is existent, are these threads being posted. It is simply part of an inquiry in regards to the understanding of metta, by receiving the input from those who subscribe to its practice.
Namaste
They're not exactly false, these notions you insist, but they seem limited as a created disbelief. You point at a bond with your children, but what is the impetus of that bond? What is it made of?
As we contemplate emptiness, there is a possibility that our mind can slip from seeing emptiness into seeing pointlessness or nihilism.
What is left is not some type of vacuous eternity, but a breathing, digesting, observing continuity with a sympathetic resonance with its surroundings. Denial of the resonance usually arises when we adopt "enlightenment" as an identity, or fear attachments. There are a good many virtues worth cultivating, as Dazzle pointed out.
With warmth,
Matt
Lol! Okay Matt, before this is started please be patient with me. It's a bit wordy. Here are the "realities" of the bond and the mask.
This is what is meant by the bond being its own make:
Bonding is the objective word that symbolizes the connectedness, which individual beings already do instinctively, with no attached view or idea. It is the natural law in all relationships and is the nature of trust, the ability to feel from each-others standing point reciprocally without hindrance to be seen as who we truly are, regardless of flaws, and without possessiveness, and is nurtured by compassion. Bonding is to being, as gravity is to matter.
It's not worth dumping it off as some idea like love or being loving. The bonding is the nominalization that names a real process, the way the gravity does.
All states of being, with enough awareness, can be broken. The reality of bonding is that it is just as vulnerable to being broken, like breaking the bond of a chain. Another reality of bonding is that with enough awareness, compassion can tie the links that bond again.
However, love is just a subjective duality of another subjective word that symbolizes another unnecessary emotion. Emotions are just a state of consciousness that is depicted by the way one perceives experiences. "Big stinking deal. It's just another perception."
Perception is deception. Love and hate are just that. They are just two sides of the same mask. There is an outside and an inside. The side that others see and the side that only the self will see out of. Neither are real until the mask is removed by the gentile hand of the awakened one: by who we truly are. Being loving is the duality against being hateful, but, they are both false formalities: fronts. Being is the awakened one that self and others keep hiding from.
It is possible to bond with anything and anybody if we allow ourselves to, even the view of love and hate, which is useless.
Deep Respect aMatt.
SimpleWitness
Perception is perception... that's why we call it so! We can percieve truth, too, with practice.
endearment
affection
attachment
lust
craving
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/dhp/dhp.16.budd.html
Thank you. (: I will read on this.
@aMatt
Passion is exactly where love and hate belong if one were to subscribe to them. When you use the word love, Matt, what do you mean by it? Maybe this will aid my understanding, or lack of.
With continued respect and deepening peace to you.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/buddharakkhita/wheel365.html
And to practice cultivating metta:
On the contrary, your words do strike a cord within me, Matt. My sight is just not familiar with metta. You gave me a link, for which, you have my gratitude. I have read the introduction of it, even this has me in meditation. aMatt, you have been doing a wonderful job at speaking about metta and the word love, within the context of metta.
You do not have to read what is pasted from the link that you gave to me below. It is there as a source, while we speak. My interest is in understanding metta. Do you practice the full doctrine of metta, Matt?
Admittedly, very little metta was practiced in my current life even before this, let alone the fact that it was never seen by me until being added to this site; however, the more is read about it, the more my mind deems the self as a bad person for only accepting love as just another idea. This is interesting because it reasons the question,
"Even if love is but an idea, what if it was practiced even with the awareness of it as but an idea? Is it such a wrong way to incorporate in my way of life? It's a practice; a conscious practice."
However, this is being contemplated. Metta seems like a worthy practice; yet, it stands as a challenge to dismiss the words "love" and "kindness." It's a pretty petty attachment that is within my mind and self.
But, thanks to your words, the word that came from Vincenzi, and the doctrines shared by Dhamma Dhatu, Metta will be practiced consciously. That will be my decision. My concern, however, is getting trapped in the wheel of hypocrisy. Ugh! So much to undo!!!
Do not give up on fools like my self, Matt.
[The Pali word metta is a multi-significant term meaning loving-kindness, friendliness, goodwill, benevolence, fellowship, amity, concord, inoffensiveness and non-violence. The Pali commentators define metta as the strong wish for the welfare and happiness of others (parahita-parasukha-kamana). Essentially metta is an altruistic attitude of love and friendliness as distinguished from mere amiability based on self-interest. Through metta one refuses to be offensive and renounces bitterness, resentment and animosity of every kind, developing instead a mind of friendliness, accommodativeness and benevolence which seeks the well-being and happiness of others. True metta is devoid of self-interest. It evokes within a warm-hearted feeling of fellowship, sympathy and love, which grows boundless with practice and overcomes all social, religious, racial, political and economic barriers. Metta is indeed a universal, unselfish and all-embracing love.
Metta makes one a pure font of well-being and safety for others. Just as a mother gives her own life to protect her child, so metta only gives and never wants anything in return. To promote one's own interest is a primordial motivation of human nature. When this urge is transformed into the desire to promote the interest and happiness of others, not only is the basic urge of self-seeking overcome, but the mind becomes universal by identifying its own interest with the interest of all. By making this change one also promotes one's own well-being in the best possible manner.
Metta is the protective and immensely patient attitude of a mother who forbears all difficulties for the sake of her child and ever protects it despite its misbehavior. Metta is also the attitude of a friend who wants to give one the best to further one's well-being. If these qualities of metta are sufficiently cultivated through metta-bhavana — the meditation on universal love — the result is the acquisition of a tremendous inner power which preserves, protects and heals both oneself and others.]
am' (from maitri) is the root of amore and amistad (friendship). there's no translation of maitri to english.
I don't consider love to be something worth renouncing, or usually worth suggesting renouncing. Instead, the target is renouncing the selfish inentions or self-view that causes love to become the attached form, rather than loving-kindness and compassion.
Said differently, we can be benevolent in our relationships with others without pressing our self-views into them. We don't have to cling to the self-views, the relationsip, or the benevolence. Still, metta remains.
@aMatt
Words are a very important symbolisms of thought in order to communicate effectively; however, it never occurred to me that it was my self this whole time getting caught up on the ideas of them.
You have both provided aid in the understanding to be freed from the fetter of self identity views.
I will move on to the next fetter now.
Thank you both very much.
SimpleWitness
@aMatt
Words are a very important symbolisms of thought in order to communicate effectively; however, it never occurred to me that it was my self this whole time getting caught up on the ideas of them.
You have both provided aid in the understanding to be freed from the fetter of self identity views.
It's time to move some awareness on to the next fetter now. You will see more from this fool about another subject, soon enough. =-D
Thank you both very much.
SimpleWitness
Namaste
@aMatt
Words are a very important symbolisms of thought in order to communicate effectively; however, it never occurred to me that it was my self this whole time getting caught up on the ideas of them.
You have both provided aid in the understanding to be freed from the fetter of self identity views.
It's time to move some awareness on to the next fetter now. You will see more from this fool about another subject, soon enough. =-D
Thank you both very much.
SimpleWitness
Namaste