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.
Is Buddhism all about cultivating indifference?
betaboy
Veteran
Since it's the middle path, I am wondering whether indifference would be the right attitude for us - no extremes, just indifference. Being indifferent to everything that happens inside and outside ... is this how we get rid of our attachment and desires?
0
Comments
The path is detaching from craving which leads to suffering, letting go of an unnatural clinging that strives against change. True freedom is living wholly and fully in every moment and acting for the benefit of all, having true virtue and compassion for all living beings... that's too much caring about the greater good for "indifference" to life.
We let go of our attachment by seeing our true nature clearly, i.e. impermanent, unsatisfactory and empty (not-self). Following the Noble Eightfold Path and meditating are the way to do this, not the cultivation of indifference. The Noble Eightfold Path says nothing of having an apathetic attitude.
Equanimity, unlike indifference, is neither cold nor uncaring. Here is one of the best explanations of the difference between the two that I've read:
"Sometimes equanimity is confused with indifference although it is actually easy to distinguish the two. If we remain calm and unmoved because we understand that excitement or agitation is inappropriate, unjustified or unhelpful, this can be called equanimity. If we remain unmoved and uninvolved because we cannot be bothered or because we simply do not care, this can be called indifference. Equanimity grows out of knowledge, indifference out of ignorance or selfishness."
-Bhante Shravasti Dhammika
For more on equanimity, there is an excellent article here, from a talk by Gil Fronsdal:
http://www.insightmeditationcenter.org/books-articles/articles/equanimity/
Alan
But in fact, he said, it is about expanding the self until it is no longer about "I" but encompasses the whole universe of sentient beings.
To do that, you need to learn that there is no difference between "I" and "You", or "Us" and "Them" - everyone is as important to you as you are to yourself. In other words, you need to practice until your compassion is boundless.
Is that an extreme? Perhaps, but always remember that terms like "Middle Way" or "Emptiness" or even "You and I" or "Us and Them" are just words that struggle to express the ultimate reality. Be careful not to mistake the finger pointing to the moon for the moon.
I can say with some certainty that you cannot have too much compassion, provided it is tempered with wisdom. Compassion must be sensible and not soppy, otherwise you can unintentionally do more harm than good.
Suffering gives rise to ‘BUDDHA’. If there was no
suffering, there would be no BUDDHA.
But don’t be the one who is suffering: just see it! It is all about seeing suffering and the end of suffering.
But I was thinking "How would one cultivate indifference"? You could pretend you weren't interested and you could ignore what was going on around you, but that sounds like going to sleep. I don't think you could actually make yourself truly indifferent without a frontal lobotamy!
Much better to start from a position of actually caring and noticing, IMHO
Buddhism is entirely attentive.
(but remained indifferent)
(I noticed it too MindGate :P
Namaste.
Disclaimer: I don't use these words as the final definition of anything. I don't think that the modern usage is quite what the Buddha was trying to get across to his followers. I would say that the word recognize is problematic for acceptance. If we are allowed to use realize, then this is closer. Surrender is interesting, we are giving back what is not self? Once we have then we see things as they are. Submit seems more restrictive than surrender, but that might just be own bias.
"The Buddha described a mind filled with equanimity as “abundant, exalted, immeasurable, without hostility and without ill-will.”
http://www.insightmeditationcenter.org/books-articles/articles/equanimity/
Indifference to what? Everything, no. Indifference to the suffering of yourself and other, no. Indifference to the 5 clinging aggregates and 6 senses and their impressions, that serve the base of suffering, yes.
At Savatthi The Buddha once said:
All form is transient, all feeling is transient, all perception is transient,
all mental constructions are transient, all consciousness is transient...
This transience is suffering! What is suffering is no-self! What is no-self
should be seen as it really is with correct understanding in this very way:
"All this is not mine, cannot be mine, this I am not, this is not my self!"...
When one sees and understands this thus, as it really is with correct and
penetrating understanding, then one maintains no views on what is past.
When one maintains no more views regarding the past, then one neither
maintains any views about the future. When one has relinquished all hopes
regarding the future, then one is not being possessed by stubborn clinging!
