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.
Wholesome Attachment
RichardH
Veteran
It seems that concern for “attachment” can mean for some people that we must place a kind of limit on the depth of our relationships and commitments, that we must on some level hold back. This is not claiming to be gospel or anything, but in my view certain deep attachments are essential for entering the stream that leads beyond all attachments. This attachment is to the Three Refuges, and it is a deep, devotional, long term attachment that is intimately connected to the wish for Enlightenment. Buddha represents every quality of awakening we value highest, Dharma is the sacred path worn smooth by those who came before us, and Sangha as a lifetime family of trust and love.
I know that there can be debate about precise terminology, but it is as straightforward as a story that Ajahn Viradhammo tells. This monastic is very devoted to the welfare of his elderly mother, so much so that other duties were put aside in order to physically care for her. One time at a public Q&A a lay person asked him about this situation, and said that he appeared to be attached to his mother. Viradhammo's reply was “Of course I am attached to my mother, She's my mother!” For him his attachment to his mother is the path.
A lot of people, for very good reasons see this approach to the path as “drinking the kool-aid “ or maybe even worse “religious”, but for me it is identical with walking this path come hell or high water.
So I would be interested to hear if anybody shares this view, sees it as strange or wrong headed, or simply unnecessary.
Thanks
I know that there can be debate about precise terminology, but it is as straightforward as a story that Ajahn Viradhammo tells. This monastic is very devoted to the welfare of his elderly mother, so much so that other duties were put aside in order to physically care for her. One time at a public Q&A a lay person asked him about this situation, and said that he appeared to be attached to his mother. Viradhammo's reply was “Of course I am attached to my mother, She's my mother!” For him his attachment to his mother is the path.
A lot of people, for very good reasons see this approach to the path as “drinking the kool-aid “ or maybe even worse “religious”, but for me it is identical with walking this path come hell or high water.
So I would be interested to hear if anybody shares this view, sees it as strange or wrong headed, or simply unnecessary.
Thanks
0
Comments
We're attached to Buddhism, the Path, our own personal quest to practice diligently, the pet dog, the spouse, the children, the new car, and Mother.
The secret is to understand that no matter how close, positive and beneficial the attachment - it still needs to be released some time.
It is the reluctance to release, that is detrimental.
Not the attachment itself.
I do appreciate the sentiment you offer in the ideas of attachment. I still feel that attachments lead into suffering and delusion, however. To me, I hear you talking about connections, and how we have strong and deep connections to other people. I think those kind of connections are amazing to cultivate, and most of life could be spent in cultivation of those kind of open and loving unions between an individual and their environment.
Attachments though, in my vocabulary, breed aggression in their absence or if the object of attachment is threatened. This doesn't make them bad, but ultimately not worth cultivating. If you plant a rose, full well knowing it might not grow, or if it does grow, that it will wilt and die, then you will not attach to it. However, as it sprouts, blooms, and wilts, you can be fully moved by the beauty and amazing qualities you observe in the rose.
In the case of Ajahn Viradhammo, when I hear him say that he is attached to his mother, it doesn't surprise me. Mothers especially hold deeply rooted emotions in our bodies. I wonder if he was saying "I cultivate attachment with my mother, she is my mother" or "I have attachment with my mother, it is natural to have attachments to your mother"
To me, there is a huge difference between simple acceptance that attachments happen, and specifically working to cultivate or cling to objects... children, buddhism, precepts or whatever. However, I do believe that a compassionate and deep union can occur without attachment, and it has to do with how easy you can set that union aside when called toward other harmonies. When the attachment holds its own gravity that can pull you away from mindfulness, it is unhealthy. When a connection occurs with open mind, it is healthy.
My opinions of course, take or leave at will.
With warmth,
Matt
Yes I agree and see Viradhammo's mother in the natural category and not the cultivated category. The thing is for me the sacred is also in the natural category. I'm a religious person, virtues and virtuous people evoke devotion which I consider wholesome.
That's a fine one Matt. I see what you say and agree. The attachments of the devotional type I am describing, though natural in my view, are passionate attachments. They are not wall to wall, as in constant, but instead come and go. There is of course simple practice where there is non-dual presence without any attachments at all, but then there is this movement again, and there are attachment that go very deep and very very subtle. Like Federica says they are not bad in-and-of-themselves IMV.
I'll definitely take it.:)
Natural, normal, acceptable, usual... all seem like reasonable attributes to those kinds of attachments... but skillful? Doesn't that raise the red flags for you guys as well? It seems like a false attribution, in order to justify one's self-clinging as appropriate, where it simply never really is...
