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.
What is it OK to want??
This thread is intended as a technical discussion of what, under the general buddhist philosphy, is considered an acceptable desire/need/want.
A few of us have attempted to discuss this on other threads and it has become a bit clouded by the examples being used. So let me set the ground rules for this discussion:
- ANY EXAMPLES USED ARE SIMPLY EXAMPLES!!! Please dont get caught up in your passion for a particular issue, but please do explain why/why-not doing/not-doing may further us on the path to freedom from suffering, or at least not hold us back from this goal.
- I know there are rules for monks that are different to those of lay people, and I'm not interested in those monastic order rules. We're talking lay people here.
So back to the question: is there a line we shouldnt cross? Are we, ultimately, fooling ourselves when we try to justify actions to meet certain desires?
As an example :thumbsup: , is it OK to wear makeup? If I have low self esteem because of extreme acne and makeup allows me to concentrate better on my meditation is that OK? If I feel more beautiful and can be more compassionate to others as a result of wearing makeup in public, is that OK?
Or is all this just avoiding opening up to the pain/hurt of the underlying issue, avoiding giving up that attachment? In my mind it is easy to say yes in regard to the example of makeup. But what if it is a much deeper issue, lets say a desire for companionship. This sort of desire is really really deeply rooted in most of us. Is this something that we accept as simply part of being human and to acknowledge the feeling of loneliness when alone, and love the feeling of companionship when it is there? Where do we "draw the line"?
What do you think?
A few of us have attempted to discuss this on other threads and it has become a bit clouded by the examples being used. So let me set the ground rules for this discussion:
- ANY EXAMPLES USED ARE SIMPLY EXAMPLES!!! Please dont get caught up in your passion for a particular issue, but please do explain why/why-not doing/not-doing may further us on the path to freedom from suffering, or at least not hold us back from this goal.
- I know there are rules for monks that are different to those of lay people, and I'm not interested in those monastic order rules. We're talking lay people here.
So back to the question: is there a line we shouldnt cross? Are we, ultimately, fooling ourselves when we try to justify actions to meet certain desires?
As an example :thumbsup: , is it OK to wear makeup? If I have low self esteem because of extreme acne and makeup allows me to concentrate better on my meditation is that OK? If I feel more beautiful and can be more compassionate to others as a result of wearing makeup in public, is that OK?
Or is all this just avoiding opening up to the pain/hurt of the underlying issue, avoiding giving up that attachment? In my mind it is easy to say yes in regard to the example of makeup. But what if it is a much deeper issue, lets say a desire for companionship. This sort of desire is really really deeply rooted in most of us. Is this something that we accept as simply part of being human and to acknowledge the feeling of loneliness when alone, and love the feeling of companionship when it is there? Where do we "draw the line"?
What do you think?
0
Comments
as long as you keep a steady practice of meditation.
but beware! oh beware! meditation will deconstruct everything.
when a desire arises, i give it space.
what is the desire selling? conditional happiness. the assertion that all is not perfect right now.
examine that. is it true?
a desire is just a thought. but we use desires to create space. in such space we discover ourselves.
this answers your question indirectly, but you have to do the real work on the cushion.
Do whatever you want as long as it does not cause harm to you or to others.
Pretty much answers most of these questions then.
@taiyaki, I gather you are saying that each of us needs to come to the answer to my question by themselves, to experience the answer themselves, possibly using meditation?
If Buddha was a woman, would she date, wear make-up, etc etc?
Please don't attack me for this.
I find myself unattractive. I have always found myself to be this way. Though, I don't let it bother me and I have never let it bother me. I just don't understand why people want to try to make themselves look what the media portrays as attractive. To me, it doesn't matter at all. I will one day die and what I looked like will not matter at all. Even though I am a jerk, I see actions being vastly more important than looks.
Why is what you look like important to you? Is it because you want a partner? If so, that is understandable. Lucky for me, I found one that doesn't care what I look like. I wish for you that you find someone like this as well, if that is your goal to find someone.
