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.
Emotions
lobster
Crusty Veteran
in Meditation
In some dharma strong emotional attachments are considered dukkha. Is it why many cold fish are attracted to this dharma?
I would suggest strong mature emotions are healthy. It is conflicted emotional responses that are the problem.
I would also suggest this maturity is found in dharma. Compassion is just love given a cold name. The arising of positive, unconflicted emotions such as fearlessness, emotional stability, ahimsa, benevolence, nurturing etc are purified arisings ...
Any kind thoughts?
1
Comments
Nobody here has ever stated emotional attachments are dukkha.
Unhealthy clinging to desires, is dukkha.
The Second Seal: All Emotions are Painful
The Tibetan word for emotion in this context is zagche, which means “contaminated” or “stained,” in the sense of being permeated by confusion or duality.
Certain emotions, such as aggression or jealousy, we naturally regard as pain. But what about love and affection, kindness and devotion, those nice, light and lovely emotions? We don’t think of them as painful; nevertheless, they imply duality, and this means that, in the end, they are a source of pain.
The dualistic mind includes almost every thought we have. Why is this painful? Because it is mistaken. Every dualistic mind is a mistaken mind, a mind that doesn’t understand the nature of things. So how are we to understand duality? It is subject and object: ourselves on the one hand and our experience on the other. This kind of dualistic perception is mistaken, as we can see in the case of different persons perceiving the same object in different ways. A man might think a certain woman is beautiful and that is his truth. But if that were some kind of absolute, independent kind of truth, then everyone else also would have to see her as beautiful as well. Clearly, this is not a truth that is independent of everything else. It is dependent on your mind; it is your own projection.
The dualistic mind creates a lot of expectations—a lot of hope, a lot of fear. Whenever there is a dualistic mind, there is hope and fear. Hope is perfect, systematized pain. We tend to think that hope is not painful, but actually it’s a big pain. As for the pain of fear, that’s not something we need to explain.
The Buddha said, “Understand suffering.” That is the first Noble Truth. Many of us mistake pain for pleasure—the pleasure we now have is actually the very cause of the pain that we are going to get sooner or later. Another Buddhist way of explaining this is to say that when a big pain becomes smaller, we call it pleasure. That’s what we call happiness.
Moreover, emotion does not have some kind of inherently real existence. When thirsty people see a mirage of water, they have a feeling of relief: “Great, there’s some water!” But as they get closer, the mirage disappears. That is an important aspect of emotion: emotion is something that does not have an independent existence.
This is why Buddhists conclude that all emotions are painful. It is because they are impermanent and dualistic that they are uncertain and always accompanied by hopes and fears. But ultimately, they don’t have, and never have had, an inherently existent nature, so, in a way, they are not worth much. Everything we create through our emotions is, in the end, completely futile and painful. This is why Buddhists do shamatha and vipashyana meditation—this helps to loosen the grip that our emotions have on us, and the obsessions we have because of them.
Question: Is compassion an emotion?
People like us have dualistic compassion, whereas the Buddha’s compassion does not involve subject and object. From a buddha’s point of view, compassion could never involve subject and object. This is what is called mahakaruna—great compassion.
I’m having difficulty accepting that all emotions are pain.
Okay, if you want a more philosophical expression, you can drop the word “emotion” and simply say, “All that is dualistic is pain.” But I like using the word “emotion” because it provokes us.
Isn’t pain impermanent?
Yeah! If you know this, then you’re all right. It’s because we don’t know this that we go through a lot of hassles trying to solve our problems. And that is the second biggest problem we have—trying to solve our problems.
From: http://www.lionsroar.com/buddhism-nutshell-four-seals-dharma/
Exactly the opposite.
Attachment implies dependence upon an object for joy, pleasure, happiness, safety etc. When the source of that attachment is no longer present then sadness, longing, sorrow, loneliness, just to name a few, can and will arise. That is suffering.
Our emotions are the result of our perceptions. The way we perceive the objects of the world. They do not inherently exist. They are objects which appear to the knowing function. Which is inherently without quality. Qualities appear in It (which is intangible) and is a result of it, but itself is never tainted by its contents. But even to say without quality is invalid because qualitylessness is itself a quality. It is and it isn't.
Compassion that is an emotion is self centered. That is compassion for some self serving purpose.
"I feel good when I help people."
"If I do good I will be blessed."
"I am making good merit."
"I had to help because I felt so sad watching them suffer."
The receiving end may benefit and it may be a kind action but it is still based on self serving, self centeredness.
Whereas natural compassion flows without me, myself and I being involved.
Come on, Tony, stop waffling and get to the point.
it is not bad if there is no hidden agenda or manipulative tricks when expressing (showing out) mature emotions
but we have to be careful about the Time and the Place
Hmmm.....okay.....I've considered your suggestion carefully and here is the most appropriate response which is in perfect alignment with that comment.
That's highly inappropriate and frankly over-steps the mark, @Tony_A_Simien.
And his rude comment doesn't? My response is on the same level as that comment. Do what you must.
I already have.
His remark wasn't what one would deem as conversationally offensive.
Yours was, both literally and figuratively, below the belt.
what are 'emotions' in Buddhism? Citta?
This may help. Or not. It's late, my mind's befuddled with tiredness.....
@lobster said, "Any kind thoughts?""
Ask for calm and you get a tussle~*
We should tuck Auntie Feddie in with a nice waffle-stitched comforter.
My understanding is all immature emotions are considered a source of suffering.
The four sublime states (the Brahma Viharas) are mettaa (loving kindness), karunaa (compassion), muditaa (sympathetic joy) and upekkhaa (equanimity).
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/desilva-p/wheel237.html
In essence our dukkha is clinging to anxieties, fears, angers and hatreds.
“Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”
Bodhi Jedhi Yoda
Fear the cushion, do not.
Yes, there is a distinction between skillful and unskillful here.