Having no trace of immovable clinging left, the mind becomes disillusioned (indifferent) regarding all form, all feeling, all perception, all mental constructions, and all consciousness. By that it is released from the 3 mental fermentations through detached non-clinging... By being released, the mind is all silenced! By being thus stilled, the mind becomes content... Being content, it is not agitated anymore... Being thus unagitated, one indeed attains Nibbāna! Right there and then, one instantly understands: Ended is this process of rebirth, this Noble Life has been lived, done is all what had to be done, there is no state beyond this...Samyutta Nikāya III 55-58
In other words, indifference to the things that one normally clings to that cause suffering. AKA: form, feeling, perception, impulses, consciousness.
Real life example: A Buddha gets his finger chopped off in a some machine. A normal person would be quite upset, a Buddha would be indifferent to it because he would not cling to his lost finger. He would not care that his finger got chopped off. But of course that does not mean he would not go and get a bandage.
From dictionary.com:
dis·il·lu·sion [dis-i-loo-zhuhn]
verb (used with object)
1. to free from or deprive of illusion, belief, idealism, etc.; disenchant.
noun
2. a freeing or a being freed from illusion or conviction; disenchantment.
Samyutta nikaya 35.28.
Mahavagga 1.5.
The Buddha spent 45 years teaching after his enlightenment... that should say it all right there.
One online definition of compassion is "deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it". That wish, that desire, is one of wisdom and not of craving based on ignorance.
definition of compassion: sympathetic consciousness of others' distress together with a desire to alleviate it
In English, the words compassion and dispassion look similar, but the meanings are not related. In a Buddhist context, "dispassion" would refer to the elimination of craving, while compassion is a positive quality to be cultivated, one of the four Brahma-Viharas, signifying a caring empathy for the suffering of others. (I see Cloud posted before me. It's what he said
Alan
wisdom without compassion is dangerous as it breeds indifference.
wisdom with compassion is acceptance.
one may have a cut on their arm and assert that it is empty so it doesn't matter.
that is clinging to emptiness. if one does not even attach to such emptiness then one sees clearly.
seeing clearly allows for clear function. oh, pain in arm okay time to clean out and apply a band aid.
then move on.
it's subtle.
"A person having undertaken a ritual act goes this way and that, fettered by his senses. But one with a wide wisdom, having understood and gone into the Dhamma with his experience, does not go this way and that. For a person indifferent towards all conditions, whatever is seen, heard or cognized, he is one who sees it as it really is and lives with clarity (of mind). With what could he be identified in the world?" SN 22.79
"Thus an instructed disciple of the noble ones reflects in this way: 'I am now being chewed up by form. But in the past I was also chewed up by form in the same way I am now being chewed up by present form. And if I delight in future form, then in the future I will be chewed up by form in the same way I am now being chewed up by present form.' Having reflected in this way, he becomes indifferent to past form, does not delight in future form, and is practicing for the sake of disenchantment, dispassion, and cessation with regard to present form." Snp 4.4 PTS: Sn 788-795
A Buddha is indifferent to big boobs, while a normal person usually starts drooling when seeing them.
but thats that.
drink your tea.
Thank you for your considered replies, but i think that compassion is fundamentally non buddhist for a couple of reasons.
1. Compassion automatically leads to a DESIRE to change the suffering. We all know what desire causes. Nir vana = no craving.
2. The suttas specifically teach that nothing should cause one to waver. Anguttara nikaya 6.55.
If we want to know what it's all about, we should look to those who have fully penetrated the truth and how they've acted. Look at how the Buddha taught for 45 years even when old and sick, look at all of the other enlightened teachers that have passed on the Dhamma. We can't ignore that... if we ignore what these enlightened beings are actually like, then we're not seeing where the path will lead us as well. Sometimes we have to just stop thinking about it, creating our own contradictions and paradoxes, and take a look at what these liberated ones are like.
First, i don't know how the points can be moot when one is a reference to the suttas?
Beside that, i know you don't know me personally and therefore understandabley doubt my level of realisation, but i have a very strong level of direct seeing, and regularly teach and help others. Not out of a sense of sentimental shared suffering, but simply because it's something to do that i'm good at and enjoy doing. I'd speculate that's also why buddha and others taught.
If an enlightened mind is beyond all craving, it wouldn't make much sense to speculate the actions are taken because of enjoyment. Enlightened minds are beyond pleasure and pain, praise and blame, honor and dishonor, gain and loss. There is only clear seeing of reality. With this clear seeing of reality, action is taken to alleviate suffering. That is compassion. The situation is seen clearly, appropriate action is taken, it's selfless.