You may want to ask yourself why you act happier when you look "better," though. Maybe I just don't understand people and am completely socially retarded, but I have never understood this.
using your example of acne and makeup, from my understand... if wearing makeup allows you to better focus on your practice, then yes wearing makeup would be skillful. what would be unskillful would be to then ignore what is making you feel insecure to begin with... essentially turning off the alarm and leaving the fire burning.
skillfulness really needs to be applied on an individual basis imo
I'm not saying what you said is wrong, but rather than covering our insecurities up with make-up (literally and figuratively speaking), shouldn't we try to get rid of them at its core? Rather than trying to make ourselves look all nice with make-up and stuff to boost our confidence, shouldn't we wonder why we need all this make-up to begin with? Shouldn't we fine the cause of this insecurity and then learn to accept ourselves as we are?
I just see this issue, and many other things, as temporary bandages. They won't help the problem at its root cause.
Just a thought. This is my thought process. Surely its not everyones.
But most practioners take an advil when they have a headache. And thats ok. Same with make-up.
I know it doesn't deal with the underlying issues however if we are to have compassion for ourselves as well as others then take care of it compassionately. Is your goal to look professional, to not draw unnecessary attention away from your work or social situation, do you just like it and don't feel like it is essential? So many ways to see it.
We can't expect all lay Buddhists to uphold the vinaya in its entirety and live like monks or nuns. The Buddha never did. That's why he only suggested the 5 precepts for lay followers (or 8 precepts on special occasions). The question, especially for lay Buddhists, is how skillful our actions are in given circumstances. "What would Buddha do?" or "what would a monastic do?" are such high expectations for lay Buddhists - and although such questions may seem pretty noble, they are an unrealistic bar for lay Buddhists hold themselves to. It's in AN 6.131 - 151. It lists 21 lay followers that were arahants. Compared to the number of arahant monks and nuns, that is a very, very small number. However, it is still possible. I can't find a transcript of it online anywhere, but there's a list of them in section 15.2 of this pdf.
Something my teacher used use to explain this to me is thinking of our mindful practice as growing a tree. When the roots are new and tender, we are correct to keep them safe. We do what we can to let it grow hearty and tall. When the roots are thick and dig deep, then we can approach our attachments more skillfully and without pain.
Perhaps one day makeup will be unnecessary for you, but not today. And that is more than just ok, it is wonderful.
Instead of trying to shed our attachments, we grow our roots. We meditate, study dharma, let go of the mind's criticisms and habits. Then, as our roots grow strong, attachments generally fall away. The ones that are strong habits we have to invest more into, but it is more like "ok, now i see it is good time to do this" rather than "arg, I need to stop doing this."
The line not to cross (if there is one) is expressed in the precepts... working to overcome patterns of stealing, lying, sexual misconduct, drunkedness, and killing. These actions specifically inhibit the growth of the roots, and so need to be abandoned if one is serious about the practice. The rest will come in time, when you're ready.
I just have an issue with the whole insecurity bit, though. If you have a bad day simply because you don't feel pretty, there is an issue which needs to be tended do without using temporary coping mechanisms. Like I said, though, just my opinion.
People need to make their own minds up, about what is personally acceptable for them, if they're not members of the ordained community.
I think questions like this rouse so many different answers, that there is no definitive single answer; thus, each must find his or her own way.
See the link provided by Jason in this thread:
Everything else is just side-salad.
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/12924/is-buddhism-compatible-with-common-life-goals-e.g.-marriage-a-house-a-family#Item_2
The transience of life, its fragility, is the thing that makes it beautiful, like a rare orchid. Don't despise it, but accept that it is impermanent. It will pass; life will change, so it is crazy to try to cling on to it. Just as, if we pick the orchid, hoping to keep it, it will die even quicker.
Some people need and want a monastic life; for most it is not possible (we have to remember 2/3rds of the world live hand-to-mouth and cannot choose careers, even for a noble cause). Not everyone can be a monk, including even some lamas in my tradition, who marry. But we shouldn't use that as an excuse not to practice - our practice should *be* our life, whatever that life is.
As for what we shouldn't do, the five precepts are our guide, but fundamentally, we should avoid anything that harms other people, or causes us to harm other people. So getting drunk, becoming addicted to drugs, lying and slandering other people, manipulating them for our own ends etc. All of these things are 'unskillful' and to be avoided.