Perhaps its just in the definitions, where words fail to fully capture the nuance of letting go.
With warmth,
Matt
There is another side of Buddha Dharma that doesn't sit well with many people, and that is devotional practice. To me this involves an attachment, but a skillful one that serves importants functions, not least of all is opening the heart completely and embracing the path 100%.
There is a long process of unbinding karma, in what (I have been told by my current Zen teacher) becomes an increasing challenging karmic environment. There is a need for inspiration, of the kind you get seeing someone who has finshed the task standing on the other shore.
Tommorrow there will be a special Dana for a teacher who arouses that kind of inspiration. My 11 year old son has been practicing his bows and will introduce himself. It will be profoundly moving for me and my partner. It will strengthen our practice and commitment to the path and bring joy to the Sangha who have known him since he was a newborn. It will also I firmly believe be auspicious his own future, not to mention fun. This may seem weird or silly to some. People have different sensibilities.
Anyway I don't think there is a right or wrong here.
Certainly no complusion to attach to the raft.
Congratulations! I hope tomorrow brings much joy. I imagine seeing humility and honor radiating from your son could do nothing other.
With warmth,
Matt
But the reluctance to release is the attachment isn't it?
Maybe it's about recognising that all attachments have the potential to cause us suffering, ie developing insight into the Second Noble Truth.
P
Richard-
Of course the bolding in the quotation of your statement is mine for the sake of this discussion, but-
I have been preoccupied a lot lately with my relationship with my son, and by extension, my relationships with close family members and longtime friends (I am now 58) and the possibility of "karmic affinity" in these connections. Basically, I want to believe that there is a "karmic affinity", especially with my son, and that my relationship with him in this lifetime is not just a one-time thing and that we will be together again in the next lifetime, in whatever relationship that may be. As it sits, that's just what I want to believe, and it may be silly, but I am still inclined to believe it.
I was just thinking about a story about Chogyam Trungpa R., and the apparent web of "karmic-affinity" relationships that supposedly took place regarding him.
Apparently Dilgo Kyhentse Rinpoche was one of Trungpa's main teachers. There is a story that when Kyhentse Rinpoche arrived at the Denver airport to visit Trungpa R. and his family, he immediately recognized Trungpa R.'s son as a reincarnation of one of his own teachers, whose name I do not recall. It was like "Wow! Your son is (a reincarnation of my teacher)!"
I know that in "higher-up" circles in Vajrayana this is pretty much commonly believed, but I'm just wondering what people know or believe about this on "our" level. I prefer to believe in "cluster" reincarnation, that people are reincarnated in clusters, and that they continue on their journeys together that way. I may choose to believe it no matter what other people say, but I'm curious to know how other people see this. I just think the karmic affinity I feel for my son is so strong that this is a real possibility for me, and that translates to significant friendships in this lifetime that I feel a strong karmic affinity for.
Vajrayanists are especially invited to comment here.
I can appreciate the deep and resonant quality that people have when close relationships are shared. There are many circles in which karmic-affinity is represented, not just in the Vajra world, and yet I have never heard it in a present moment identification with others, such that it would differentiate one relationship over another.
For instance, in the circles I've walked, there are two types of regarded affinity. One, which appears to me to be unattached, is when information is easily, fluidly transmitted across a connection, as though the connection is millions of years old. This seems reasonable enough. It can be seen between people, between people and dharma, people and objects etc. I remember a story of the HHDL remembering where he kept his teeth, it sounded like an echo of pattern resonating from the previous experience.
The other is where we feel more capable of feeling compassion for specific people, and because of the potent feeling we consider them multi-life'd friends. Or, we consider the relationship especially important to us, and relate that gravity to a relationship that transcends death. Those, in what I see, are direct clinging and to be looked at like any other attached feeling.
To attempt to regard certain relationships as permanent or lasting beyond this lifetime (even really lasting beyond the moment of connection) is ripe with slippery notions of dukkha. This is not to say that it isn't so, but it might be better to focus on what drives the examination, rather than the possibilities of the truth. Sometimes, fear of extinction can bring up a lot of interesting perspectives regarding reincarnation and group membership.
With warmth,
Matt
Better to have loved and lost....
It is said about Ramkrishna that he was much too interested in food; in fact obsessed. Even his wife, Sharada, used to feel very embarrassed; because he was such a great saint, only with one flaw – and the flaw was that he was much too interested in food. He was interested so much that while he was giving satsang to his disciples, just in the middle he will say, ”Wait, I am coming,” and he will go to look into the kitchen, what is being cooked. He will just go there and ask, ”What is being prepared today?” and then will come back and start his satsang again.
