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.
Friend, enemy, stranger are all points of self-reference. For example, your friend could be someone else's enemy, or your enemy could be someone else's friend. A stranger is only a stranger because YOU don't know them. So the term's friend, enemy, and stranger are all points of self-reference.
It's kinda linked to attachment and aversion; the more we experience attachment and aversion, the more we will suffer.
I can't remember all the stuff I was taught on this, but I think those are the general principles, really condensed and regurgitated back at the level I understood it.
@vinlyn I don't understand how you can compare compassion to contributing to a guilty person being released into the public without rehabilitation(if it is possible, often it is not). Compassion has nothing to do with letting wrong doers get away with their actions without being held responsible to society. Not only do you do society no favors you do the offender no favors, either.
And I promise you I have spent time in prisons. Not just any prison, I used to work for the MN Sex Offender Treatment program. I've spent plenty of time amongst violent criminals. We no longer live anywhere near a prison, since we live in the sticks and I no longer work with them. Would I bring someone potentially dangerous to live with my children? Of course not. But on the reality side you can't just invite criminals to live in your home, there are licensing procedures and such that have to be followed. At the point in my life I can return to work, would I consider working in such an environment? Yes, I would. It's why I chose the degree I did in college. But, it's unlikely because of where we live. Most likely I'll end up working for the department of natural resources or something along those lines.
Even though it appears incomprehensible to most of us, every person. Every single person, rides a fine line between completely normal and completely not normal. Every person on the planet is capable of performing horrible, horrible acts. Most of us are lucky enough that circumstances do not present themselves that we carry out those acts. For others, that's not the case.
I'm glad that at least you are speaking from experience.
But to the first question above, think of why I am comparing compassion to contributing to helping a guilty person being released without rehabilitation:
In my view (which I know not everyone agrees with), compassion equals actually doing something for a person. So to me, if you have real compassion toward the Aurora mass murderer you will do something for him. What could one actually do for him? The only thing I can think of, at this point, is contributing to his defense fund.
And when it comes right down to it, what is society's reaction to felons who have served their time and been released? Shun them; don't hire them; if you unknowingly hired them, fire them; don't let them move into the area where you live (especially sex offenders, for example); etc. What is society's reaction to people with significant mental conditions? Pretty much the same...maybe with a little less vehemence. And yet, virtually all these "shunners", "firers", and and people who want to restrict them from the freedom to live where they want to belong to various religions that preach compassion.
Her's a little somethin I found from the Dalai Lama -
Compassion compels us 2 reach out to all living beings, including our so-called enemies, those who upset or hurt us. Irrespective of what they do to you, if you remember that all beings like you are only trying to be happy, you will find it much easier 2 develop compassion towards them.
Cheers
The question is how you define "reach out to". What do you think it means?
@vinlyn I don't understand how you can compare compassion to contributing to a guilty person being released into the public without rehabilitation(if it is possible, often it is not). Compassion has nothing to do with letting wrong doers get away with their actions without being held responsible to society. Not only do you do society no favors you do the offender no favors, either.
And I promise you I have spent time in prisons. Not just any prison, I used to work for the MN Sex Offender Treatment program. I've spent plenty of time amongst violent criminals. We no longer live anywhere near a prison, since we live in the sticks and I no longer work with them. Would I bring someone potentially dangerous to live with my children? Of course not. But on the reality side you can't just invite criminals to live in your home, there are licensing procedures and such that have to be followed. At the point in my life I can return to work, would I consider working in such an environment? Yes, I would. It's why I chose the degree I did in college. But, it's unlikely because of where we live. Most likely I'll end up working for the department of natural resources or something along those lines.
Even though it appears incomprehensible to most of us, every person. Every single person, rides a fine line between completely normal and completely not normal. Every person on the planet is capable of performing horrible, horrible acts. Most of us are lucky enough that circumstances do not present themselves that we carry out those acts. For others, that's not the case.
I'm glad that at least you are speaking from experience.
But to the first question above, think of why I am comparing compassion to contributing to helping a guilty person being released without rehabilitation:
In my view (which I know not everyone agrees with), compassion equals actually doing something for a person. So to me, if you have real compassion toward the Aurora mass murderer you will do something for him. What could one actually do for him? The only thing I can think of, at this point, is contributing to his defense fund.