Remember that there is no difference between 'you' and 'me': we are all one. What hurts one, hurts all of us. So we must be kind to one another and to ourselves, and show wise compassion to all. At least, that is our goal (I'll let you know when I get there! For now, I've lost my halo).
To answer the question "What is it OK to want?", the answer is you can want anything, provided it isn't harmful and provided you understand that it is impermanent. But the best things to want are those things that help yourself and your fellow beings achieve liberation from suffering.
You might ask then what should an enlightened one do when he is hungry or thirsty? Simple, ask for food from others or obtain food himself. The difference is that the act of seeking food should arise from pure understanding of the need to survive, not driven by the pain of hunger or expected pleasure of food. If someone rejected your request for food, you dun feel bad but just calmly continue your search elsewhere.
So can a devoted Buddhist wear makeup? In my opinion yes he/she can, it is the reason for wearing makeup that counts. If makeup helps in whatever noble act you are doing, not driven by pain or pleasure, go ahead. But if makeup is only for your self-esteem, sorry no.
"If it's to the advantage of your reasonable self, seize hold of it. If it's merely to the advantage of your animal self, admit it and don't try to pretend it's more than that. Only be sure of your judgement." Meditation, Marcus Aurelias.
P.S. Sorry if sometimes I mix non-Buddhist stuffs together, I just think it is the end result that counts, not the means.
@federica, I knew I was taking a risk but the question is such an important one to me at this time, and really this would have to be the nicest forums community I've ever encountered!
Thanks everyone for your contributions, they are really insightful! I have lots of fuel for my upcoming meditation sessions.
There is the desire for one's personal liberation.
and
There is the desire for the liberation of others.
exactly
Of course. Dependent origination, Emptiness, self/Not-self interconnectedness - all the same thing.
Back to the make-up question, and similar questions on other threads (the example AHeerdt gives of having to dress up and wear make-up for work), it all depends on your relationship to the use of these things. If make-up and a certain type of clothing are a required part of the work "uniform", and you're not attached to fashion, it's in keeping with Buddhist principles. But I think that society being what it is, if someone has a deformity, or even "mere" acne, it's ok to do what you need to do to minimize the visibility of that. Because people can be remarkably thoughtless, even cruel. If it helps your day go smoothly, and keeps the awkward or thoughtless remarks at bay, do what you have to do.
The thing is, most of the Buddha's teachings that have come down to us are to monks. We can't use that as a standard for householders. He clearly had a different standard for householders, in the few texts that record those teachings. To apply his standards for monks to householders would be overly restrictive, and does come across as Puritanical.
Buddhist mythology describes the Buddha as s being beautiful to look at, due to the ripening of much positive past karma. He (if he'd been a she) wouldn't have needed make-up. "She" would have been a nun. That doesn't mean we all have to be celibate and reject personal adornment.
We may be unattached to the need to wear makeup to work and only do so to reduce awkwardness and allow work to go smoothly - but is this really an attachment to the need to reduce conflict at work?
Similarly was Gopi Krishna avoiding confronting his kundalini rising by avoiding sex? And when he'd developed the habit of not having sex it merely presented an outward appearance of freedom from attachment?
Being well presented at work (perhaps with makeup) may be skillful by demonstrating compassion to others by reducing conflict. Similarly I'd say having sex in a relationship may be skillful because it may increase the bond between the couple who are not yet enlightened. But is taking those actions avoiding acknowledging the hidden attachments we may have?
To turn those two examples around (do or not-do, they are the same arent they?):
If I have an attachment to makeup and I allow myself to indulge in it and through that action I find compassion for my workmates and freedom from attachment for everything else, and the fact that I am wearing makeup is almost forgotten, have I achieved enlightenment?
If I am uninhibited in my sex life with my partner (perhaps even as a meditative act), and discover unattachment to all other thingss, have I discovered enlightenment?
The intent of my question is the same as this: if Buddha were given a choice between a nutritious pile of dung or a nutritious vege burger, why wouldnt he chose the burger? Most of what I'm hearing, and the examples given of the enlightened ones seems to have them eating the dung.
