Howdy, Stranger!

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

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.

Deciding what actions are skillful

Hello everyone. I am a new Buddhist and I am having trouble deciding whether some of my actions are skillful or unskillful. I know that any action that stems from greed, aversion or delusion is unskillful, but actions that stem from the antidotes are skillful. What I don't understand is the definition of greed.

If someone says something false about me and I try to correct them politely because I care about my reputation, is that unskillful?
If I see delicious food and I am not hungry, but I eat it anyway, is that acting out of greed?
If I choose to relax instead of completing my To Do list, is that acting out of greed or delusion?

Please help me. I am truly lost on this subject.

Comments

  • sovasova delocalized fractyllic harmonizing Veteran

    Skillful action can itself be the home topic of meditation and mental inflexion.

    The Buddha's teachings, like the principles they describe, are interrelated in complex ways. It is difficult to point out any one teaching that underlies everything else, as all the teachings are mutually dependent. Nevertheless, there are a number of possible entry points into their pattern, and one of those points is the Buddha's observation that it is possible to master a skill.
    Unlike many of his contemporaries-and many thinkers before and since-the Buddha did not try to reason from abstract principles down to direct experience. As we noted in the Introduction, the Buddha's contemporaries were influenced by the premier science of their time-astronomy-in the way they viewed experience, and it is easy to see prejudices derived from astronomy at work in their thought: that the universe is composed of discrete bodies acting in line with regular, linear causes; and that human knowledge of these processes has no impact on the way they behave. These prejudices, when applied to human experience, resulted in what the Buddha called theories of being, or what we today would call theories of order: that the processes of the universe can be totally explained in terms of physical principles that follow linear causal patterns unaffected by human intervention. The various conclusions that developed out of this approach differed primarily in how one's soul-viewed in various ways either as a discrete thing or as a more abstract principle-was to look for release from this vast cosmic machine. Some insisted that action was illusory; others, that action was real but totally determined by fixed rules, serving only to bind one to the impersonal cycle.

    In reaction to the theories of being, the Lokayatans proposed a theory of non-being or absolute chaos that, like all reactionary ideologies, was defined largely by what it denied. Although it admitted the primacy of the physical universe, it denied that any causal laws operated on the observable, human level. Everything, the Lokayatans said, was totally spontaneous, random, and chaotic. No personal souls were observable, and thus human identity was composed only of the temporary conjunction of elements that made up the body, terminating when those elements separated at death.

    In a manner typical of his approach to problems, the Buddha avoided both sides of this argument by focusing directly on the level of immediate experience and exploring the implications of truths that both sides overlooked. Instead of fixing on the content of the views expressed, he considered the actions of those who were expressing the views. The logic either of total determinism or of total chaos must end in the conclusion that purposeful action is pointless, and yet adherents of both schools continued to act in purposeful ways. The fact that each side advanced an interpretation of reality implied that both agreed that there were skillful and unskillful ways of approaching the truth, for each insisted that the other used unskillful forms of observation and argumentation to advance its views.

    Thus the Buddha looked directly at skillful action in and of itself, worked out its implications in viewing knowledge itself as a skill-rather than a body of facts-and found that those implications carried him all the way to release.

    Continued at http://www.buddhanet.net/wings_1a.htm

  • sovasova delocalized fractyllic harmonizing Veteran

    Anyway, this is a great topic, and I look forward to a thoughtfully slow and deliberate discussion of what helpful takeaways there can be in daily life.

    Anything we do that gets us farther from freedom is unskillful and anything that gets us closer to freedom is skillful.

    For me, it has boiled down to effectiveness. Of course, we know that causality is our benchmark, causality is our relative experience of life and persons and whatnot. But, beyond any individuality labels or matrices of experience, we know thanks to the four noble truths that there is freedom (3rd noble truth).

    Anything we do that gets us farther from freedom is unskillful and anything that gets us closer to freedom is skillful.

    So in understanding this and deciding this it is very important to apply ourselves at the roots of our ignorance. We can try and destroy all outside enemies, but Shantideva tells us that this will never work, they will simply multiply again and again, no end in sight. However, "conquer ones own anger and all enemies are slain."