And when it comes right down to it, what is society's reaction to felons who have served their time and been released? Shun them; don't hire them; if you unknowingly hired them, fire them; don't let them move into the area where you live (especially sex offenders, for example); etc. What is society's reaction to people with significant mental conditions? Pretty much the same...maybe with a little less vehemence. And yet, virtually all these "shunners", "firers", and and people who want to restrict them from the freedom to live where they want to belong to various religions that preach compassion.
But allowing a sex offender (a pedophile for example) into your neighborhood wouldn't be compassionate towards the children who live there. That would be endangering them.
I didn't read all the response but I'll give you my response.
See their suffering.
How do we see that? Well we examine our suffering.
That becomes the ground for empathy. But it requires you to open up to yourself and to others. Then enemy becomes suffering being. Then friend becomes suffering being. They may still be a friend or enemy but still see their suffering. This will move the heart into a loving space if you allow it.
Now this needs to be balances with wisdom. The wisdom of emptiness. Even the suffering is empty, ungraspable, coreless, like a dream.
This will keep one with equanimity. This will help balance the openness of love with cool wisdom.
And ironically emptiness leads to openness of the heart. And the openness of the heart leads to emptiness. There is just this subtle balance if one doesn't push or pull.
But allowing a sex offender (a pedophile for example) into your neighborhood wouldn't be compassionate towards the children who live there. That would be endangering them.
There are several situations here. Is the person a one-time offender who has been rehabilitated. Or someone who had made multiple transgressions?
There are hundreds of such offenders who live in swamps down in Florida because there is literally now no place where they can legally live. What do we as compassionate Buddhists do for them?
It is moment by moment activity of clarity, which arises out of deep wisdom.
Thus compassion is boundless and ungraspable. There is no person doing the action, nor is there truly any action recorded. Everything in its essence is compassion because everything is constantly letting go.
Actualizing this is actualizing the activities of the bodhisattva.
Sure we can help on a gross level the best we can when conditions are right. But all help and love and compassion action arises spontaneously from the open, naked heart.
Anything else falls short and only stays in the realm of morals/ethics/philosophy.
Maybe if they hate swamps so much they shouldn't have fiddled with kids in the first place.
I think the most compassionate thing in this case is letting them deal with the full consequences of their actions.
Well, no one is suggesting that someone should be able to "fiddle" with kids.
My question is -- when someone has broken the law and goes to prison, after they have served their sentence, should they have the right to rejoin society?
It's not an easy question.
What is the compassionate thing to do? See...that's not easy, either.
Perhaps child molesters shouldn't be put in prisons, but rather in mental institutions.
One of the consequences of their actions is trying to join society, and more often than not, being rejected. They may have served the sentence, but the consequences continue after that.
That's how our society works, and it works to the benefit of most people - the continuing protection of children for example. And that's just a further consequence of their action, it doesn't end after they've come out of jail, rehabilitated or otherwise.
It's not crime and punishment, it's action and consequence.
Or, how I see it, which is that the consequences to an action are just an extension of the original action. That part of getting drunk is having a hangover, part of messing with kids is jail and rejection from society, part of doing something wrong is guilt.
One of the consequences of their actions is trying to join society, and more often than not, being rejected. They may have served the sentence, but the consequences continue after that.
That's how our society works, and it works to the benefit of most people - the continuing protection of children for example. And that's just a further consequence of their action, it doesn't end after they've come out of jail, rehabilitated or otherwise.
It's not crime and punishment, it's action and consequence.
Or, how I see it, which is that the consequences to an action are just an extension of the original action. That part of getting drunk is having a hangover, part of messing with kids is jail and rejection from society, part of doing something wrong is guilt.
The great thing about exercises that stretch and strengthen your mind to be more compassionate towards neutral people and "enemies" is that our loved ones (and we ourselves) reap the benefit, too; in situations where our loved ones vex us, we are more likely to remain (at least a little more) patient and compassionate, because our mind has been training for it under more difficult circumstances.
One of the consequences of their actions is trying to join society, and more often than not, being rejected. They may have served the sentence, but the consequences continue after that.
That's how our society works, and it works to the benefit of most people - the continuing protection of children for example. And that's just a further consequence of their action, it doesn't end after they've come out of jail, rehabilitated or otherwise.
It's not crime and punishment, it's action and consequence.
Or, how I see it, which is that the consequences to an action are just an extension of the original action. That part of getting drunk is having a hangover, part of messing with kids is jail and rejection from society, part of doing something wrong is guilt.