His closest disciples became worried. They said, ”This doesn’t look good, Paramhansa. And everything is so perfectly beautiful – never has there walked such a beautiful and perfect man – but this small thing, why can’t you drop it?” He will laugh and will not say anything.
One day his wife Sharada insisted too much. He said, ”Okay, if you insist, I will tell. My prarabdha is finished; and I am just clinging with this food. If I drop that I am gone.” The wife could not believe this. It is very difficult for wives to believe in their own husbands – even if the husband is a Paramhansa it makes no difference. The wife must have thought that he is befooling, or he is trying to rationalize. Seeing that, Ramkrishna said, ”Look, I can see that you are not trusting me, but you will know. The day I am going to die, just three days before that day, three days before my death, I will not look at the food. You will bring my thali in, and I will start looking in another direction; then you can know that only three days more am I to be here.”
That too was not believed; they forgot about it. Then, just three days before Ramkrishna died, he was resting, Sharada brought his thali, his food: he turned over, started looking at the other side. Suddenly the wife realized, remembered. The thali fell from her hands, she started crying.
Ramkrishna said, ”Don’t cry now. Now my work is finished; I need not cling.” And exactly after three days he died.
These are ties that bind one to rounds of rebirth. Only by clinging to nothing will there be Unbinding(nibbana). 3 days before his death he attained nibbana, to die while living.
Ramakrishna seemed to intuitively know that his time is up. IMO his death is the parinibbana, the exhaustion of the residual karma.
This man was only clinging to his ego.
It doesn't "keep us alive"; it only keep the ego alive; keeping us slaves of our own mind.
this is why even mundane attachments must be looked at just like any others.
Are you saying that you are an experienced mediator but you never let go of attachments? you never experienced this personally?
if this is the case you should seek the advices of a qualified teacher.
If you do not make progress on your path, after working hard, it is a great sign that you do not practice properly.
If things sounds too complicated and unachievable, it simply mean that you did not understood the concept. This is why sometimes it is crucial to have a teacher.
One do not need to be a religious pundit to promote letting go of attachments; anyone who experienced letting go of attachments through his own experience of meditation would know that it is indeed very possible and inevitable if discipline and the right effort is maintained.
And not so difficult either.
can you see everything that is wrong with this?
I believe i shouldn't answer this just to allow you to face your own demons, but i will satisfy your craving nonetheless. (so you don't get eaten alive
When I have questions, i find a teacher. I do not often feel the need to ask any questions. My path seem fairly obvious to me these days, which is to just get the work done in the meditation.
But when i do have questions, there are two in Toronto where i can visit. I did visit one teacher was at the bloor and ... in between st-george and spadina, the tibetan temple, and i was quite satisfied with the answers given to me.
the other is the zen temple at spadina. I do not have questions yet to ask the teacher, but i know that when i do, i will find answers there.
If i have questions in the future, i know where to go (not that you seem to worry too much about my potential problems
I did take advantage of teacher at the Vipassana retreat (near Barrie) a few times as well.
satisfied?
with love!
It's not demons, although I like you do have them. It is a skepticism. The way you told dennis he/she was probably not practicing properly and should consult a teacher, and that it is crucial sometimes to have a teacher, gave a certain impression that I wanted to clarify. You have, but I already knew that.
We all have ego delusion, round these parts, (the Bhikkhu aside maybe) and we all to varying degrees have genuine insight and maybe "Enlightenment experiences" it's no big deal. It is also natural to attach to our "correct" understanding of the Dharma.
I fall into this bullsh*t teacher mode, you do, lots of us do because we care about the Dharma.
a potato will still be a potato even if you label it with a different name.
i did not do so.
Based on his post, I suggested a possible interpretation and gave the advice to seek the advices of a teacher based on this possible interpretation. not on an assumption that this interpretation was right or wrong for his particular case.
Ok I have demons around Pat.
That sounds so much better.
I'll PM you, because now I'm officially avoiding work. later
You're so right!
P
But it's possible to be aware of all our attachments and where they lead us. That's the first step to letting go.
P
Didn't the Buddha teach that it IS possible to be rid of all attachments? If one can truly perceive that "All 5 skandhas are empty", then what is there that is left that can be attached to? It seems to me that you are saying here that the 3rd Noble Truth is simply not true?
SN 22.53 "At Savatthi. There the Blessed One said, "One attached is unreleased; one unattached is released."
If it is just a pipe dream and not real, then it is not possible to be released?
Yes, I think he did, and yes, I think that's the goal of the 8-fold path. Technically I don't think there's such a thing as a "wholesome attachment", though clearly some attachments are less unwholesome than others.;)
P