Compassion Revisited

Dakini

This post came up on the "Compassion Without Buddhism" thread, and I think it deserves some examination and discussion.
Xabir: "The greatest help you can give others is to permanently free them from all suffering via enlightenment, nirvana. (not [to offer] them temporary solutions to aspects of suffering in their lives)"
Quoting Loppon Namdrol: "The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion. The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Mundane" day-to-day compassion is wrong? We shouldn't be bothering with helping our friends, acquaintances, strangers, working to bring about social change, contributing to the alleviation of "mundane" suffering?

Does it have to be an "either-or" question? Can't it be "both-and"? Can't we commit random acts of kindness and compassion while at the same time working to overcome our afflictions, and doing what we can to support others in their quest for freedom from suffering via enlightenment? Isn't the cultivation of all forms of compassion integral to our own transformation and "overcoming of afflictions"?

And how many of us are qualified to "permanently free others from all suffering via enlightenment, nirvana"? The best most of us can do is to point the way to others, offer counsel, and the like, no? This seems like a statement more applicable to teachers than to students.

Thoughts, comments, analysis, clarification welcome.

genkaku

Kindness beats cruelty, so at first the practice of a "compassion" most commonly envisioned as a kind of haloed super-altruism is good practice. It's nice to be nice.

But investigation of the nice-to-be-nice, socially-impassioned sort of compassion shows that compassion is just the way things work...the way they honestly work.

Given all the praise and effort lavished on nice-to-be-nice compassion, this may seem like a come-down and a bummer, but it is really much richer than anything that can be praised.

My take, obviously.

Dakini

Well, compassion is based on empathy, no? It's not just about being nice because that's the nice thing to do. (Maybe I misunderstood you.)

I'm not sure that compassion is the way things work. There's an awful lot of self-serving action, corruption, thoughtlessness, and cruelty in the world. If compassion were the way things work, the world wouldn't be in such a mess. (But, maybe I misunderstood your point again. Sorry. )

genkaku

Let's all be nice in the meantime.

compassionate_warrior

Hear, hear! Let's all be nice!

Clearly Liberation for ourselves and others is the greatest goal, but not the only one, IMO. I'm all for the "both-and" approach, as I've commented elsewhere. That was my understanding of what Dharma practice is about.

kayte

This post came up on the "Compassion Without Buddhism" thread, and I think it deserves some examination and discussion.
Xabir: "The greatest help you can give others is to permanently free them from all suffering via enlightenment, nirvana. (not [to offer] them temporary solutions to aspects of suffering in their lives)"
Quoting Loppon Namdrol: "The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion. The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom."

These statements confuse me and make me doubt that I understand enough about Buddhism to try and practice it.

How does one permanently free others from all suffering via enlightenment? Is this anything like the old saying: “Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime”—Author unknown?

Freedom from suffering comes from within, yes? Compassion could help those who are struggling with mental/emotional/psychological/physical problems. A person can gain some enlightenment from their experiences- good or bad. Sometimes growth is painful but compassion may be the influence that helps them move past the pain and gives them hope.

I don't advocate coddling people who won't help themselves and refuse to face their negative behavior. I do believe in helping people when they start to realize the nature of their problem. No one can do this for them, only support and teach them when they are ready to listen.

Some people may need mundane compassion to help ready them to seek enlightenment.

Just my 2 cents.

Namaste

TheJourney

Ultimately there is no "good" or "bad," "compassion" or "hatred." There simply is what is. people have their own concepts of good and bad, but they have no meaning. Be like water. Just go with the current.

Cinorjer

"Attain human nature, then attain your correct situation, correct function, and correct relationship. Then you attain great love, great compassion, and the great Bodhisattva way." (Zen Master Seung Sahn)

So the answers from above confused you? Try this:

Three young birds have not grown big enough to leave the nest. Between visits by their parent birds, they got to arguing about their purpose in life.

"Our purpose is to eat as many bugs as momma and daddy so we can grow as big as they are!" one bird says.

"Our purpose is to grow feathers so we can be as pretty as they are!" another bird says.

"No, our purpose is to learn how to fly so one day we can leave the nest!" the third bird said.

"I know," the first bird said, "We'll ask momma!" When the mother bird arrived, the baby birds all chirped the question.

"Such loud peeping! Here's a nice, juicy worm for all of you," was all the momma bird said.

Which little bird was correct? Such confusing and different answers! Was any of them wrong?

Cinorjer

I don't advocate coddling people who won't help themselves and refuse to face their negative behavior. I do believe in helping people when they start to realize the nature of their problem. No one can do this for them, only support and teach them when they are ready to listen.

