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.
I've been confused for a while on this, but it isnt the point to not, not feel emotions, but rather not let your annoyance or sadness, etc take over and not let you still be kind and helpful? Realize they will pass and still be benevolent and sweet, ?
Metta, and opinions appreciated.
0
Comments
Zen masters can be very emotional for instance. They cry. They just don't cling to these emotions.
Thanks for the help.
And I get what you're saying- sometimes they bring out which emotion they believe could be best suitable for a situation: Yelling, not out of real anger, but intending on it to help you, in some way. That's where I'd guess mindfulness comes into play.
Could you explain this? I understand it, in a way, but am confused on what he means by 'No a human emotion.' And, if you did feel happy or not, what could you practice?
But the question arises, "encourages us for what?" Mostly they just encourage us towards more emotion or more intellectual accumulation. The more we rely on emotion and intellect, the more we are disappointed: Intellect and emotions change, so their credibility is thrown into question. Uncertainty arises: If emotions and intellect can't provide the smooth and easy peace we might seek, what can?
In this realm, a little meditation practice helps. The object is not to rise above or erase intellect and emotion. The object is to be at ease with what is right in front of our noses. No need for diatribes about "attachment" or "non-attachment." Just practice and see what actually happens.
Just my take.
Ta Hui is an ancient Chinese Chan Master, from a time when there were two schools of Chan in China (and I forget their names and I'm too lazy to look them up), what would become Renzai and Soto once they were exported to Japan. The Zen practice that Ta Hui teached was Renzai, that of koans and striving with all one's effort until satori or sudden intuitive awakening happens. The other school of Zen, Soto, stressed just meditation for its own sake, with no goal, as the path to a more gradual awakening.
People who don't know the rich history of Chan and Zen can be confused when they read different Masters from different schools, one telling you to strive with every ounce of effort and if sitting in meditation can make you a Buddha, then all frogs are enlightened, and the other saying just sit, that there is nothing out there to find, that you are already a Buddha and just need to wake to this truth.
Which one is right? Sit down and find out for yourself. Might as well ask why Bodhidharma came to China in the first place.
The wise thing to do is to allow our emotions to be. Accept both the good and the bad and then release. It helps to know feelings for what they really are, temporary impermanent experience. It is the difference between, I feel sad/happy, and I am sad/happy.
It is very easy to cling (or avoid) and create stories. To become lost in our emotions.
I like this visualization.
Imagine you are a tree out in a strong storm of negative emotions. The wind blows and whips the tips of the branches around in a most violent way. At the same time the trunk of the tree just weathers the storm in stillness knowing it is anchored and the storm will eventually pass. Be the trunk not the branches till the storm blows over.
I believe we can all agree that emotions are impermenant.
As well, I believe we are all Buddhas, we just need to shed away the habitual and ego 'self' we believe we are.
And, with compassion, doing things like drugs, etc. could be still considered foolish to do, but I suppose it's not thinking just that, but realizing that before now, before we thought and saw to think otherwise, we were searching for some sort of way to become happy, and they are as well, maybe in an unwholesome, maybe not. Just hope well for them.
Metta, and thanks again!