The great thing about exercises that stretch and strengthen your mind to be more compassionate towards neutral people and "enemies" is that our loved ones (and we ourselves) reap the benefit, too; in situations where our loved ones vex us, we are more likely to remain (at least a little more) patient and compassionate, because our mind has been training for it under more difficult circumstances.
the people i love the most are my girl friend and family/friends.
i use them as a base. my goal and path is to bring everyone else up to that level of love.
hence why imho it is better to be in the position of a lay person. because they can have a significant other and also children.
One of the consequences of their actions is trying to join society, and more often than not, being rejected. They may have served the sentence, but the consequences continue after that.
That's how our society works, and it works to the benefit of most people - the continuing protection of children for example. And that's just a further consequence of their action, it doesn't end after they've come out of jail, rehabilitated or otherwise.
It's not crime and punishment, it's action and consequence.
Or, how I see it, which is that the consequences to an action are just an extension of the original action. That part of getting drunk is having a hangover, part of messing with kids is jail and rejection from society, part of doing something wrong is guilt.
I think I know where the disconnect is in this conversation, @Vinlyn. You view compassion as somehow exonerating someone from the consequences of their actions, and I view it as letting them fully deal with the consequences of their actions. For example, I would allow an alcoholic family member hit bottom, and I would view allowing them to suffer in that way without trying to intervene as an act of compassion.
I think I know where the disconnect is in this conversation, @Vinlyn. You view compassion as somehow exonerating someone from the consequences of their actions, and I view it as letting them fully deal with the consequences of their actions. For example, I would allow an alcoholic family member hit bottom, and I would view allowing them to suffer in that way without trying to intervene as an act of compassion.
Okay. But you're wrong about what I think.
I think people should be put in prison when they commit crimes that permanently and significantly impact the lives of others. I think murderers should go to prison. I think child molesters should go to prison. And I think that if we as a society believe in the concept of rehabilitation, that at some point, if rehabilitated, those people should be released from prison and be given the ability to rejoin society. How is that exoneration? They served the time we assigned them. They earned their bad karma. They suffered from their bad karma.
You seem to be saying that you not only want them to earn and serve their bad karma, but that you want them to suffer for their entire lives.
@Vinlyn First off, I apologize for putting words in your mouth and assuming I understood your view.
They served the time we assigned them. They earned their bad karma. They suffered from their bad karma.
But we aren't the deciders of karma. A jail sentence isn't the be all and end all of karma, that's just a human dealing with a crime. It's part of the karma, but it isn't all of it. It's not that I think that they should suffer their entire lives, but that it seems the consequence of their action is suffering their entire lives. The karma doesn't just end when they walk out of jail, just one part of it ends.
Well, I think it's just sensible. We have a huge problem with recidivism and someone just finishing their prison sentence doesn't necessarily mean anything.
I don't think allowing a rehabilitated pedophile to work with children is a good idea. The risk is just too high.
Well, I think it's just sensible. We have a huge problem with recidivism and someone just finishing their prison sentence doesn't necessarily mean anything.
I don't think allowing a rehabilitated pedophile to work with children is a good idea. The risk is just too high.
I would agree with that completely. But it goes so far beyond that.
But I don't want to wrap this whole conversation around pedophiles. That was an example. What I am talking about here is America's sense of crime and punishment...and that punishment should be forever.
Well, I don't really view it in terms of punishment. We lock them up to keep us safe, and hopefully on their end they'll learn that the consequence to their action is really unpleasant so they won't do it again.
Should they be punished forever? I don't know. All I know is that's how it generally does work. If everything is a consequence of previous actions and a manifestation of karma then how things are working right now is exactly how things should be working, to the benefit of all of us, regardless of our perception of it.
Well, if your true nature is infinite and death isn't a possibility in reality, then killing the body wouldn't change anything. You're also robbing them of the opportunity to clear their karma in this lifetime which probably carries a serious karmic consequence for yourself. Plus, it never proved to be an effective deterrent.
You know, I just thought, if you don't believe in reincarnation then what I just said is totally stupid. It's all beliefs and perceptions. It's my beliefs and perceptions vs your beliefs and perceptions. I don't know if that means anything, I just find it interesting.
You know, I just thought, if you don't believe in reincarnation then what I just said is totally stupid. It's all beliefs and perceptions. It's my beliefs and perceptions vs your beliefs and perceptions. I don't know if that means anything, I just find it interesting.
Well, if punishment by man should be forever, then there's no real moral argument against the death penalty.