Suppose the Buddha had looked around after his great awakening, and thought, "These people won't help themselves, refuse to face their negative behavior, and don't realize the nature of their problem. These people aren't worthy of my compassion!"

Kayte, I do understand that there are people out there that will take anything you give them and continue their self destructive behavior. But, that is the oldest excuse there is to not help someone, because people actually resent needy people, don't like giving, and are always ready to judge them unworthy.

"I won't give that bum a dollar, because he'll only buy booze with it!" "Giving those people more unemployment payments only encourages them not to work!"

Compassion isn't something somebody has to earn from us. In fact, compassion begins with learning not to judge. And, once you learn how to look at people with a clear mind instead of one stained with a judgemental attitude, then the purpose becomes clear. What can I do to help? Sometimes, help means saying no. But develop the clear mind, first, or all you're doing is being selfish.

kayte

I don't advocate coddling people who won't help themselves and refuse to face their negative behavior. I do believe in helping people when they start to realize the nature of their problem. No one can do this for them, only support and teach them when they are ready to listen.

Suppose the Buddha had looked around after his great awakening, and thought, "These people won't help themselves, refuse to face their negative behavior, and don't realize the nature of their problem. These people aren't worthy of my compassion!"

Kayte, I do understand that there are people out there that will take anything you give them and continue their self destructive behavior. But, that is the oldest excuse there is to not help someone, because people actually resent needy people, don't like giving, and are always ready to judge them unworthy.

"I won't give that bum a dollar, because he'll only buy booze with it!" "Giving those people more unemployment payments only encourages them not to work!"

Compassion isn't something somebody has to earn from us. In fact, compassion begins with learning not to judge. And, once you learn how to look at people with a clear mind instead of one stained with a judgemental attitude, then the purpose becomes clear. What can I do to help? Sometimes, help means saying no. But develop the clear mind, first, or all you're doing is being selfish.

Cinorjer- I don't think that I stated my position clearly. We can't always express our feelings with just text. Vocal tone and facial expressions help. I am NOT one of those callous people who blames the victim. I've been told that I am too naive and soft hearted. What I have observed, is that people can cling to very destructive habits. Some of them require more conventional intervention and therapy before they can even understand what they need.

It pains me to see any life ruined. When I am with people who are making harsh judgments on others, I try to point out something good about the person. When they try to draw me into it, I just say, "I don't know that person's circumstances. I don't understand why they are behaving that way. I choose to be kind." The last thing troubled or troubling people need is other people adding to their problems.

I have had enough difficult experiences in my own life to know what that feels like. I have concluded that the pain has taught me to have empathy for others.

Perhaps the great changes in the developed world have robbed too many people of a sense of purpose. They have been displace and are at a loss about what to do. I think that purpose brings happiness. Materialism, ego, and competition can interfere with happiness and purpose.

Yes, I am confused by some of the teachings. The story about the nestlings did illustrate that sometimes there are no answers.

Sometimes it's hard to know what will help or harm.

I like this story:

There is a Taoist story of an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit.

"Such bad luck," they said sympathetically.

"We’ll see," the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses.

"How wonderful," the neighbors exclaimed.

"We’ll see," replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune.

"We’ll see," answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son’s leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.

"We’ll see" said the farmer.

Namaste

compassionate_warrior

I think the reason the quotes provided by the OP are confusing is that either they were taken out of context, or the person who originally provided them didn't understand his teacher correctly, or (dare I say?) the teacher was wrong. We know there are many texts discussing how to cultivate compassion towards others, how to develop non-discrimination in our compassion, etc. Isn't this one of the main focuses of Buddhism? Practicing compassion towards others helps remedy ego-clinging. This is basic. Too bad we can't invite Loppon Namdrol to explain his position. Perhaps this is one of those situations that illustrate the importance of thoroughly checking out a teacher before signing on with him/her.

Cinorjer

I don't advocate coddling people who won't help themselves and refuse to face their negative behavior. I do believe in helping people when they start to realize the nature of their problem. No one can do this for them, only support and teach them when they are ready to listen.

Suppose the Buddha had looked around after his great awakening, and thought, "These people won't help themselves, refuse to face their negative behavior, and don't realize the nature of their problem. These people aren't worthy of my compassion!"

Kayte, I do understand that there are people out there that will take anything you give them and continue their self destructive behavior. But, that is the oldest excuse there is to not help someone, because people actually resent needy people, don't like giving, and are always ready to judge them unworthy.

"I won't give that bum a dollar, because he'll only buy booze with it!" "Giving those people more unemployment payments only encourages them not to work!"

