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.
Inquery of Metta.
Because love is a subjective word which symbolizes a thought of a perceived emotion, would it be just as well to view it as the like of lust in disguise? Wouldn't "loving" then be just another deception? Moreover, wouldn't this make kindness a formality which only benefits the view of propriety, in the like of just mere "good manners" to serve the self by the means of the other, regardless of compassion? If this be the case what does this say about metta?
Much respect:
SimpleWitness
Much respect:
SimpleWitness
0
Comments
I highly recommend reading this article 'Universal Loving Kindness' which might be helpful for your confusion.
http://www.abhayagiri.org/index.php/main/article/215/
with kind wishes,
D.
So, upon reading Ajahn Sumedho, it is understood that metta is a practice of a view that is used, all the while, renouncing the attachments to the conditioned world. It seems more like a belief of forgive and forget, which is a hypocritical attitude. What if one does not subscribe to a practice of loving kindness but by letting the sight of compassion be the source of developing a sincere bond with all, indiscriminately? Would this, then, be deemed worthy also of confusion?
It is more attainable, as witnesses, to allow compassionate understanding (even towards all transgressors) be our nature. Subscribing to the belief of pardon just because a doctrine says so, thus, becomes refuted. This blessing is the fruit of making mindful decisions, which benefit joy from the bigger picture. Forgiveness, then, becomes a useless formality because one has already achieved understanding by allowing compassion to be their supreme essence.
Didn't the Buddha teach the path of inquiry? Then, why is one's mind deemed as confused for inquiry without the use of doctrine? Isn't confusion caused by allowing the mind of the self to be the disciples of another master's views? The awakened witness by means of inner awareness. Neither by slavery to thought nor dogma have these questions been discovered, as these questions are not the questions of the confused; but, the very questions found on the path of inquiry by the seeker to be placed in stasis in order to be awakened.
Deep Peace and Respect to you, Dazzle:
SimpleWitness
and spoken to him personally - and he absolutely radiates gentleness and loving -kindness and compassion !
To quote from the link I offered you:
"with metta, we are relating to all conditioned experience with an attitude of kindness, accepting things as they are. Consider what this does to the mind as a practice. We contemplate all phenomena, all sentient beings, in terms of loving-kindness rather than in terms of which is best, which is worst, what we like, what we don’t like.
... Metta is non-discriminatory. It doesn't mean liking one thing rather than another, it isn't a question of singling out: "I love this person, I don't love that one."
I'm afraid I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say in your response to me, Simple Witness, so I think, with respect, I'll end this conversation with you right here.
Be well and happy
D.
Please understand that he is not one to refute, but forgiveness should be. He teaches understanding, by the practice of metta. It is just not consciously understandable, to the self, as to how forgiveness has a place in understanding. Forgiveness just seems to get in the way of true compassionate understanding.
However, you have been very compassionate to share that link with me and for that gratitude should have been expressed by me. My limits are jadedness, Dazzle. If you can aid in understanding, that will always be welcome. Please do not give up on a fool like my self.
My comment offended you. It is because my approach was flawed and uncalled for bad form and will be corrected, Dazzle. The intent was not to display him as a hypocrite, but to display forgiveness as a hypocrisy.
There is still much for me to learn, in terms of how to communicate effectively. My trust is that you understand.
With much gratitude, Dazzle:
Namaste
How about having a browse, a read, and a listen to the audio at the Metta section at Buddhanet. There's instruction about loving kindness cultivation and meditation - and also you can learn about the Four Sublime States (Brahma Viharas) which were spoken of by the Buddha.
http://www.buddhanet.net/metta.htm
with kind wishes,
D
It seems to me that forgiveness happens naturally if one has compassion for others. Non-referential compassion doesn't necessarily come easily to everyone however, and we are all in different stages of understanding and practice.
Last weekend we joined in satsang with Adyashanti and it was a great inspiration to be there.
One thing that came up was “true love”.
True love is not an emotion or an experience. It is something deeper.
We don’t always feel like our children are God’s ultimate gift to humanity. We may want to strangle them at times.
But that doesn’t change the fact that we love them.
That’s true love. It runs deeper than our feelings.
Metta is something like that – I think.
It’s not about creating some artificial feelings; it is a deeper notion of being connected.
Imho!