The government is formed by citizens giving off some of their sovereignty to representatives. Since no citizen of a sound mind would give away the power over his own life, the government - and state - cannot have that power Cesare Beccaria as far as I remember.. Just love that argument
Well, if punishment by man should be forever, then there's no real moral argument against the death penalty.
The government is formed by citizens giving off some of their sovereignty to representatives. Since no citizen of a sound mind would give away the power over his own life, the government - and state - cannot have that power Cesare Beccaria as far as I remember.. Just love that argument
You know, I just thought, if you don't believe in reincarnation then what I just said is totally stupid. It's all beliefs and perceptions. It's my beliefs and perceptions vs your beliefs and perceptions. I don't know if that means anything, I just find it interesting.
First, I absolutely loved the dharma debate I've just read. This place can be an oasis of sanity in an insane world.
And for my own answer, all I can say to "How do you love your enemies?" is keep practicing. What do you think Buddhism is all about? One day you'll realize that the enemies have all gone away without you noticing. There will still be bad people in the world, but instead of enemies you see people. Sometimes stupid, sometimes smart, sometimes petty and vindictive and insane. But they're people. Nobody can love an enemy. You can learn to feel compassion for people.
that is usually the case with most discussions. us verse them. one ideology over another ideology.
but to put it bluntly. cause and effect or karma is not an ideology.
though it can become one and for most people it only exists in the realm of ideology.
Yeah, I totally agree. Beliefs and perceptions... Everyone has different ones so we have discord and it divides, but the truth, that brings everyone together. Even if karma is the truth, I don't think we get to see that until enlightenment anyway, so all we have is the belief in it. It's interesting stuff
@cinorjer That's a really nice way of looking at it.
@vinlyn and @RebeccaS First, i don't think the US justice system works all that well. However, in MN if you commit certain levels of sex offenses, you can be committed to the sex offender program for a very long time PAST the point your prison sentence is done. When an offender meets a set of criteria (risk of re-offending, previous offenses, level of offense and some other things) after their prison time is done, they are remanded to the MN Sex Offender Treatment Program. It went into place many years ago, and just this past year the first person EVER was considered rehabbed enough to be able to rejoin society. A lot of places have problems with how we do this, but I support it. Just because someone has repaid a legal debt to society doesn't mean they are fit to rejoin society.
On compassion, I think you can do more for people who've committed horrible acts, than financially support them. You can write letters as was suggested earlier, for example. That might seem rather passive, but sometimes it's all someone can do, to share words, and sometimes they have a profound impact. I wouldn't go at it believing I'd make a profound impact on someone, of course. But I have written letters, going way back to when I was a teenager, to people in jail or prison. Obviously you have to be really careful about doing so, and I did it with my parents supervision.
I actually learned a lot about forgiveness and compassion for offenders from my sister. When she was 5, she was run over by a drunk driver. He did go to prison for 5 years, but my sister, 30 years later, still suffers physical problems because of her injuries. She has forgiven him and was able to develop compassion for him.
Sometimes, in developing compassion, it helps me to remember that person, that offender was once a little boy. In a previous lifetime he could have been my husband or my parent even. But at one point, he was just like my little boy, sleeping soundly in his bed, completely innocent. Obviously when I see my little boy, i can think nothing but good things about what his life will be. But you never know the turns life takes, and there is always the chance that one day, one of my children could grow up to do something horrible to someone else. I sure hope not, I hope that I am raising them to be respectful, contributing people. But, even though they are my children and I love them very much, they have their own path, their own karma. Every "horrible person" was once an innocent baby, a little kid who hugged his mommy and daddy. Somewhere, something went horribly wrong, and that is very sad for everyone.
On compassion, I think you can do more for people who've committed horrible acts, than financially support them. You can write letters as was suggested earlier, for example. That might seem rather passive, but sometimes it's all someone can do, to share words, and sometimes they have a profound impact. I wouldn't go at it believing I'd make a profound impact on someone, of course. But I have written letters, going way back to when I was a teenager, to people in jail or prison. Obviously you have to be really careful about doing so, and I did it with my parents supervision.
I actually learned a lot about forgiveness and compassion for offenders from my sister. When she was 5, she was run over by a drunk driver. He did go to prison for 5 years, but my sister, 30 years later, still suffers physical problems because of her injuries. She has forgiven him and was able to develop compassion for him.
...
Very interesting post.
