Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

Verbal/Emotional Abuse

edited August 2011 in Philosophy
If you don't identify with your ego than how can your "self-esteem" ever be hurt from abuse?

You might feel emotional/psychological pain, but there is no esteem of self to be hurt, no?

In another way, couldn't emotional/verbal abuse almost help in liberating oneself from the grips of ego?

I mean you still feel the pain physiologically, but there is no suffering of hurt self-esteem.

Who's self and who's esteem?

A receiver of abuse is pretty much a receptical for the emotional pain of another person who has been abused in the past.

Energy cannot be destroyed only passed on. There is no abuser nor abusee just humanity as a collective transmitting life's pain.

?????





Comments

  • there is a limit, ahimsa includes making a stop to any form of violence in a skillful/wise way.
  • @jgpp - that's a really interesting perspective. It's set me off thinking about all the other things in life that might take on a new meaning if one stops clinging to their 'sense of self'.

    I might go and meditate on that one...
  • edited August 2011
    Hmmm.....if you really can say you do not have an ego (an ego is really hard to completely eradicate), yes that is true, but we all have one and when the ego is hurt it start to identify with the word hurt, and an hurt ego is more hard to tame is less receptive to new things. Just my opinion.
  • From a psychology point of view in my opinion it depends on which self ur currently living in and how far your ideal self is from your real self, i think it would be save to say that your real self is on a spirital path. your ideal self who who you believe yourself to be. I lived for many years with a huge gap between them, totally out of touch with my real self and living in the fake reality of my ideal self, a weak state which can be impressed upto, and highly influenced by others opinions of me. Comments and abuse all mean something and have an effect, whereas had i been nearer my real self at the time of abuse it would not have made much of an impression or had any meaning to me.

    Ego....still learning....l am still stuck on the Freud ego, havent got to the page on Buddhism ego theory!! i am getting there!
  • jgpp, that's exactly what Dzonsar Khentse Rinpoche said in an interview with Enlightenment Now magazine, when asked if the "destroying the ego" process wasn't abusive to the student. He said once you have no ego, there's nothing there to experience abuse.

    The interesting thing about these "ego-destroying" practices is that the lamas think they're what every student needs, but I've never heard of a lama taking his own medicine, and undertaking this treatment himself at any point in his training.
  • edited August 2011
    madly reading around about ego now, this is virtual classroom at its best. So perspective for me:

    Buddhism is unique in that it denies the existence of a soul, as it denies the existence of self. The self being an illusion born of the ego with no reality to base itself on.

    so does that mean that what i put in my previous post, the ego is part of the ideal self that many people live with, and with buddhist practice we move towards our psychological real self, without ego?

    am i understanding this right? sorry if l havent taken this thread wayward!
  • It sounds like you're combining psychology with Buddhism and coming up with a jumble.
    "Our psychological real self"? That may have an equivalent in Buddhism, but it wouldn't be expressed by the term "self".
  • right l thought l was getting confused, happens quite a lot :rolleyes:
  • No form of abuse should never be tolerated. It harms both the abuser and the abused. Harm comes from the selfish.

    A compassionate being would not step out of the way of an abuser. A compassionate being is already aware of what decision has to be made to benefit healing and joy for all involved from the bigger picture, including the abuser's, even if it means dividing a family from a harmful person.
  • DakiniDakini Veteran
    edited August 2011
    Yes, back to topic, thanks,Witness. jgpp, the "destroy the ego" treatment advocated by some Tibetan teachers is very controversial. I think there are other ways to curb one's ego. There must be, given that there are many other sects/traditions of Buddhism that don't use the brutal approach. My objection is to teachers who sometimes run the program on a student without any warning, without informing the student of what is going on, without the consent of the student. That's been known to happen, though I think (I hope) it's rare.

    If a lama is verbally abusive to a student in the context of simply giving standard teachings in a group setting, I speak up, or I have a little talk with the lama privately. There's no place for verbal abuse or rudeness in a routine sangha teachings context.
  • Hmm, As someone who spent years in a verbally abusive relationship I am not sure I totally agree, however I do see some truth as well. Hows that for the middle path?

    Okay on the one hand I think there is a point where verbal abuse doesn't really touch you so much. It becomes something you observe, and you still have compassion for the person attempting the abuse. I have had several challenges in the years since I left the abusive relationship where others tried similar things. One thing that helped was that they were not in a position of power over me. I had already survived the relationship where the other person had power over me so really I was not affected too much. I mean they were playing around with the pro survivor after all. So I recall one conversation where this lady I supervised just was going on and on, saying I was interupting her as well, I felt half there and half observing but I felt no anger towards her. I waited and when she stopped I just responded to her. However several factors are in abuse that are not in just bad behavior. One is the power differential, and it has to be real. So I couldn't call this abuse because I was actually in charge, but my previous self could have been affected by worrying about if she liked me or how others we worked with saw me. But when you let go of attachment to many things it makes it much harder for someone to have power over you. Instead of being controlled by your image or lots of money you may only be affected when your life or basic health is in danger. Not as many people will really threaten those.

    Okay on the other side, ya know there is one, is that abuse is about power, control and lack of empathy. Compassionate actions are not about power, control and not feeling empathy. So it may look and feel very similar but it is possible to be different. I would find it hard to imagine someone who was continually controlled and did not get treated with any empathy would get to compassion very easily. Some do of course, but many more people are damaged and spend years healing.

    Long winded but I think it is relevant

  • Very good points, Heerdt. One isn't touched so much by verbal abuse or threats by someone who doesn't have power over one. You just let the person have their say, realizing they're coming from a place of personal pain of some sort, and then you deal with whatever the situation calls for, quietly. Still, people who chronically relate to people abusively need a wake-up call of some sort, if they can't be avoided.
  • Hmmm.....if you really can say you do not have an ego (an ego is really hard to completely eradicate), yes that is true, but we all have one and when the ego is hurt it start to identify with the word hurt, and an hurt ego is more hard to tame is less receptive to new things. Just my opinion.
    anatman does not imply ægo; ego means I; atmān means soul as viewed by theists/atomicists/eternalists.

