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.

Pride/Humiliation

RichardHRichardH Veteran
edited July 2010 in Philosophy
I recently posted this statement/question on another forum......


Humiliation rises to meet pride at every turn, and "I" am this cycle of pride and humiliation. When not Awake, "I" am this cycle, even if its reality is covered up for a while by a veil of obtuseness. When Awake, no "I", no cycle. Any thoughts on this?

The basis if this question is that if there is self view there is pride and humiliation. no self view, no pride and humiliation.

an answer I got was this.......


"Sure, thoughts abound.

There is nothing wrong with pride and humiliation, they are the natural expansion and contraction of the self-image. Without the activity of the expansion and contraction of the self-image as manifested in pride and humiliation a person can not have a healthy functioning consciousness.

For example, a healthy pride is the expression of the moment as the self-image (ego) expands and merges with the object-image.
Little Jack Horner
Sat in the corner,
Eating a Christmas pie;

He put in his thumb,
And pulled out a plum,
And said 'What a good boy am I!
Little Jack's pride is the natural expansive expression of his unification with the plum.

Pride and humiliation become problematic when a fixation in consciousness arises that interferes with the natural expansion and contraction of pride and humiliation. When the expansion of pride becomes fixated the self-image becomes fixated, and in the state of fixation the self-image becomes idolized as something separate from the natural activity of expansion and ocntraction and in the state of fixated expansion the self-image is seen as something to defend against the occurance of contraction and humiliation. Once pride is fixated and the self-image becomes fixed in the illusion of everlasting expansion, then the state of fear arises because there is no illusion strong enough to completely block out of consciousness the sub-conscious acknowledgement of contraction. As long as one is alive, humiliation must break through the illusion in some form, but the fixation of pride creates, on the one hand, an infinite variation of rationalitions for the "alien intrusion" of humiliation and on the other hand, the distancing of one's self-image from the object that is associated with the humiliation through blame and projection.

Becoming fixated in humiliation and the contraction of the self-image can occur just as well, in which case pride becomes the "enemy" of the self-image. Such false humility has the expansion of pride firmly fixed within it, yet attempts to contain it like a nuclear reasctor shell containing the core.

So rather than be fixated around pride or humiliation, please enjoy your Chrismas pie."


This is an interesting approach. any reflections on this? Thanks

Comments

  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited December 2009
    That's awesome. Where did this gem come from?
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited December 2009
    Interesting isnt it? Its from a zen forum (no better or worse than any other forum) and it points to some interesting differences between the conception in practice in different schools, having both a Theravada and Zen background these differences have been a real issue.

    What is the difference between awakening to everything precicely how it is, and mere licence? How can there be awareness of Humiliation, when it seems to me humiliation depends on a lack of awareness (ie absorbtion in self image)? It gets to the whole issue of there "being nothing to do", yet at the same time there being something to do.


    ....anyway I'll PM you more info about the forum, it impolitic do discuss another one in this forum.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited December 2009
    ....anyway I'll PM you more info about the forum, it impolitic do discuss another one in this forum.

    Thanks
    Interesting isnt it? Its from a zen forum (no better or worse than any other forum) and it points to some interesting differences between the conception in practice in different schools, having both a Theravada and Zen background these differences have been a real issue.

    What differences do you see reflected here? One of the reasons I liked it is that to me it reads like an excellent reinterpretation of Dependent Origination in modern psychological terms, with a twist of object relations theory.
    What is the difference between awakening to everything precicely how it is, and mere licence? How can there be awareness of Humiliation, when it seems to me humiliation depends on a lack of awareness (ie absorbtion in self image)? It gets to the whole issue of there "being nothing to do", yet at the same time there being something to do.

    One response to these questions is to conclude that there is no permanent cessation of suffering. That's roughly where I'm at, at the moment. But I know it's heretical, and largely speculative.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited December 2009
    There are a number of differences that I can tell, based on the Sanghas I have associated with. First of all in Zen there is endless practice, no final cessation. Samsara and Nirvana are simply one living reality. So there is always practice, and enlightenment is now. In the Korean Zen tradition it is called "Sudden Awakening/Gradual cultivation", Through intensive practice under the guidence of a teacher the "bottom falls out of the bucket" and you awaken to sheer non-duality. This is confirmed by the teacher. That is "Sudden Awakening", but you are still acting out of habit energy so you must continue polishing the mirror so to speak. That is "gradual cultivation". This is different than the Mindfulness I was taught in the Theravada in that there is no intial direct penetration, so it is a gradualist path. The result is a very different mindset among the two Sanghas that I have been able to compare over the years. This ofcourse is just my take and others may see it very differently, thats cool, and there is no better or worse, just a different approach to things..