I don't think letter writing is passive. I think it's very commendable, and meets my standard for compassion -- you actually did something.
How sad about your sister, and how commendable her attitude. I think the one thing that is different than what we've been talking about is your sister forgave and had compassion for someone who had hurt her. We've sort of been talking about having compassion for people who harm others (as in the movie shooting).
Well, if punishment by man should be forever, then there's no real moral argument against the death penalty.
The government is formed by citizens giving off some of their sovereignty to representatives. Since no citizen of a sound mind would give away the power over his own life, the government - and state - cannot have that power Cesare Beccaria as far as I remember.. Just love that argument
How did that work out?
Admitted, his argument on usefulness and proportionality had more impact in his time, but all in all he was part of a movement which eventually was very successful in Europe (where he lived). The death sentence is now illegal under the individual European states' legislation as well as internationally through the European Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as The European Convention on Human Rights Protocols 6 and 13.
Also, the value of an argument is not judged from it's impact, but from the reason it contains. That half the world recognizes capital punishment because oppressive leaders want to use it against their citizens and most of the other half recognizes it because the citizens want "justice", does not make Beccaria any less right or reasonable. It just proves that cruelty and stupidity are two deciding factors in human societies.
But you can't start out loving your enemies until "metta" becomes strong and powerful. First, strong and powerful to yourself, then strong and powerful to loved people, then strong and powerful to neutral people. Then you can begin to extend it to enemies. It's a successive practice with various stages of development. It's very difficult to jump to the last stage without first developing the previous ones. Jumping to the last stage, without developing the previous ones, may even cause more hate and anger towards enemies.
Then there are certain types of persons towards whom loving-kindness should not be developed in the first stages. The attempt, at the outset to regard a disliked person as dear to one is fatiguing, and likewise trying to regard a dearly loved friend with neutrality, and when an enemy is recalled anger springs up. Again it should not be directed towards members of the opposite sex, to begin with, for this may arouse lust. Right at the start, the meditation of loving-kindness should be developed towards oneself repeatedly in this way: "May I be happy and free from suffering" or "May I keep myself free from hostility and trouble and live happily" (though this will never produce the full absorption of contemplation). It is by cultivating the thought "May I be happy" with oneself as example, that one begins to be interested in the welfare and happiness of other living beings, and to feel in some sense their happiness as if it were one's own: "Just as I want happiness and fear pain, just as I want to live and not to die, so do other beings." So one should first become familiar with pervading oneself as example with loving-kindness.
Only then should one choose someone who is liked and admired and much respected. The meditation can then be developed towards him, remembering endearing words or virtues of his, and thinking such thoughts about him as "may he be happy." (In this way the full absorption of contemplation, in which the word-meditation is left behind, can be attained.)
When this has become familiar, one can begin to practice loving-kindness towards a dearly beloved companion, and then towards a neutral person as very dear, or towards an enemy as neutral. It is when dealing with an enemy that anger can arise, and all means must be tried in order to get rid of it.
As soon as this has succeeded, one will be able to regard an enemy without resentment and with loving-kindness in the same way as one does the admired person, the dearly loved friend, and the neutral person. Then with repeated practice, jhana absorption should be attained in all cases. Loving-kindness can now be effectively maintained in being towards all beings; or to certain groups of beings at a time, or in one direction at a time to all; or to certain groups in succession.
I can't remember the original references, but some bright bloke on Buddhist Geeks who sounded like he knew what he was talking about (I know I know) said the original meaning of metta was just a friendly attitude towards others.
I've had a google, but can't find anything too definitive; but that makes sense to me.
But as I learned from Ajaan Fuang’s encounter with the snake, metta is not necessarily an attitude of lovingkindness. It’s more an attitude of goodwill—wishing the other person well, but realizing that true happiness is something that ultimately each of us will have to find for him or herself, and sometimes most easily when we go our separate ways.
The warm heart - - - just heard a teacher online the other day on this. How all the wisdom training is moot unless it brings about (or is accompanied by) a warm heart. I believe it was Za Choeje Rinpoche.
"In particular, if you follow those who say that although one realizes emptiness one must cultivate compassion elsewhere, you are similar to someone who claims that although one has water one must seek wetness elsewhere, that although one has fire one must seek warmth elsewhere, or that although one is fanned by the wind one must seek coolness elsewhere. The decisive experience of certainty that samsara and nirvana are supreme emptiness is itself unsurpassable awakened mind - compassion as the display of samsara and nirvana in the equalness and purity."
