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.

Aren't Some Desires Good?

tim45174tim45174
edited March 2010 in Buddhism Basics
Does being Buddhism mean having no attachment to desires? because if this is the case, then how do you justify great social movements like the Civil Rights movement. Clearly, they had a desire to achieve more equality and this has become an almost universally applauded movement.

and what about desires ingrained in our nature? For example, if we are starving and need food then our bodies will biologically desire sustenance.

Can someone please explain this to me?

Comments

  • JanineJanine
    edited March 2010
    I think desire for food and need for food are two different things. You can desire food without needing it, I have this problem occasionally which is why I'm overweight :o

    I see desire as a personal me, me , me thing.

    So if you desire to do good for personal gain then it's a bad thing but if you desire to do good for the benefit of all then you will not have attachment to it.
  • MatSaltedMatSalted
    edited March 2010
    tim45174 wrote: »
    Does being Buddhism mean having no attachment to desires? because if this is the case, then how do you justify great social movements like the Civil Rights movement. Clearly, they had a desire to achieve more equality and this has become an almost universally applauded movement.

    and what about desires ingrained in our nature? For example, if we are starving and need food then our bodies will biologically desire sustenance.

    Can someone please explain this to me?

    In Buddhist terms you need to distinguish between, desires and cravings. Cravings are generally over eight times more dukkarizing than desires.

    I jest:P
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited March 2010
    The Buddha used two words: craving (tahna) and aspiration (sankappa).

    Craving is ignorant desire where as sankappa is wise desire.

    Sankappa or wise aspiration is the second factor of the noble eightfold path to peace.

    Craving (tahna) is the second noble truth, namely, the cause of suffering.

    Kind regards

    :)
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited March 2010
    The civil rights movement is somewhat relevant. It was a noble movement with a good intention. But it was possible in such an environment to become very angry at your opponent. So for example doctor King avoided that sentiment but many did not. I think its good to be involved in good causes. But still ultimately what they are seeking is political change and that is a conditional phenominon. So you can actually also fail at achieving political change. And if you are too attached to the movement that would be very painful.

    I'll make it simpler. Say 'political change' is instead a brand new car. You can take enjoyment in the brand new car. But the more you are attached the more you cannot sleep at night for fear of the car. The more a scratch will make you cry. Or when it gets old you will be (more) sad.

    Indeed we can enjoy our possessions the LESS attached we are rather than more.

    As you practice buddhism the idea is not to stop buying anything and to stop being in any groups or politics. The idea is to just watch what happens when you align your heart and become attached to impermanent things. Again and again you will suffer.

    Sooner or later you switch the allegiance of your heart to mindfulness of impermanence. Two responses are BOTH negative. One negative response is closing yourself off because you are afraid of impermanence. You have no possessions. No friends. You rarely do anything except your activity of choice to hide from life. A SECOND negative choice is to run around like a chicken with its head cut off gorging yourself on every juicy morsel of life because you are afraid you won't get enough. It sounds good on the surface but the fear and the filling of spaces is sick. Those open spaces can be quite beautiful.

    When you harmonize your desires you will dance with the world. Mindful of impermanence but still really appreciating politics and cars.

    Buddhism doesn't tell you your desires are wrong. Buddhism tells you to honestly look at what is happening. Are you suffering or are you happy? That is the question.
  • JanineJanine
    edited March 2010
    If something made you happy but made somebody else unhappy, would that not be unskillful?
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited March 2010
    I think then you need to communicate about it. In mahayana it is believed that you can't truly be happy until all beings are happy.
  • sukhitasukhita
    edited March 2010
    Desire is not the cause of suffering... but selfish desire is! Desire by and in itself is simply power, neither good nor bad. Without the power of desire ("the wish"), there can be no progress in anything, including the spiritual path. The thing is, one must turn away from selfish desire towards selfless desire.

    :)
  • JanineJanine
    edited March 2010
    Say there is a situation where one person has communicated to another that they are unhappy with what the other is doing but the person still continues with the action because it makes them happy.

    Is the ball then in the court of the unhappy person to change their perception of the action?
  • NamelessRiverNamelessRiver Veteran
    edited March 2010
    Is the ball then in the court of the unhappy person to change their perception of the action?

    I would say the unhappy person is gonna have to set some boundaries.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited March 2010
    Janine yes the ball is in the unhappy persons court. They don't necessarily have to change their perception. Their perception may be that the other person is being an a hole. But they don't want their happiness to rely on someone else who may not be particularly kind.

    So say my neighbor is throwing loud parties. I call the police and the police say its legal what they are doing (just hypothetically). I can either be miserable or I can make the best of a bad situation. Maybe I can wear earplugs? Maybe I can play some of my own music?

    But what you don't want to do is say "poor me". "I can't be happy because of what other people are doing"....

    That kind of thinking is just that. It is just discursive thinking. It is not even true thinking.
  • DhammaDhatuDhammaDhatu Veteran
    edited March 2010
    Janine wrote: »
    Say there is a situation where one person has communicated to another that they are unhappy with what the other is doing but the person still continues with the action because it makes them happy.

    Is the ball then in the court of the unhappy person to change their perception of the action?
    The Four Noble Truths is a teaching about suffering rather than morality.

    In the sphere of human relationships, the Buddha taught duty or mutual responsibilities as the reference point (rather than the Four Noble Truths).

    Our problem with Buddhism is Westerners are generally first exposed to the Four Noble Truths but in the East or traditionally it is not like this.

    :)
  • JanineJanine
    edited March 2010
    Thank you Jeffrey, I find myself consumed by the 'poor me' thoughts sometimes. Ends in a downward spiral. I see myself falling into it.

    My meditation stops it temporarily.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    edited March 2010
    Janine if you find yourself suffering that is a good time to imagine what it would be like if you could wake up to a vaster vision. Like when you wake up from a bad dream and you realize that you don't have to run away from the persecutor because it is just a dream.

    So in the suffering the natural response is to try to remove the bad feeling. If its a down mood for example. And that wish or non-acceptance in itself becomes quite painful. But a depression is not a solid monolith that you have to remove. It is actually made up of many good bad and neutral feelings.

    Just watch as bad feelings turn into neutral. Neutral turn into good. And then good turn into bad. You can start to notice what things you do make it better and what things you do make it worse. Some insights come through at times with these messages.

    And the vaster vision is that the ground of the good, bad, and neutral is always the same uneasiness perhaps? Always changing and as vast and open as the sky. As you align with that openness your experience becomes more clear. All of these insights you have about what makes it feel better.
  • JasonJason God Emperor Arrakis Moderator
    edited March 2010
    tim45174 wrote: »
    Does being Buddhism mean having no attachment to desires? because if this is the case, then how do you justify great social movements like the Civil Rights movement. Clearly, they had a desire to achieve more equality and this has become an almost universally applauded movement.

    Buddhism is more about making distinctions between desires (chandha) than rejecting them altogether. The Buddha himself made distinctions between skillful (kusala) and unskillful (akusala) desires. The desire for happiness, especially "long-term welfare and happiness," is actually an important part of the Buddhist path.

    As for the rest, it should be obvious that helping people is a skillful desire.
Sign In or Register to comment.