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.
Have you learned not to take things personally? Do you think that is something to strive for? If people are rude to you do you take it with a smile? What does a Buddhist do when someone is hurtful to another?
0
Comments
"Ego" , the conventional "I" having social agency and responsibility, is just a function of body and mind. Hopefully this social self is well integrated and healthy. It is not a solid thing .. it is like a pattern, a standing wave in the stream of thoughts and feeling.. recreated moment to moment. No problem per se. Just walking down the street there is no ego.. only foot-fall, sounds, etc. ...then someone walks up and says "hi" and ego appears.. it is an interface
Then I realize its a projection from myself to others.
And that everything is actually quite impersonal.
Then I get over myself. And life goes on.
When someone is hurting someone else you tell them to stop it or you stop them. Ex: It may not be wise to do such and such because it may lead to such and such.
I still take a few things personally on a very subtle level but nothing like before. of course. i would completely suck to go back to how things were.
It is a great liberation from mental torture. i know you dont mean this literally but i usually don't smile otherwise it may hurt them.
Try to smile when your wife/husband is mad at you; very nice setup for "WHAT! YOU THINK THATS FUNNY??"
or also i fear people may thing i'm laughing at them, therefore closing their opportunity to open up and let go of whatever pushed them to be rude in the first place.
I usually, very calmly, just talk about the situation that is a problem.
Just remaining clam sometimes is enough for the person to calm down a bit.
And i stay open to the opportunity to approach the emotional issue that the person have that pushed him to feel anger/irritation/frustration/whatever.
I've seen Theravadin monks of 40 years take things personally then drop it..
maybe you are describing something else?
I should precise: some bigger conditioned reactions still arise on rare occasion as well but no action taken. i believe he either pretended to be mad as a way to teach, or he's been lying to himself and not get the work done. it doesn't appear so.
Ajahn Brahm talked about this in one of his video.
If the enlighten guy gets angry/annoyed/frustrated etc...
and he's not pretending to be, he's just not enlighten.
Imagine the "Enlightenend" father witnessing his young child getting crushed under a car at an intersection.... and remaining serene... free of disturbance. How sick... sick.
It's called dissociation.
lets leave this one.
You are using such a terrible image that people cannot even imagine any other way to react.
cannot imagine relating to someone who wouldn't react the same way.
Joe have a fear of dogs.
Every time he's in the presence of a dog, he feels this fear in his belly.
Joe gets some hypnosis sessions and lose his fear of dogs.
Joe now have 3 dogs and enjoy them very much.
Joe can now walk in the park without fear, he can walk in the park with a great joy.
When Joe lost his conditioned mechanical emotional reaction, he didn't lose any part of himself, he only lost something that was preventing him from enjoying his life, getting joy in life, sharing joy in life, giving love to the dogs etc...
a mechanical conditioned reaction which has nothing to do with a person, it is only a thing.
We will have to die. When i die, no matter how horrible the death was, I would really like if my loved one would laugh. Cries with tears of joy. I truly wish they will remember the funny jokes i said, celebrate my life.
When we lose our attachments to people and things (which is a deluded view of the world since we never "had" them), we are free to love them fully, since the attachment contain fear and greed, is like the fear of the dog, it prevent us from loving fully.
I see nothing sick in this.
Looseing the grip of ego is probably beneficial - really only you can answer that as only you know its effects.
People are rude all the time... its a subjective standard so its tough holding another person to the same standard - a smile is disarming - usually best to say nothing and leave them to it - other times a comment and move on...
This is tough... intervention is a tough one... I tend to take the role of a mediator - not sure if that's because people see me as that type of person or because I choose it - I dont tend to step into affairs that dont concern me... sometimes I watch to see where its going... I've saved a few random people from issues but nowadays, that is very risky and can escalate rapidly out of control - really tough...
We can differ, Pat. Lets differ
..... BTW.. I don't doubt that your view is consistant with a certain style or school of practice... I can't knock it.... just say lets differ.
Yes. Your actions or inaction will dictate future actions, conditions and consequences. To make the decision to strive for that which is good will often result (not always) in a good outcome. Nothing says you have to be one way or the other, again you are free to choose but know your actions or inaction will result in consequences and those consequences will be yours.
Yes and no. Sometimes I can get downright mad at someone. So I am mad-I can either reinforce this or abandon it. More often time than not I abandon the causes and conditions of my anger.
What does a Buddhist do when someone is hurtful to another?
So a situation is thus, what is one's proper relation to it? For me mindfulness and compassion are the lines I would like to proceed on. How can I help the situation? Can I help the situation? If someone were physically hurting another I would probably physically intervene, it would be situation dependent. Again there is freedom to choose, to be or not to be, our actions and inactions carry consequences, what outcomes do we want?
All te best,
Todd
Well i don't want to go with your personal situation.
But where do we draw the line?
Let say my wife was very attached to me.
How long should she suffer after my death?
At one point she should let it go and remember the good of our life together right?
hopefully with a smile on her face?
How long before she let go of the attachment?
1 year? 10 year? how long is enough suffering?
I certainly don't want my wife to suffer because of me when im dead.
what about you?
But you don't mind suffering for someone else. Would that someone else also dont want you to suffer because of them?
The way i see is we don't let go of the people, we let go of our deluded ideas about them.
what you think?
@genkaku that was addressed to me?
anger and frustration!
ps: oh and btw, don't get me wrong, if anything terribly bad would be to happen to my loved ones, i would be suffering my fair share. But not taking things personally would help quite a bit.
Here is a story about the basic thrust of "attachment" as I mean the word.. I've told this before here..
Ajahn Viradhammo is a wonderful teacher currently here in Ontario at the Tisarana Monastery near(er) Ottawa. I haven't seen much of him for while but he was the guiding light of the TBC (Theravadin Buddhist Community) , our Lay forest sangha here in Toronto since the eighties. Viradhammo spent years nursing his elderly mother , he would worry about her all the time. He even left his position as Abbott of a monastery in New Zealand to come here and live with her...even though it meant being hobbled as he kept the vinaya in a situation with no support. He told a story of once giving a talk and having a lay person stand up and say to him "You are attached to your mother". His response was "Of course I am attached to my mother ... She is my mother!!!!". When he told us this he was shaking his head. This is not an unwise man.
here is a Zen story...
A master was officiating at his oldest disciple's funeral. When it came time to give a eulogy, he broke down and cried. He was unable to continue and was escorted from the room.
A young disciple was disturbed by this. Later, he confronted the master and said, "There is no self, no birth and no death. Why did you cry?"
The master said, "He was my oldest and dearest disciple. If I don't cry now, when am I supposed to?"
so that is where I am coming from... maybe we do not differ.. maybe we do.. no matter, but when the chips are down I have no doubt we would both respond with compassion where needed.
*In my next incarnation, I promise to remember names and dates and places better. In the meantime, I will acknowledge this woman as one of my cherished mentors.
This is a Zen perspective... there are other streams of Buddhism with a different measure of Enlightenment. It used to feel around here like the Theravadin Buddhist perspective was given primacy and other views were forced to defend their legitimacy..
It's not like that now ..but given that this is an open forum with people from different traditions... or no tradition, I feel it is a good idea to acknowledge that the Zen Buddhist ideas around Enlightenment are just one perspective... and hey.. within Zen Buddhism there are differences around this as well.