Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register
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.

Skepticism, psychoanalysis, Theravada, Zen ... help? :)

onko27onko27 New
in Buddhism Basics

If by conduct, it is meant or ID impulses (sexual, survival), and the Buddha said by this very conduct we get rid of conduct ... well, how is this even possible? If you would not have ID impulses, you would not opperate, wouldn't you? And similar example - even if you do things for the others, still the background of this "wannabe" motivation as "to not be too egoistical" still remains "To be liked (or to not be disliked)".

Also, for example, you have a job. You do wonderfull things for others (as of being a doctor). But then again, your main motivation behind it is still money - "survival" instict. If someone takes away your payment, you won't work anymore, and will find another job. Of course, you might still continue, and this IS closer to altruism, but this won't happen in 99.9999% cases (so basicly, unless you're a Buddha) cases, because background motivation will win and you will have to find another job. Well, if the "conduct" could destroy itself, you should basicly be able to continue with the work, but the problem is this main motivation (conduct) persist ... and wins ...

This kind of logic can be further applied even to monks, though I admit it's harder to make an example, haha. :) (or maybe it is I would feel a bit guilty making one..)

So, it is this conduct "logic" that bothers me ...

About the repressed anger. Now the psychoanalysis says, you must "feel" the anger, while Buddhism says you must avoid the anger. But I think I might understand this one. You are not able to actualy "feel" the deeper anger and comperhand it emotionaly because of all the defensive stories and the anger that steams out of these stories (so not the actual anger you (I) feel from the childhood - at father, for example (Oidpus complex, etc.)) - I know this is the issue with me, but this is being said at 100% intelectual and 0% emotional level, of course. What I feel towards him when I'm around him is merely "being worthless", "not being good enough", and not anger, really.

Because there is therefore so much "inapropriate" anger as a mask of the this unfelt anger, this stand on our way to feel what should be felt (at the right person). Intelectual understanding doesn't help a bit.

So, if I'm getting this right ... we must, by practicing metta and gratitude (not sure about later, but I it found it suggested a while ago on a site training people to happiness, but gratitude isn't mentioned in this 4 trainings of Sublime states ... and I must admit it feels a lot more fake then metta ...) ... I know there is also compassion, but I don't think there are sayings as "May I be happy" for compassion traning, right? ... same goes for equanimity, sympathetic joy ... please, correct me if I'm wrong on this one ...

And so, by practicing metta, we built this new, temporary "house" where we develop enough of antidotes (armors) to actualy go into the old house (revisit old emotional issues, which are the REAL source of anger) and resolve the repressed issues. Because as long as the long burried repressed issues are not resolved, the anger always leaks out somewhere with (self) destructive thoughts/actions or somatic issues.

I must say I started doing psychoanalysis once weekly 2 months ago, and I find these 2 topics well related. Though my therapist suggested me Zen (but I'm already into Buddhism for a half a year ... well, not that I'm doing much, but still, it would be hard to "give up" (that's one of my issues) and I also see her, to be honest, as being "lame" with this Zen. But that's only because I ... emm ... I almost drifted out ... well, yeah, that's because I feel worthless that my kind of way is the right way. I mean Theravada Buddhism of course, as Zen is also Buddhism. :)

Though one of my defenses is obviously intelectualization (I might be overgeneralizng this defense, not EVERYTHING is intelectualization, either), I can be encoruged to Zen, too, but I'm not sure what's Zen all about. My intelectual appreciation goes for the Theravada, as it is the oldest one ... but my HEART says I need Zen, because last few days I read also other then Theravada (Tibetian to be precise) and I somehow feel this is more appropriate for me, because I neeed to feel more and think less, while Theravada do the opposite for me. I don't know Zen yet, but intuition says it is similar ... more of a heart training(?) ... I have to admit Tibetian buddhism sounds kind of silly to me, as if I "don't believe in love" ... I mean, I just don't get it how they can love so much. Damn, I want to do this, too, really ... where did I loose my heart on a way?! :/:)

Well, I know I wroted different things, but I would appreciate any answer.

It would do better then doing the Google search, because I will open 30 tabs, read 5 of them, and remember nothing. And the cycle continues ... I must also admit doing the metta is really hard to get started for me (like I leave the best for the last, although I know it will contribute good for me (kind of self destruction, isn't it :surprised: )) ... and I also have hard time meditating while sitting (it is better to lie down), because I feel a lot of pain (somatic, too) in my stomach and solar plexus area ...

Regards

Comments

  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran

    too long but Buddhism has to be used in a practice. you have to understand how it makes sense. and it takes time.

    Buddhism does not say to avoid the anger. it says to let it be until it goes away. and then try to stop it from arising again in the future. the vajrayana says that anger is a distorted quality of buddha nature.

    most of your writing is a thought process. in meditation you would just let thoughts come and go.

    metta does not liberate but it arouses qualities that nourish ourselves and others. but only insight not metta cuts the ignorance.

    armor is conditionally built and thus can decay. the mind as it is is all we need.

    the essence of Buddhism is meditation. start a practice, brother (or sister)

  • silversilver In the beginning there was nothing, and then it exploded. USA, Left coast. Veteran
    edited April 2015

    Lots of confusion going on there, but I think that the anger and the other similar emotions will occur much less if one can observe the things in life with a certain amount of dispassion, and yet compassion - because we all fear death and pain, etc.

    Please read Thich Naht Hanh's book about Buddha's life and The Way - it's enchanting, it's simple, it gives the basics of Buddhism: It's called Old Path White Clouds. I'd say forget the psychoanalysis - for now - but that would be me being a bit too cheeky. But that's what my heart tells me to tell you, @onko27.

  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Moderator

    Hmm. I'm not sure I even know what you are asking, :confounded:

    I'm a Tibetan Buddhist (in practice, not ethnicity) so any answer I might give might be silly anyhow!

    You sound like a fairly young person, as most people I know who start in with considering Id/Ego/Superego are usually early college students getting their first experiences with psychology. Life isn't nearly so linear. Things don't always go logically in order, step by step. Multiple things, including different phases, can be happening at once. When we are young, it is easy to maintain a fairly simplistic view of the world when in reality it is much more intertwined and complex. Likewise, motivation has many layers and levels. There are people who work as doctors and make very little. Many of those fighting the ebola fight are a good example. Others work for humane organizations and the Peace Corps and other things. So, not all doctors (nor any other profession) are just in it for the money. Nor is working in order to sustain our needs and survival necessary the work of our ego (or the Id).

    I rather prefer Maslow's hierarchy of needs to Freud's stuff. It makes more logical sense to me. Most people can't even start to consider their spiritual needs until their other needs are met. Meeting the "lower"needs doesn't mean anything in particular though. Our survival instincts don't impede us (unless we allow them to) from other goals. It doesn't mean awakened people don't eat. There is just less focus on exactly how they will eat as opposed to the lives most of us live where it's such a focus. No clinging to anything including a plan for how to survive rather than clinging to anything and everything like most of us do.

    Also, don't confuse the psychological definitions with Buddhist definitions. They often don't quite line up. There is a great book that goes into psychology/psychotherapy from a Buddhist point of view that might be helpful for you called "Thoughts Without a Thinker" by Mark Epstein.

    lobster
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran

    maybe check out a book at the library or store written by a master. Zen, Theravada, whatever.

Sign In or Register to comment.