    Thus, what comes skillfully must attack at the root of ignorance, attachment, and aversion ... the hog is simply unaware... the rooster grabs and jumps at the snake, and the snake slithers and slides to avoid any inkling of danger. It's a wheel that goes round and round, pretty much by itself, and the Dharma, used like a pure mirror, can wipe away every blemish and stain that prevents us from understanding and experiencing reality as it is -- which is to say, as we are.

    lobster
  • @Cinorjer said:
    On a practical level, you're making the mistake my old Zen Teacher Young called "checking".

    You're trying to check the motives of your actions, and that's an impossible task. I want to do something, but am I acting from selfish or unselfish motivation? If I have a few dollars in the bank, am I being selfish for not giving it to the needy? If I give something to the needy but enjoy it and I'm doing it to get good karma, am I being selfish?

    You cannot divide your actions into selfish and nonselfish, or skillful and nonskillful, and always do one and not the other. Motivations in reality are not pure. They are a mix. Likewise the results of your actions, even well meaning, are mixed. You only tie your mind into knots by thinking you can anticipate what you should or should not do this way. That's checking.

    As you learn to keep a calm mind and realize you are not your thoughts and not slave to your emotions, you will stop acting out of emotions like anger or jealousy. The meditation and calm mind has to come first. When you practice compassion then acting to hurt others out of selfish desire will stop. The compassion has to come first.

    Thanks everyone. Cinorjer, your comment was especially helpful. Are you saying that I should stop trying to categorize actions as skillful or unskillful based on my intentions? It sounds like you're saying I should focus on meditation and calming my mind instead. If I understand you correctly, you're saying that as I practice calming my mind, I will get better at acting out of only non-greed, non-aversion and non-delusion.

    In the past, I have tried to follow Theravada Buddhism, but maybe I'll look into Zen Buddhism as well.

  • @followthepath That is my advice from the Zen perspective. You have the Precepts to be a guide, so you do need to be mindful but it's a path of learning to act from a spontaneous, clear mind.

    sova
  • howhow Veteran Veteran
    edited November 2015

    @followthepath

    Zen Meditation is a process of learning how to stop feeding our identity's dream construct in this very nano second.
    Why ruminate over the past gorging s of our identity when the only place you can actually ever address it's indulgences is in this very unfolding moment?

    Skillful actions simply reflect the degree to which our identities dream is not presently being pandered to.
    Here, skillful means will just manifest in the absence of our obstruction to it's truth rather than us looking for ways to personally wield them.

    Cinorjer
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran

    I've always liked this little description. Of course you can just substitute "verbal" with whatever else and it would be the same.

    [The Buddha speaks to his son, Rahula:] "Whenever you want to perform a verbal act, you should reflect on it: 'This verbal act I want to perform — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful verbal act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful verbal act with painful consequences, painful results, then any verbal act of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do.

    But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful verbal action with happy consequences, happy results, then any verbal act of that sort is fit for you to do.

    Cinorjerfollowthepath
  • Your mind decides what is wise.

    http://www.buddhanet.net/dhammapada/d_heed.htm

    Heedfulness is the Deathless path,
    heedlessness, the path to death.
    Those who are heedful do not die,
    heedless are like the dead.

    The wise then, recognizing this
    as the distinction of heedfulness,
    pleased with the spheres of Nobles Ones,
    in heedfulness rejoice.

    They meditate persistently,
    constantly they firmly strive,
    the steadfast to Nibbana reach,
    the Unexcelled Secure from bonds.

    Assiduous and mindful,
    pure kamma making, considerate,
    restrained, by Dhamma heedful living,
    for one such spread renown.

    By energy and heedfulness,
    by taming and by self-control,
    the one who’s wise should make as isle
    no flood can overwhelm.

    Foolish folk of little wit
    in heedlessness indulge,
    the one who’s wise guards heedfulness
    kin to the greatest wealth.

    Don’t indulge in heedlessness!
    Don’t come near to sexual joys!
    The heedful and contemplative
    attains abundant bliss.

    When one who’s wise does drive away
    heedlessness by heedfulness,
    having ascended wisdom’s tower
    steadfast, one surveys the fools,
    griefless, views the grieving folk,
    as mountaineer does those below.