Compassion isn't something somebody has to earn from us. In fact, compassion begins with learning not to judge. And, once you learn how to look at people with a clear mind instead of one stained with a judgemental attitude, then the purpose becomes clear. What can I do to help? Sometimes, help means saying no. But develop the clear mind, first, or all you're doing is being selfish.

Cinorjer- I don't think that I stated my position clearly. We can't always express our feelings with just text. Vocal tone and facial expressions help. I am NOT one of those callous people who blames the victim. I've been told that I am too naive and soft hearted. What I have observed, is that people can cling to very destructive habits. Some of them require more conventional intervention and therapy before they can even understand what they need.

It pains me to see any life ruined. When I am with people who are making harsh judgments on others, I try to point out something good about the person. When they try to draw me into it, I just say, "I don't know that person's circumstances. I don't understand why they are behaving that way. I choose to be kind." The last thing troubled or troubling people need is other people adding to their problems.

I have had enough difficult experiences in my own life to know what that feels like. I have concluded that the pain has taught me to have empathy for others.

Perhaps the great changes in the developed world have robbed too many people of a sense of purpose. They have been displace and are at a loss about what to do. I think that purpose brings happiness. Materialism, ego, and competition can interfere with happiness and purpose.

Yes, I am confused by some of the teachings. The story about the nestlings did illustrate that sometimes there are no answers.

Sometimes it's hard to know what will help or harm.

I like this story:

There is a Taoist story of an old farmer who had worked his crops for many years. One day his horse ran away. Upon hearing the news, his neighbors came to visit.

"Such bad luck," they said sympathetically.

"We’ll see," the farmer replied.

The next morning the horse returned, bringing with it three other wild horses.

"How wonderful," the neighbors exclaimed.

"We’ll see," replied the old man.

The following day, his son tried to ride one of the untamed horses, was thrown, and broke his leg. The neighbors again came to offer their sympathy on his misfortune.

"We’ll see," answered the farmer.

The day after, military officials came to the village to draft young men into the army. Seeing that the son’s leg was broken, they passed him by. The neighbors congratulated the farmer on how well things had turned out.

"We’ll see" said the farmer.

Namaste

My apologies, I didn't mean to give the impression I thought you would use excuses not to be charitable, only how this is a path that won't lead to compassion.

Dakini

Cinorjer, I'm all for helping others, but I think I see Kayte's point. In helping others, I've noticed that some people are "helpable", and others mess up no matter how much you try. I don't believe this is a matter of "skillful means". I think that some people have a LOT of self-defeating behaviors. Helping someone like that might first require getting them into therapy, and most people with self-defeating beliefs aren't open to therapy.

I think sometimes there's a difference between theory and the real world. Or maybe some people require help from those with much more training than we have. It's tricky.

kayte

My apologies, I didn't mean to give the impression I thought you would use excuses not to be charitable, only how this is a path that won't lead to compassion.

No offense taken.:) It is easy to misunderstand one another when we communicate this way. Thank you for clarifying your position.

Namaste

kayte

Cinorjer, I'm all for helping others, but I think I see Kayte's point. In helping others, I've noticed that some people are "helpable", and others mess up no matter how much you try. I don't believe this is a matter of "skillful means". I think that some people have a LOT of self-defeating behaviors. Helping someone like that might first require getting them into therapy, and most people with self-defeating beliefs aren't open to therapy.

I think sometimes there's a difference between theory and the real world. Or maybe some people require help from those with much more training than we have. It's tricky.

Dakini, Thank you, that is essentially what I was trying to say. Unskillfully, I'm afraid.

The modern world is much more complicated, therefore, the problems are more complicated and they affect more people. Science is still just scratching the surface of how the brain works. They're finding more information on how much psychological/mental/emotional issues affect people. We, as a society, have to find more effective ways to heal people so that they can find a place in society.

I have seen some religious people actively trying to help those in need. I've also seen fundamentalist religious folks "shun" people for not fitting their narrow view of acceptable.

Maybe effective assessment and treatment of people, first, will help heal them enough to seek enlightenment. It would also be helpful if more of the "normal" people would seek enlightenment, too.

Namaste

Cinorjer

Cinorjer, I'm all for helping others, but I think I see Kayte's point. In helping others, I've noticed that some people are "helpable", and others mess up no matter how much you try. I don't believe this is a matter of "skillful means". I think that some people have a LOT of self-defeating behaviors. Helping someone like that might first require getting them into therapy, and most people with self-defeating beliefs aren't open to therapy.

