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.
Love
ajani_mgo
Veteran
It isn't metta-love i'm talking about here... I'm saying the love they call BGR and Man and Wife.
I understand that non-attachment is the key... But without attachment the love between seems really really weird, isn't it. How do you married guys face it?
I understand that non-attachment is the key... But without attachment the love between seems really really weird, isn't it. How do you married guys face it?
0
Comments
Michael
I think you raise an important question and one which goes to the heart of the definition of the Sangha and our Western understanding of the Dharma.
I am sure that Elohim can quote us texts from the Canon which demonstrate what I have been taught: that all attachments are hindrances on the Way. When the Historical Buddha was "tiurning the Wheel of Dharma", it was clear that he was enjoining an absolute adherence which is not possible for the ordinary 'householder', which is how the laity are described. The 'stream enterer' has to abandon everything. It is similar to the instruction that Jesus gave, to leave everything, including family, and follow him.
The monastic ideal was seen as the Sangha. Monks ceased to have any caste, removing them completely from the rigid social; structure of the Subcontinent. Once again, the parallels with the pre-Reformation Christian experience are interesting. Some of this attitude remains in the way in which we identify priests, monks, nuns, etc. by titles which are used with their name (e.g. Father, Sister, Brother, Reverend, etc.)
Because Buddhism has never had the monolithic structure of the post-Constantinian Christian churches, the 'reformations' and changes have woven themselves into the whole tapestry. In Christendom, such weaving-in was impossible and the tapestry tore into many pieces, all fraying!
It is an integral myth of the Western world that romantic love is important. Love of family has been raised to a point where it surpasses all other moral imperatives. In discussions here and elsewhere about the 'right' use of killing, someone will always ask something like, "How can it be wrong to kill in defence of your family/children/loved one(s)?" And I have rarely seen a writer audacious enough to reply that killing another being is wrong, irrespective of the apparent reasons.
And here, you ask whether attachment to a partner is unskillful. Frankly, I think it is!
In the old Catholic catechism, we were warned against "occasions of sin". These are not unskillful acts themselves but facilitate them. Romantic love can be viewed as one such impediment.
As I said earlier, it is in the monastic tradition that the practitioner can be whole-hearted. But I think we can also question the attachment to the monastic vocation. This is also at the heart of contemporary Christian unease. It is the old argument about authority. The old texts, arising out of cultures that did not even recognise romance (a 13th century invention), make daily, married, mortgaged life 'inferior'. Is their authority still as absolute within a changed cultural context?
This is one of the things that my late wife and I discussed as she was dying. Both of us were practising "Buddhist Christians". We had shared with each other our desire, over many years, to 'go forth', she as an anchorite and I as a simple mendicant. We had talked about it many times. As she approached her passing, she talked a lot about the choices we make. Her belief in rebirth was rather special: she believed that we simply live the same life over and over again, as the universe repeats itself, until all possibilities have been fulfilled. For her, awakening didn't mean leaving the eternal repetitions but consciously enjoying and improving the ride each time. When I asked her what she thought of our decision to live a full, sexual, parenting, 'householder' lives, she simply turned to the tenth Ox-herding picture
On one level, from these suttas, you can see how dangerous the Buddha viewed attachments:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn42-011.html Gandhabhaka Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an05-030.html#love Nagita Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/udana/ud8-08.html Visakha Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/khuddaka/suttanipata/snp4-02.html Guhatthaka Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/samyutta/sn04-008.html Nandana Sutta
And yet the Buddha was well aware of emotions such as love and our need for them in society:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/anguttara/an04-055.html Samajivina Sutta
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/canon/sutta/digha/dn-31-nt1.html#to-spouse Sigalovada Sutta
And this is also helpful for a perspective on marriage:
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/dhammananda/marriage.html A Happy Married Life
A Buddhist Perspective
So in the practice of Buddhism there are many different levels. As lay followers we are not expected or even encouraged to give up our families and loved ones. We are simply taught how to treat them with respect and kindness, as well living a skillful life. Only those who see the deeper, hidden dangers of worldly life and seek to ordain have to give up such things. These people dedicate their lives to uncovering and understanding the entirety Buddha's teachings. Honestly, how can a person teach you something when they have not yet experienced it or practiced it with all of their effort? You wouldn't want your math teacher to try and teach you trigonomatry when they didn't even know algebra would you? How confusing would that be? Monastics are very important in keeping the Dhamma and teaching it to the lay communities. That way the teachings will surive as long as possible in the impermanence of time.
As for Simon, I always feel a little sad when he mentions his wife. I have never been married, but I can imagine how much sorrow a person feels when losing someone so close. I have to say that secretly I have viewed life exactly like that, the same life lived until all the possibilities have been fulfilled. Every time I had deja vu I would just figure, "Ok I did this already, seems so familiar, guess I should do it differently this time."
So how do you face it? Mindfully.
Simon, I really like your wife's belief in rebirth. Even though I know it is going to happen, I can't imagine a day without my husband.
Ajani, if you happen to find a wonderful woman that does not share the same mindset as you when it comes to Buddhism, it will probably work out just fine.