    What you say about there being no permanent cessation of suffering cuts right to the heart of this issue. Alway approaching final peace, tying loose ends forever. Thats one way of looking at the Bodhisattva path. Since "sudden awakening" the division between subject and object is truly gone on one level, yet on another level practice goes on and on. This goes back to that "pure/impure" thread.
  • edited December 2009
    I've always sort of thought of pain as instructive. You become proud, you're humiliated and you suffer. It teaches you not be arrogant, and to invest less in the ego.
  • edited December 2009
    To me humiliation is just pride spelled backwards.

    If you feel humiliated, it is because you have attached yourself to a personal self-image (a plaster saint of sorts) that we believed (up until now) was so much better than whatever action/thought has humiliated us, or brought our ego back to earth.

    We all do it!

    Worse still is the fear that others will see us differently (than the pretend self that we have been presenting to them), and that we will loose some stature in their eyes because of this.

    Can you spell Attached?

    What is ego, if it isn’t a pretend self that, we wave like a red flag before others, and ourselves, in order to put ourselves up, elevate our self in status and above the norm? (above the great unwashed.)

    So up above what? Up above other people, of course. Who else do we compare ourselves with, squirrels? No, we are in competition with our brothers and sisters on this planet, (a war we take for granted, and hardly notice). But where is the compassion, or the PEACE in that?


    S9
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited December 2009
    In the OP what I'm basically saying is ego=pride/humiliation. It would seem that we all experience a degree of pride/humiliation unless we are either Enlightened (thoroughly uprooted the tendancy to contract around a seeming separate "I") or obtuse. This practitioner has times of simple non-dual awareness, and therefore no pride/humiliation, and times of self-view that are frought with pride and humiliation. Ofcourse I'm not just talking about severe incidences, but a general low grade state of identification with conditions. This has lessened over time. I've met a couple of extraordinary beings who seem to be largely free of pride/humiliation.
  • edited January 2010
    Richard,

    Everyone does not continue to fall into the trap of pride, all the way up to the last breath outside of Total Liberation. Some sage like individuals are capable of understanding this trap intellectually, and therefore of side stepping it by choosing the “Middle Way.”

    If this were not the case, why else would Buddha give us the “8 Fold Path?”

    He would simply say that our “Goose was Cooked” outside of total Liberation.

    It is not dull witted, (“obtuse” as you say), if one doesn’t claim every fault as his own.

    Peace,
    S9
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    IMO pride/humiliation decreases in degree and frequency, But an intellectual understanding is usually very prideful, even if subtley so. There are periods where there is no self view, no pride. But if self view remains pride/humiliation is part and parcel of it. "Obtuse" is a blunt word.. What I mean is we literally ignore it, overlook it, mislabel it, even make it part of our spiritual display, our radical enlightenment.

    Never met anyone who is truly beyond all identification with conditions.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    It makes sense to work at this on a case by case basis. It's quite possible to be awake in one part of life and totally deluded in another. Look at Chogyam Trungpa, for instance.
  • edited January 2010
    5 Bells,

    Quite so, as they used to say when I was a kid, “We all have our cross to bear.“

    When working with Alzheimer disease, I also saw this. They could be lost in one area and quite lucid in another area, at the same exact moment.

    We do not progress in every part of our life and understanding equally, like a straight line across the top. This also pulses, (as in, one step forward, 2 steps back, and then we hop ahead 3 steps. Go figure! ; ^ )

    Sometimes we have spirts of insight in one area, and other parts of our life must wait their turn.

    Soon we learn to go with the flow, and stop fighting with our self.

    Respectfully,
    S9
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    5 Bells,


    Soon we learn to go with the flow, and stop fighting with our self.


    S9
    Could you expand on this? What is the difference between profound self acceptance, living with oneself in the full light of compassionate awareness, ...and mere licence.

    They can look the same from the inside. A lack of dissonance around self image can look just like that, as you blithely step on those around you. Many profoundly egocentric people are very self accepting.