I think sometimes there's a difference between theory and the real world. Or maybe some people require help from those with much more training than we have. It's tricky.

Dakini, Thank you, that is essentially what I was trying to say. Unskillfully, I'm afraid.

The modern world is much more complicated, therefore, the problems are more complicated and they affect more people. Science is still just scratching the surface of how the brain works. They're finding more information on how much psychological/mental/emotional issues affect people. We, as a society, have to find more effective ways to heal people so that they can find a place in society.

I have seen some religious people actively trying to help those in need. I've also seen fundamentalist religious folks "shun" people for not fitting their narrow view of acceptable.

Maybe effective assessment and treatment of people, first, will help heal them enough to seek enlightenment. It would also be helpful if more of the "normal" people would seek enlightenment, too.

Namaste

The world is more complicated? I used to think that, until I lived long enough to know better. The world is certainly more cluttered. But, people's lives are the same now as they were back in Buddha's day. They have the same desires, the same fears, the same struggle to keep a roof over their heads and deal with and raise a family. They have bosses and rich people telling them what to do, and the rich play their power games and suffer just as much. If you're a big fish in the pond, there's always a bigger fish waiting to pounce.

So not so much different, where it counts. And society? We have rich and powerful, poor and beggars, insane and criminal. That's all societies for you.

So how can we help people? Start by helping yourself. Then you learn your true function. Giving should be as natural and without thought as your right hand handing your left hand a pensil. You have to divorce the act of giving from your expectations, and you only do that from letting go of the expectations in the first place. People are suffering, but they are people with their own lives and karma to work out. So you do what you can to help, but without demanding anything in return. Not even the satisfaction of watching your help make a difference.

Because, if you expect this, you are staying mired in frustration and unfulfilled desire to make a difference. Your compassionate giving does make a difference, but you're not going to see it most of the time. You have to take it on faith that compassionate giving is your proper function.

The Buddha was Enlightened when a woman, out of compassion, gave this crazy starving man sitting under a tree a bowl of rice to eat. As far as she knew, the man was going to throw the rice away and continue to starve himself to death. She might have shook her head as she walked away, wishing she could do something to cure the man from his craziness. I doubt she ever knew what that one act of giving did for the world. That's the model of giving out of compassion to follow.

kayte

The world is more complicated? I used to think that, until I lived long enough to know better. The world is certainly more cluttered. But, people's lives are the same now as they were back in Buddha's day. They have the same desires, the same fears, the same struggle to keep a roof over their heads and deal with and raise a family. They have bosses and rich people telling them what to do, and the rich play their power games and suffer just as much. If you're a big fish in the pond, there's always a bigger fish waiting to pounce.

So not so much different, where it counts. And society? We have rich and powerful, poor and beggars, insane and criminal. That's all societies for you.

So how can we help people? Start by helping yourself. Then you learn your true function. Giving should be as natural and without thought as your right hand handing your left hand a pensil. You have to divorce the act of giving from your expectations, and you only do that from letting go of the expectations in the first place. People are suffering, but they are people with their own lives and karma to work out. So you do what you can to help, but without demanding anything in return. Not even the satisfaction of watching your help make a difference.

Because, if you expect this, you are staying mired in frustration and unfulfilled desire to make a difference. Your compassionate giving does make a difference, but you're not going to see it most of the time. You have to take it on faith that compassionate giving is your proper function.

The Buddha was Enlightened when a woman, out of compassion, gave this crazy starving man sitting under a tree a bowl of rice to eat. As far as she knew, the man was going to throw the rice away and continue to starve himself to death. She might have shook her head as she walked away, wishing she could do something to cure the man from his craziness. I doubt she ever knew what that one act of giving did for the world. That's the model of giving out of compassion to follow.

Cinorjer-I beg to differ on the idea of today's society being no less complicated than 1000s of years ago. The basics stay the same- true. When you compare life today with life at the turn of the last century, the 1900s, you will find many differences. Diet, medical care, taxes, education requirements, means of making a livelihood, morality, religious practice, prejudice, crime rates, legal protections, government, exposure to chemicals/toxins, means of communication and travel, and on and on.

I agree that our basics needs and basic patterns have stayed the same. But try walking down to your local village with a rabbit pelt to exchange for food at you local farmer's market. That is, if your farmer's market hasn't been closed down by government regulations on organic gardening.

In the old days, you might have been able to trade a bushel of potatoes to have your horse shod at the blacksmith's. Can you make that same trade with your mechanic?

I'm not trying to nitpick. I just find it curious that you don't see any changes in how people live life today.