Comments
Equanimity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upekkha
Friend, enemy, stranger are all points of self-reference. For example, your friend could be someone else's enemy, or your enemy could be someone else's friend. A stranger is only a stranger because YOU don't know them. So the term's friend, enemy, and stranger are all points of self-reference.
It's kinda linked to attachment and aversion; the more we experience attachment and aversion, the more we will suffer.
I can't remember all the stuff I was taught on this, but I think those are the general principles, really condensed and regurgitated back at the level I understood it.
But to the first question above, think of why I am comparing compassion to contributing to helping a guilty person being released without rehabilitation:
In my view (which I know not everyone agrees with), compassion equals actually doing something for a person. So to me, if you have real compassion toward the Aurora mass murderer you will do something for him. What could one actually do for him? The only thing I can think of, at this point, is contributing to his defense fund.
And when it comes right down to it, what is society's reaction to felons who have served their time and been released? Shun them; don't hire them; if you unknowingly hired them, fire them; don't let them move into the area where you live (especially sex offenders, for example); etc. What is society's reaction to people with significant mental conditions? Pretty much the same...maybe with a little less vehemence. And yet, virtually all these "shunners", "firers", and and people who want to restrict them from the freedom to live where they want to belong to various religions that preach compassion.
See their suffering.
How do we see that? Well we examine our suffering.
That becomes the ground for empathy. But it requires you to open up to yourself and to others. Then enemy becomes suffering being. Then friend becomes suffering being. They may still be a friend or enemy but still see their suffering. This will move the heart into a loving space if you allow it.
Now this needs to be balances with wisdom. The wisdom of emptiness. Even the suffering is empty, ungraspable, coreless, like a dream.
This will keep one with equanimity. This will help balance the openness of love with cool wisdom.
And ironically emptiness leads to openness of the heart. And the openness of the heart leads to emptiness. There is just this subtle balance if one doesn't push or pull.
Hope this helps.
There are hundreds of such offenders who live in swamps down in Florida because there is literally now no place where they can legally live. What do we as compassionate Buddhists do for them?
I think the most compassionate thing in this case is letting them deal with the full consequences of their actions.
There is no "what if" compassion.
Compassion isn't a theory or philosophy.
It is moment by moment activity of clarity, which arises out of deep wisdom.
Thus compassion is boundless and ungraspable. There is no person doing the action, nor is there truly any action recorded. Everything in its essence is compassion because everything is constantly letting go.
Actualizing this is actualizing the activities of the bodhisattva.
Sure we can help on a gross level the best we can when conditions are right. But all help and love and compassion action arises spontaneously from the open, naked heart.
Anything else falls short and only stays in the realm of morals/ethics/philosophy.
tldr: wisdom is compassion.
My question is -- when someone has broken the law and goes to prison, after they have served their sentence, should they have the right to rejoin society?
It's not an easy question.
What is the compassionate thing to do? See...that's not easy, either.
Perhaps child molesters shouldn't be put in prisons, but rather in mental institutions.
That's how our society works, and it works to the benefit of most people - the continuing protection of children for example. And that's just a further consequence of their action, it doesn't end after they've come out of jail, rehabilitated or otherwise.
It's not crime and punishment, it's action and consequence.
Or, how I see it, which is that the consequences to an action are just an extension of the original action. That part of getting drunk is having a hangover, part of messing with kids is jail and rejection from society, part of doing something wrong is guilt.
i use them as a base. my goal and path is to bring everyone else up to that level of love.
hence why imho it is better to be in the position of a lay person. because they can have a significant other and also children.
perfect for a vajrayana practitioner.
I think people should be put in prison when they commit crimes that permanently and significantly impact the lives of others. I think murderers should go to prison. I think child molesters should go to prison. And I think that if we as a society believe in the concept of rehabilitation, that at some point, if rehabilitated, those people should be released from prison and be given the ability to rejoin society. How is that exoneration? They served the time we assigned them. They earned their bad karma. They suffered from their bad karma.
You seem to be saying that you not only want them to earn and serve their bad karma, but that you want them to suffer for their entire lives.
I don't think allowing a rehabilitated pedophile to work with children is a good idea. The risk is just too high.
But I don't want to wrap this whole conversation around pedophiles. That was an example. What I am talking about here is America's sense of crime and punishment...and that punishment should be forever.