    This isnt a dig at you Subjectivity, its just a question that hangs in the air in Spiritual practice. especially in the non-dual traditions where the injuction is to wake up to the unity of Nirvana and Samsara.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    If you're stepping on those around you, the only way to do it blithely is to turn away from your naturally compassionate response to that.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    If you're stepping on those around you, the only way to do it blithely is to turn away from your naturally compassionate response to that.
    ok I agree, but non-duality includes everything precisely as it is, including ones defilements as such. This body-mind and action is not that of a saint, should one radically accept such a bodymind and action as it is?
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    The defilements come from the nonacceptance. Complete acceptance of a defilement brings an end to it.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    The defilements come from the nonacceptance. Complete acceptance of a defilement brings an end to it.
    Is that true? Cant it also throw fuel on a fire of passion or aggression. Can you expand? If one tends toward dispersion in thought, and forgetfullness of bodymind, what does complete acceptance of that look like?
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    Forgetfulness of bodymind arises from nonacceptance. You're right, that wasn't quite true, or at least not clearly written. "Complete acceptance of a defilement" needs to be complete acceptance of every aspect of experience in that moment, not just the defilement.
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    fivebells wrote: »
    "Complete acceptance of a defilement" needs to be complete acceptance of every aspect of experience in that moment, not just the defilement.
    That sounds good and true enough. Ofcourse there is the matter of choosing not to practice, to remain in dispersion, and calling it "just this". Done that one.:o







    ........by the way. I hear you like to enter sheep.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited January 2010
    I hear you like to slander Australians, and you use you real name on the Internets. Expect call from my lawers. :)
  • edited January 2010
    Richard,

    Lets examine acceptance, shall we?

    What exactly is it?

    Isn’t acceptance synonymous with clarity?

    Acceptance isn’t just a ‘brute force’ that without any rhyme or reason forces us to accept something/anything without any prelude to that acceptance, is it?

    Lets not get the horse before the carriage here. There is a process to acceptance, however so subtle, and the actual workings take place within what we call acceptance.

    1st we look at something/anything taking place and examine it (this defilement) as it is, unvarnished, without any prejudgment to interfere with our seeing it with NEW EYES.

    We begin to see that the defilement is merely a thought, and the actions that naturally bloom from that thought. We also begin to notice that, that thought is not our self, and that we have been ‘Wrongly Identifying’ with it as being a part of who we are.

    Bad boy! Good boy!

    We also see the pain it causes, the unpleasantness within because of it…only then can we accept it for what it is…a dream problem. We can let it go.

    Whereas, license is a whole other animal. It is a kind of blindness, which fosters continuing within any given pain cycle. Some part of us, because we remain in a habitual idea that this defilement will bring us pleasure, or even happiness, continues to pursue that error.

    Isn’t this what “Right View’ is all about, seeing clearly?

    I believe with this added clarity, you will begin to notice (also) self correcting taking place (automatically), and you will also notice that the mind decided to do this (automatically), much like a child burned will pull his hand (automatically) out of the flame.

    If you are really astute, you will also see that this (automatic) doing is not your job, that you are not the self, or his doings, and this added clarity will give you even more room to see more clearly in the future. And so it goes, until everything simply falls away.

    Sincerely,
    S9
  • RichardHRichardH Veteran
    edited January 2010
    I believe with this added clarity, you will begin to notice (also) self correcting taking place (automatically), and you will also notice that the mind decided to do this (automatically), much like a child burned will pull his hand (automatically) out of the flame.

    If you are really astute, you will also that this (automatic) doing is not your job, that you are not the self, or his doings, and this clarity will give you even more room to see more clearly in the future. And so it goes, until everything simply falls away.


    S9
    Namaste :)
  • edited January 2010
    Namaste, Richard

    S9
  • edited July 2010
    There is a feeling of something being fixed called a self, this then needs to be told how fixed, great, happy, wonderful, grand and marvelous it is. Any thought or reflection that threatens this fixed, independent identity called self is seen as something to be avoided or rejected. This is what i believe is the basis for pride and humiliation. It is often said that western psychology tries to integrate a self and put its pieces together. Where as eastern psychology , particularly that of buddhism is focused upon a model without self, but it is important to see this last statement " without self" in the context of dependent origination.
Sign In or Register to comment.