I understand what you are saying about charity needing to be from the heart with no expectations or strings attached. I've raised three children and I get the whole giving without expectation of receiving anything in return. I get the concept of putting others' needs before my own.

In practice, charity becomes second nature and opportunities never fail to present themselves. Why would I have expectations of Quid pro quo or gratitude?
I'm just grateful that I am able to help others.

Cinorjer

I'm just trying to make the point that where it counts, the experience of being human, nothing at all has changed. For our purposes, which is discussing the Dharma, the complexity of modern life is empty. That's why I call it cluttered instead of complex. The "simple life" of my childhood or even our ancestors was not simple at all. It just required a different set of skills and still had to meet the same needs. Try living off the land for a year and watch how fast someone can starve to death, if you think even farming is simple compared to office work for a paycheck and shopping at the mall.

Back in prehistory, a mother stood over the grave of a child, looked to the sky through her tears, and asked, "Why?" That is the same grief and the same tears you would cry over the grave of your child. If your eyes could meet across time, you'd see your life reflected in her struggles and understand each other. Your life is more cluttered, but her life was just as complex. Make it through the day. Feed everyone. Keep the children safe. So, instead of saber tooth tigers, you have a car accident to worry about. It's the same worry.

Progress is an illusion. It's empty. We have medical science now that our ancestors could only dream about--for those people lucky enough to live where they can get it, and afford it--but people still suffer and die from disease all the same. Our fears and desires and struggle for meaning haven't changed. Our capacity for hate and violence hasn't changed. Neither has our capacity for compassion.

And, the Dharma hasn't changed. But, I'm just being a windy old man lately. I occasionally start preaching sermons. Yesterday I caught some virus going around so I'm calling in sick so I can take advantage of modern medication and dose myself with decongestants. Modern life does have its advantages.

kayte

Cinorjer- I do see your point. Thank you for stating it so well. It didn't sound like a sermon. You helped me see a new perspective and gave me more to think about. Thank you for taking the time to answer.

I hope that you recover quickly and feel better soon.

Namaste

Dakini

We have to divorce the act of giving from expectations regarding the outcome.

True. But we need to discern between those who can benefit from our efforts, and those who can't, otherwise we can wind up spinning our wheels, or being taken advantage of by opportunists or scam artists. This isn't about progress, it's about skillful means; discernment is part of skillful means. I lived a good chunk of my life reaching out to help anyone at all. I learned from experience to discern.

caz

Quoting Loppon Namdrol: "The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion. The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom."

Ah that explains things a little better...:|

Dakini

Quoting Loppon Namdrol: "The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion. The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom."

Ah that explains things a little better...:|

haha. (A wry joke, I assume.)

Cinorjer

Quoting Loppon Namdrol: "The purpose of Dharma is not the cultivation of mundane compassion. The purpose of Dharma is to control afflictions, then overcome them, and finally, to attain a state of total omniscience and freedom."

Ah that explains things a little better...:|

Excuse me, you're quoting Malcom Smith, aka Namdrol, the moderator who first banned all Zen views from E-Sangha and then shut it down completely when people complained? That guy?

He's wrong. He's so breathtakingly wrong, it's hard to know where to begin.

I hope you get other opinions.

Dakini

Thanks so much for this info, Cinorjer. That quote really raised a red "Something-Is-Wrong-With-This-Picture" flag in my mind, which is why I put up this thread. And I think (I hope) Caz was kidding. I think that's supposed to be a wry face after the quote. I thought he was serious at first, too.

Apparently "Namdrol" has a following. Thanks again; what a relief to discover he's bogus! I do not consider your comment "wrong speech". Some people might. Though that could be the topic of another thread.

Cinorjer

I also debated pointing out the source, but it is such a remarkably off the wall interpretation of Buddhism that I figured it best to just bring it out in the open.

kayte

I also debated pointing out the source, but it is such a remarkably off the wall interpretation of Buddhism that I figured it best to just bring it out in the open.

Thank you. I appreciate your candor because I'm unfamiliar with "Namdrol".

Dakini

Bringing things out in the open can be healing. And that's what Buddhism's about, no?

And it helps forward people from selecting the wrong teacher, also important, as we see from kayte's comment.

Dakini

(Typo, above: it's supposed to read: "...it helps forwarn".)

compassionate_warrior

I don't think we should be afraid to speak the truth. I'd say Cinorjer's contribution was very appropriate speech. We need to be informed, not proceed blindly. Ignorance and naivete are risky. I'd file this under "dispelling ignorance", which is a good thing. "Let's all be nice" doesn't mean we should withhold information that could benefit others.