Should they be punished forever? I don't know. All I know is that's how it generally does work. If everything is a consequence of previous actions and a manifestation of karma then how things are working right now is exactly how things should be working, to the benefit of all of us, regardless of our perception of it.
that is usually the case with most discussions. us verse them. one ideology over another ideology.
but to put it bluntly. cause and effect or karma is not an ideology.
though it can become one and for most people it only exists in the realm of ideology.
this dimension that we can experience is governed by causality.
Cesare Beccaria as far as I remember.. Just love that argument
And for my own answer, all I can say to "How do you love your enemies?" is keep practicing. What do you think Buddhism is all about? One day you'll realize that the enemies have all gone away without you noticing. There will still be bad people in the world, but instead of enemies you see people. Sometimes stupid, sometimes smart, sometimes petty and vindictive and insane. But they're people. Nobody can love an enemy. You can learn to feel compassion for people.
@cinorjer That's a really nice way of looking at it.
First, i don't think the US justice system works all that well. However, in MN if you commit certain levels of sex offenses, you can be committed to the sex offender program for a very long time PAST the point your prison sentence is done. When an offender meets a set of criteria (risk of re-offending, previous offenses, level of offense and some other things) after their prison time is done, they are remanded to the MN Sex Offender Treatment Program. It went into place many years ago, and just this past year the first person EVER was considered rehabbed enough to be able to rejoin society. A lot of places have problems with how we do this, but I support it. Just because someone has repaid a legal debt to society doesn't mean they are fit to rejoin society.
On compassion, I think you can do more for people who've committed horrible acts, than financially support them. You can write letters as was suggested earlier, for example. That might seem rather passive, but sometimes it's all someone can do, to share words, and sometimes they have a profound impact. I wouldn't go at it believing I'd make a profound impact on someone, of course. But I have written letters, going way back to when I was a teenager, to people in jail or prison. Obviously you have to be really careful about doing so, and I did it with my parents supervision.
I actually learned a lot about forgiveness and compassion for offenders from my sister. When she was 5, she was run over by a drunk driver. He did go to prison for 5 years, but my sister, 30 years later, still suffers physical problems because of her injuries. She has forgiven him and was able to develop compassion for him.
Sometimes, in developing compassion, it helps me to remember that person, that offender was once a little boy. In a previous lifetime he could have been my husband or my parent even. But at one point, he was just like my little boy, sleeping soundly in his bed, completely innocent. Obviously when I see my little boy, i can think nothing but good things about what his life will be. But you never know the turns life takes, and there is always the chance that one day, one of my children could grow up to do something horrible to someone else. I sure hope not, I hope that I am raising them to be respectful, contributing people. But, even though they are my children and I love them very much, they have their own path, their own karma. Every "horrible person" was once an innocent baby, a little kid who hugged his mommy and daddy. Somewhere, something went horribly wrong, and that is very sad for everyone.
I don't think letter writing is passive. I think it's very commendable, and meets my standard for compassion -- you actually did something.
How sad about your sister, and how commendable her attitude. I think the one thing that is different than what we've been talking about is your sister forgave and had compassion for someone who had hurt her. We've sort of been talking about having compassion for people who harm others (as in the movie shooting).
Check out the agulimala sutta 86 (he was a killer)
I fully accepted Buddhism after reading this story.
Um amitayus sutras,definitely the Brahma net sutra,parts of yhe nirvana sutra(these are Mahayana and might not be your poison)
The death sentence is now illegal under the individual European states' legislation as well as internationally through the European Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as The European Convention on Human Rights Protocols 6 and 13.
Also, the value of an argument is not judged from it's impact, but from the reason it contains. That half the world recognizes capital punishment because oppressive leaders want to use it against their citizens and most of the other half recognizes it because the citizens want "justice", does not make Beccaria any less right or reasonable. It just proves that cruelty and stupidity are two deciding factors in human societies.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/nanamoli/wheel007.html
But you can't start out loving your enemies until "metta" becomes strong and powerful. First, strong and powerful to yourself, then strong and powerful to loved people, then strong and powerful to neutral people. Then you can begin to extend it to enemies. It's a successive practice with various stages of development. It's very difficult to jump to the last stage without first developing the previous ones. Jumping to the last stage, without developing the previous ones, may even cause more hate and anger towards enemies.
@seeker242
That was awesome, really insightful. Thank you
I've had a google, but can't find anything too definitive; but that makes sense to me.
http://shambhalasun.com/sunspace/?p=22219
- Dudjom Lingpa