    Among the heedless, heedful,
    among the sleepy, wide awake.
    As the swift horse outruns a hack
    so one of good wisdom wins.

    Heedfulness is always praised,
    heedlessness is ever blamed.
    By heedfulness did Magha go
    to lordship of the gods.

    The bhikkhu liking heedfulness,
    seeing fear in heedlessness,
    never will he fall away,
    near is he to Nibbana.

    That being said I am humbled that my happiness for the evening is somewhat based on a particular football team winning the game in the last second. But I did do my meditation and prepared a good environment for my family and friends to share the day with me.

    "Positive anything is better than negative nothing." ~Elbert Hubbard

    sova
  • By ENERGY and heedfulness,
    by taming and by self-control,
    the one who’s wise should make as isle
    no flood can overwhelm.

    (from the post above... empasizing the word ENERGY)

    interesting that the scripture mentions energy. I feel it is part of the 'calculation' to be mindful of what helps you to 'energize'. A lot of people talk about energy in dharma talks and I will try to find what I looked at last night.

  • A negative thinker sees difficulty in every opportunity.
    A positive thinker sees opportunity in every difficulty.

    ~ Zig Ziglar

    Buddhadragon
  • lobsterlobster Crusty Veteran

    @followthepath said:
    What I don't understand is the definition of greed.

    Perhaps some examples:

    • Greed for a bit of peace and calm
    • Greed to be pain free
    • Greed to make progress on the path
    • Greed for understanding and wisdom

    Now you might realise everyone is greedy. B)

    What is a gal to do?

    • Calm the arising of Ms Piggy by meditation and awareness
    • Stay in the moment not the swine trough
    • Head to virtue not the pig sty
    • Huff and puff and blow the little piggy house down

    What is your plan?

    sova
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran

    @followthepath said: In the past, I have tried to follow Theravada Buddhism, but maybe I'll look into Zen Buddhism as well.

    That would make sense because Zen is an offshoot of Theravada. ;)

    lobster
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited November 2015

    @followthepath said:

    Hello everyone. I am a new Buddhist and I am having trouble deciding whether some of my actions are skillful or unskillful. I know that any action that stems from greed, aversion or delusion is unskillful, but actions that stem from the antidotes are skillful. What I don't understand is the definition of greed.

    If someone says something false about me and I try to correct them politely because I care about my reputation, is that unskillful?
    If I see delicious food and I am not hungry, but I eat it anyway, is that acting out of greed?
    If I choose to relax instead of completing my To Do list, is that acting out of greed or delusion?

    Please help me. I am truly lost on this subject.

    Although it may difficult for us to discern at times, the criteria is actually quite simple: if an action, whatever the motivation, leads to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both, then it's most likely unskillful; if it doesn't, then you're good (MN 61). The majority of the practice is all about growing our mindfulness and being more aware of what we're doing, why we're doing it, and what the results of our actions are, both in the short term and in the long term.

    I'd just add that, out of the three examples given above, one appears to be skillful, one appears to be unskillful, and one is likely neutral. It's up to you to figure out which is which. Hint: lobhachandha.

    lobsternamarupaBuddhadragon
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator

    I merely ask:

    Is it necessary?
    Is it kind?
    Is it true?

    These three caveats apply to the spoken word, but I see no reason why they should not also apply to what we think, and do.

    namarupaInvincible_summerfollowthepath
  • karastikarasti Breathing Minnesota Moderator

    It's pretty hard to be 100% truly skillful all the time. We make mistakes, and then we learn better ways.
    Yes, you will get better and knowing the right thing to do when your mind is better calmed and operating from a different place. Always wonder what is right or wrong is just another extension of ego. If you are trying to figure it out, it's your ego wanting to know if it is doing everything right. When you operate from an open, compassionate, loving place instead, you don't have to wonder so much and the words you need come more naturally. You don't have to try to hard because you know what is needed.

    The questions you asked, no one can answer because it varies based on situation and other things. And it might not be the same answer every time you encounter it. Sometimes it is appropriate to relax rather than work. Sometimes it's appropriate to speak up and sometimes it's not. You will learn what is skillful because you will approach everything from a more skillful place by training your mind and thus operating from your heart.

    lobsterCinorjernamarupa
  • @followthepath said:

    Hello everyone. I am a new Buddhist and I am having trouble deciding whether some of my actions are skillful or unskillful. I know that any action that stems from greed, aversion or delusion is unskillful, but actions that stem from the antidotes are skillful. What I don't understand is the definition of greed.

