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.

Non-Attachment vs. Detachment

jgppjgpp
edited March 2011 in Buddhism Basics
What are the fundamental differences?

How does one know if they are truly non-attached or merely detached?

Can we say that one who is non-attached may hope for a certain outcome to happen, and if that outcome does not manifest, he or she can accept it, be "OK" with the results, and move on?

On the other hand, the detached individual has no hope for any potential outcome as he has no interest in the subject matter or issue at hand to begin with?

Comments

  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    The fundamental difference is semantic. Non-attachment and detachment can and often do refer to the same phenomenon.
  • federicafederica Seeker of the clear blue sky... Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubt Moderator
    I personally see it this way:
    non-attachment is the practice of realising that everything, all compounded phenomena, are impermanent, and practising to release the clinging, grasping aspect of our 'nature', without losing hold of compassion, wisdom and loving kindness.

    detachment is.... 'meh'....

    Frank but not unkind, indifference. Not really minding one way or the other....
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    Can we say that one who is non-attached may hope for a certain outcome to happen, and if that outcome does not manifest, he or she can accept it, be "OK" with the results, and move on?
    Yes.
    On the other hand, the detached individual has no hope for any potential outcome as he has no interest in the subject matter or issue at hand to begin with?
    Yes. It's a defensive posture.
    How does one know if they are truly non-attached or merely detached?
    Cultivate compassion.
    What are the fundamental differences?
    In terms of English meanings, very little. In a Buddhist context, your example captures the difference fairly well. Attachment is the samsaric tendency for awareness to collapse down on some specific phenomenon at the expense of attending to the rest of experience. Non-attachment is the opposite of this. Detachment is what Equanimity decays into.
  • JeffreyJeffrey Veteran
    Sounds like non-attachment would be welcoming and working with situations, whereas detachment is being indifferent. Non-attachment is equinimity and detachment (might to some) be near enemy or imposter of equanimity.

    Then again I like Sherab Dorje answer to and it depands what people MEAN when they use WORDS
  • hermitwinhermitwin Veteran
    Both are good.
  • TheswingisyellowTheswingisyellow Trying to be open to existence Samsara Veteran
    "Non-attachment is equinimity and detachment (might to some) be near enemy or imposter of equanimity."
    I would agree with this. For me detachment has a negative connotation. To me it implies non-engagement, indifference, maybe even subtle hostility.
    With metta,
    Todd

  • dontknowdontknow
    The one and only thing you must become detached from is your thinking. We believe that our thinking is reality. But it is merely something we create, an interpretation of reality. If you become detached to your thinking by giving it less attention, then you become free from all other forms of attachment.
  • fivebellsfivebells Veteran
    edited March 2011
    Depends what you mean by "thinking." The way that word is usually interpreted, what you've said isn't true, in that there are other things towards which samsaric attachments form.
  • SherabDorjeSherabDorje
    edited March 2011
    The one and only thing you must become detached from is your thinking. We believe that our thinking is reality. But it is merely something we create, an interpretation of reality. If you become detached to your thinking by giving it less attention, then you become free from all other forms of attachment.
    Do you mean "non-attached" or "detached"? It seems like detachment has generally been defined as "meh..." in this thread for purposes of this discussion. And to agree, with fivebells, it really does depend on what you mean by "thinking". Do you mean interpreting, judging, judging in the context of "I don't like that", or what exactly?

    If we became detached from thinking in the conventional sense, the world would become a pretty disorganized place. Just think of the traffic jams and traffic accidents, and that's just for starters.

  • SeaOfTranquilitySeaOfTranquility Veteran
    Sounds like word play to me. But hey I'm game.

    Detachment would occur after you had already become attached.

    Non-attachment would be the practice of not becoming attached in the first place.

    I think the important thing to note is that attachment and aversion occur as a REACTION to something. Through awareness and mindfulness these habitual reactions can be seen and hopefully stopped before they get a hold.
  • dontknowdontknow
    All thinking is an illusion. It is concepts we create in our mind that we apply to reality. They are empty. They are not reality. We need thinking to survive and to function in this world (which is based largely on what we have mentally agreed is true). But we become obsessed with our thinking. We believe our thoughts are equivalent to reality. They're not. They are our attempt to INTERPRET reality. If we take the approach of non-attachment to our thinking, meaning: we take our thoughts less seriously by realizing that thinking is something we create rather than something we experience, we can lead a life that contains less suffering.

    All suffering depends on thinking. All thinking is our desire for how we wish the world to be (be it positive or negative thinking). Taking thoughts to be reality is what the Buddha called ignorance. And in the chain of co-dependent arising, it is the first condition of suffering.
Sign In or Register to comment.