Your question is basically; are we justifying our attachments by saying we're just doing this or that for acceptable reasons. In that case, we have to be truthful with ourselves. In the case of someone who uses make-up to hide acne, or who wears a wig after losing her hair in cancer treatment (another example), I say do what you have to do to get through each day without people pointing at you and making thoughtless remarks. I suppose an enlightened being wouldn't care about the public reaction to deformities or whatever. When we get to enlightenment, we can let go of these little disguises.
That last question packs a punch! Actually, in some of the highest rituals in Tibetan Buddhism, they do eat dung to prove that they've risen above "mundane" reality and have attained an elightened state in which cake, veggie burger or dung are all the same. (The Dalai Lama has discussed this, in case anyone doesn't believe me, and it's in tantric texts.) However, I'm pretty sure the Buddha wouldn't do that. He didn't do well after eating some spoiled meat. In fact,he died from it.
Oh, and about Gopi Krishna. He had to avoid sex, because of the nature of the Kundalini energy roaring through his body. Sex makes it worse. For those who haven't done adequate preparation, anyway (I forget we have members who are very advanced and have a very different experience of Kundalini than the average person.) He also had to switch to a vegetarian diet--his body became too sensitive to handle meat. I don't recall all the details, but it's a fascinating story. I believe the title of the book is "Living With Kundalini". It should be available very inexpensively on Amazon. There's also a collection of his lectures sponsored by the United Nations that are fascinating. In case you're interested.
I am still baffled about the makeup arguments. Maybe because as a man it's just not important to me.
Regarding personal appearance:
From my personal experiences in life, attractiveness in a person is less about looks and more about personality, what's inside. I have dated what could be considered "pretty" women, and I have dated what could be considered "homely" women. A lot of stock is placed in looks, and being shallow so to speak. Look at the heat Julia Roberts took when she married Lyle Lovett. Ridiculous.
The one pretty woman I am thinking of was very attractive to look at, however once I got to know her after a couple of years of being together her looks disappeared for me. Her personality became undesirable, and looks to me were not a factor in making me stay. An arm-charm was not what I needed.
One of the women I dated I was not initially attracted to physically, however once I was around her more I was highly attracted to her, sexually and emotionally. We had great chemistry. We parted because of exigent circumstances, sadly.
So, if you are unattractive physically AND a jerk, you will come across as ugly. If you are unattractive and positive/happy people can usually see beyond just your looks if they take the time to talk with you. Ugly inside = ugly outside.
Not that the media has idea what beauty is, just that proper hygeine and healthy diet are signs of a balanced lifestyle.
I was talking about natural appearance, maybe I should have been clearer on that. Yet even moreso I was talking about how one's inner self can make one's exterior seem more or less attractive by virtue of their personality.
Personal grooming is yet a whole other ball of wax. It can actually be pretty complex, especially if you have ever seen one of those makeover shows.
I certainly agree that my situation is a world of difference lol
Tantra 101.
Suffering is caused by attachment and freedom from suffering comes from giving up attachment. If you are drinking tea instead of just water, why? Is it an attachment? Does it matter if you "indulge" this attachment or "preference" while you walk the path to enlightenment?
@taiyaki, so if I desire beer are you saying I redirect this desire towards the practice of ending my desire for beer? Surely thats simply a positive reinforcement of my desire for beer? Dont get me wrong, I like the idea of tantra, I just dont fully understand how it works, and perhaps its key to answering my dilemmas!
What is needed is clarity on what is rewarding, kushala, versus what is not rewarding, tanha.
Oh, the answer to your question is "D", all of the above, and none of the above. It all depends on what mood I am in at any given moment. I am not attached to the idea of attachment right now.
:rolleyes:
Is there a big Buddhist executive committee someplace that I don't know about? I thought **I** was the one who got to decide what was right, or "acceptable" for me.
Have I missed some major point about Buddhism all this time? This entire discussion seems like a big waste of bandwidth, a lot of mental construct (to absolutely no point whatsoever), and a LOT of attachment to egos if you ask me.
Just my $.02...