Compassion and wisdom are inextricably entwined. You can't find one without the other, because true virtue and true compassion are born out of clear-seeing and not out of craving born of ignorance. The enlightened mind does not suffer from acting compassionately, and so there is no problem.
Enjoyment may not be a good word. Passing the time is probably a better description.
As i think you know, action is never taken. Reaction happens. And it's possible for this reaction to happen without feeling and sharing another's suffering. Compassion is not in any way necessary in order to help somebody, and is not productive in any way.
"Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is defiled by incoming defilements."(A.I.8-10)
This is a pretty close description of a liberated mind freed from greed, hatred and delusion imo.
virtue to be cultivated. Here is a quote from just one, the Nissaraniya Sutta:
"Furthermore, there is the case where a monk might say, 'Although compassion has been developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken by me as my awareness-release, still viciousness keeps overpowering my mind.' He should be told, 'Don't say that. You shouldn't speak in that way. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One, for it's not right to misrepresent the Blessed One, and the Blessed One wouldn't say that. It's impossible, there is no way that — when compassion has been developed, pursued, handed the reins and taken as a basis, given a grounding, steadied, consolidated, and well-undertaken as an awareness-release — viciousness would still keep overpowering the mind. That possibility doesn't exist, for this is the escape from viciousness: compassion as an awareness-release."
You might also want to look at the Mettam Sutta, the Buddha's basic teaching on the Brahma-Viharas, sometimes translated as the Heavenly Abodes.
As for your two points, I will quote from an article at http://www.existentialbuddhist.com/2011/02/letting-go/:
"Sometimes the Buddhist message about craving, clinging, and attachment is misunderstood. People misinterpret it to mean that we should be free from desire and interpersonal relationships. In Buddhism there are good desires — the desire to help others, to be happy, and to become enlightened are prominent examples. The desire to be a good parent or a good spouse are others.
"Another way of saying this is that aspiration is all right, but craving is not. Cravings are intense desires that are fixated on a particular object or experience. There is a tightness, rigidity, stereotypy, or “must-ness” about them — like the addict craving a fix; the overeater, a binge; the miser, more wealth. Satisfying a craving leads to transitory pleasure, but as the pleasure fades, more craving ensues. Cravings have a way of taking over our lives and enslaving us."
Here is another example of a "good desire," from the Karaniya Metta Sutta:
Think: Happy, at rest,
may all beings be happy at heart.
Whatever beings there may be,
weak or strong, without exception,
long, large,
middling, short,
subtle, blatant,
seen & unseen,
near & far,
born & seeking birth:
May all beings be happy at heart.
Let no one deceive another
or despise anyone anywhere,
or through anger or irritation
wish for another to suffer.
As a mother would risk her life
to protect her child, her only child,
even so should one cultivate a limitless heart
with regard to all beings.
With good will for the entire cosmos,
cultivate a limitless heart:
Above, below, & all around,
unobstructed, without enmity or hate.
Whether standing, walking,
sitting, or lying down,
as long as one is alert,
one should be resolved on this mindfulness.
This is called a sublime abiding
here & now.
Not taken with views,
but virtuous & consummate in vision,
having subdued desire for sensual pleasures,
one never again
will lie in the womb.
Alan
There was an old woman in China who had supported a monk for over twenty years. She had built a little hut for him and fed him while he was meditating. Finally she wondered just what progress he had made in all this time.
To find out, she obtained the help of a girl rich in desire. "Go and embrace him," she told her, "and then ask him suddenly: 'What now?'"
The girl called upon the monk and without much ado caressed him, asking him what he was going to do about it.
"An old tree grows on a cold rock in winter," replied the monk somewhat poetically. "Nowhere is there any warmth."
The girl returned and related what he had said.
"To think I fed that fellow for twenty years!" exclaimed the old woman in anger. "He showed no consideration for your need, no disposition to explain your condition. He need not have responded to passion, but at least he could have shown some compassion."
She at once went to the hut of the monk and burned it down.
Alan
A surgeon may perform a limb amputation out of compassion for his patient.In order to perform the operation efficiently, he needs equanimity.
If it is his loved one who needs the amputation, he may still have compassion but without equanimity he cannot do what has to be done.
"Cultivate, then, gentlemen, such a judicious measure of obtuseness as will enable you to meet the exigencies of practice with firmness and courage, without, at the same time, hardening "the human heart by which we live."
William Osler