    If someone says something false about me and I try to correct them politely because I care about my reputation, is that unskillful?
    If I see delicious food and I am not hungry, but I eat it anyway, is that acting out of greed?
    If I choose to relax instead of completing my To Do list, is that acting out of greed or delusion?

    Please help me. I am truly lost on this subject.

    I am inclined to thinking that the word "skillful" would mean something that is good in the beginning, the middle, and end. Meaning that you should feel good about doing it, while carrying it out, and after you carry it out.

    The examples of greed that you mentioned obviously would not bring good results if we have to question it again later. Greed and selfishness both stem from self clinging/attachment, and it definitely will not bring any good results in the end.

    So how much ego is good enough to keep, and how much should be let go of? Perhaps a similar a question would be how much firewood is enough to keep warm? It really depends on how much we can carry and clean up after as well.

    lobster
  • rohitrohit Maharrashtra Veteran
    edited November 2015

    @followthepath said:

    Hello everyone. I am a new Buddhist and I am having trouble deciding whether some of my actions are skillful or unskillful. I know that any action that stems from greed, aversion or delusion is unskillful, but actions that stem from the antidotes are skillful. What I don't understand is the definition of greed.

    If someone says something false about me and I try to correct them politely because I care about my reputation, is that unskillful?
    If I see delicious food and I am not hungry, but I eat it anyway, is that acting out of greed?
    If I choose to relax instead of completing my To Do list, is that acting out of greed or delusion?

    Please help me. I am truly lost on this subject.

    Buddha says they critisize who seats, they critisizes who stand ups, they critisizes them who walks and also critisizes who remains steal. There is nobody who is wholly admired or critised in this world. Many times people malign us proposely due to many reasons. If you behave responsibly then people will not give attention to those people which are maligning your reputation. Some times people may ask you explanation then only you may explain reality otherwise i don't think it is better to be furstrated.
    Dalai lam says "Do not let behaviour of others to deatroy your inner peace."
    Over eating is always bad. It will grow stomach and loss of shape and health of body. It will also make feel lazy and lack of self esteem.
    If one eats delicious food at regular basis then we can eat in proper amount without having more greed to take overdose.
    Relaxation is good but not at level that we might have trouble due to it. This habit may get converted to laziness.

    The act which is not harmful for one and others might be a skillful action. But it needs lots of wisdom to know therefore it might called as skillful. In such case middle path is used and sometimes puting things in priority works great.

  • BuddhadragonBuddhadragon Ehipassiko & Carpe Diem Samsara Veteran
    edited November 2015

    I dare say overthinking is a killer.

    The nanosecond you squander pondering if your action is skillful or not, defeats the disinterested motivation of the action.

    I can only repeat what has already been very well expressed by others above: that ideally a skillful action is an action which does not lead to self-affliction nor inflict suffering on other sentient beings.

    But life is full of grey areas: we might find ourselves incurring seemingly skillful actions stemmed from the wrong motivations or performing unskillful ones with someone's welfare at the back of our minds.

    Just plunge, live and do as much good as you can, for whatever reason.
    Life is too short to keep tabs on whys and wherefores.

    silverBunkssova
  • BunksBunks Australia Veteran

    This is indeed a tough one!

    Yesterday I had reason to complain about someone at work.

    They're in a management position but, as far as I can see, don't accept all the responsibilities that come with that. Other people (including me) have had to cover for them in the past.

    I ended up saying something to their manager in the end. I did have to question my motivation though due to the fact that I find them annoying. If I liked them as a person, would I have said something to their manager. Possibly not.......

  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran

    @Bunks said: They're in a management position but, as far as I can see, don't accept all the responsibilities that come with that. Other people (including me) have had to cover for them in the past.

    Work situations can be really tough to deal with, stuck in close proximity with people who ordinarily you would have nothing to do with, some of them in positions of authority....

    Bunks
Sign In or Register to comment.