  • Unless you are advanced in your mindfulness and perception of anatta, I think being subject to abuse is unskillful. It will only increase your defensiveness (ego) and arouse unwholesome mind states.

    In other words, avoid abusive people.
  • SattvaPaulSattvaPaul South Wales, UK Veteran
    There is a widespread misunderstanding among many Buddhists that the aim of practice is to get rid of ego/self.

    If you get rid of ego, you go into psychosis.

    You need ego for normal functioning as a person in this world.

    Buddhism aims not at destroying the ego, but at letting go of attachment to ego as a solid, permanent entity.

    Just clarifying.
  • ThaoThao Veteran
    No form of abuse should never be tolerated. It harms both the abuser and the abused. Harm comes from the selfish.

    A compassionate being would not step out of the way of an abuser. A compassionate being is already aware of what decision has to be made to benefit healing and joy for all involved from the bigger picture, including the abuser's, even if it means dividing a family from a harmful person.
    I like your post, but while abuse should never be tolerated, what do you do about it? Do you quietly walk away or speak up when being abused?

    I don't believe that you can destroy the ego and have seen many disciples harmed by such treatment, ending up in therapy for depression and low self-esteem all due to the thankfulness of some guru. And if a disciple makes it through this school of hard knocks, he becomes an abuser as well. I have seen pecking order in guru organizations where when the guru isn't around, his closest students abuse those below them.

    sattvaaul, i agree with you too. as i look above what i am writing and see that you said you need the ego for normal functioning. what these gurus are doing is trying to make you comply with them totally. i think everyone should read The Guru Papers as it is an eye opener. Destroying the ego is a Tibetan Buddhist and Hindu concept as I have never heard of it in Zen, and my Zen teacher said that it couldn't be done and that if teachers were abusive people would leave. It doesn't help anyone. Neither does this Wrathful Compassion, which doesn't anger me but makes me realize how stupid the posters are that use it in an attempt to change my views. It doesn't work with me.



  • ThaoThao Veteran
    Hmm, As someone who spent years in a verbally abusive relationship I am not sure I totally agree, however I do see some truth as well. Hows that for the middle path?

    Okay on the one hand I think there is a point where verbal abuse doesn't really touch you so much. It becomes something you observe, and you still have compassion for the person attempting the abuse.

    If you care nothing about the person who is abusing you verbally, then it can't really touch you, but if they are a friend you can still get very hurt by it all, but still you move away. It would be nice to be able to observe all abusers, and of course if it is physical abuse, then you can't observe at all.

    For example, if someone flips me the finger when I am driving, I can let that go and just bless that person. I don't get angry. If I am in a group and someone I hardly knows says something, I can still do that to a great extend. But if it is a so-called friend I am hurt and then maybe end the friendship, depending.

  • I want to refine my answer like a million times ya know, lol. yes when we care about someone we naturally care what they think and how they act with us. Can we leave everyone who is abusive? Maybe not although I thought so at one point. Then I realized that there are times when I think I may sound or act that way to another. It is not that I lost all my empathy or want to control everything, sometimes I am in a situation where I can see more of the big picture and I just have to get something done (talking about my teens and some of their choices that I react to strongly). So I do see that an incident of being rude or insenstive is not the same as chronically abusive.

    Then at the same time the chronic ones can do so much damage! I see that despite wanting to be so independant, we are very social creatures and dependant on our society to some extent. Even a beggar needs to have someone giving him food, and they may be okay in places where it is seen as spiritual but in Denver you would be just another homeless bum. That means that abuse has to work in that framework, and often it does. So the concerns about being with a guru who is abusive in the name of enlightenment are very important. There are some areas of society that are more prone to this than others, I think the legal system in the US is like the playground of narcissists and abusers. I had to study the system to get through it intact, still had effective arguments that my ex needed more food money because he was used to it, while me and the kids spent less. And sometimes sports teams, not that all are like this but it seems that people accept the yelling rude coach as normal.

    For me it wasn;t just the legal system when we got to that point that supported the abuse, it was really almost everyone. The most I got for years of support was when people were tired of me being upset they would just tell me to leave, like that was so easy. Without strong social support you can't usually leave. My family thought I was just overreacting all the time, my friends couldn't figure out how he was charming to them and mean to me, even my chruch at the time. They actually knew that he was not nice but figured that somehow I could make him a better person and that was my job. I got calls over the years asking me to get him to behave at certain functions.

    I am actually very aware of and have studied verbal and emotional abuse. There are things that are accepted to some extent in relationships that are actually forms of torture as well. Actions like not letting someone sleep (can't go to sleep angry), controlling food strictly (in the name of supporting a diet), isolating a person (because you love them so much), etc.

    Okay off the soap box!
  • aMattaMatt Veteran
    When someone is caught deeply by their suffering, they often lash out in many ways. I think the label "abuser" is a poor one. If we can be compassionate when someone else is vibrant with emotion, there is nothing in us to be "abused", nothing in them to be an "abuser." That being said, there is also no reason for our life to be an endurance trial. We can be nuturing to our own body without falling in the trap of judging others.

    We don't call a stove an abuser if it burns us... we learn to walk away, turn the stove off, or work with the stove in a skillful way.
  • tmottestmottes Veteran
    edited August 2011
    We don't call a stove an abuser if it burns us... we learn to walk away, turn the stove off, or work with the stove in a skillful way.
    :clap: :thumbsup:
Sign In or Register to comment.