Untwisting our own panties
lobster
Crusty Veteran
From another thread . . .
The fact is, if I want a beer, a cake, a steak, or a cigarette, I shouldn't have to justify it to anyone else. If I am ok with knowing what I know and making a choice, then everyone else really has no choice but to accept that because they don't get to make the decision for me. If someone gets their panties in a twist over the decisions I make about my life that don't affect them in the least, then they are the one with the problem.
As we all know one of the favoured dharma pursuits is pointing out our fellow travellers who are 'not really on the true and authentic path'.
Luckily that never happens here or to Mr Cushion . . . or maybe it does? Anybody still un-twisting other people's panties? How is that working out for you?
Comments
Just glad to see you finally admit that you wear panties!
^^^ Glad eh? Do we sometimes presume too much? It just so happens I don't wear underwear . . .
I'm guessing that the point of this post is about trying to modify the behaviour of others? But not being a proper Buddhist (though I do know a little about Buddhism) I know I often bring A.A. into this forum. That's probably because it's ingrained into me that we should never tell another alcoholic what to do, but instead, to merely share our experience around a subject and hope my fellow alcoholic will see his own story in ours, and follow our example. It seems to be more effective (skilful) that way.
Another thing is that in our instructions for 'working with others', (helping alcoholics to recover from their alcoholism), all the instructions are about us as individuals and what we should be doing - there is nothing in there about what our 'prospects' should be doing (it doesn't even say they should stop drinking).
The principle seems to be that by focussing on ourselves and what we should be doing, it somehow helps modify - in a positive way - the behaviour of others.
Is that a paradox? Or am I full of shit? I look forward to reading some Buddhist replies.
I think so, @Tosh. I mean, I think that is a good way of looking at it. By sharing our experience and leaving others to take from it what they need at the time. It also gives them a reference point to come back and ask questions or whatever as well. It gives them a resource.
I do think that one has to be a little careful in some circumstances that sharing our experience doesn't take the power of the experience of sharing away from the person who spoke up originally. I tend to do that sometimes. Not intentionally, I share as a way to connect with them and let the know they aren't alone. But sometimes, it kind of takes the wind out of their sails, so to speak and I'm trying to be more careful what I say, and when in various situations. For example, if someone comments that a loved one died, I often reference my ex/kid's dad who died, when instead I should be focused first on providing support and kindness wherever I can, not always necessarily comparing experiences.
I posted the comment @lobster referenced in a discussion where someone else said that he thinks people drink because they like it and then try to justify it. My point in my comment was just that no one should have to justify their behaviors/choices because someone disagrees with it. Their disagreement is on them, it's their problem to work with...not to try to turn it into someone else's problem. If I want to have a drink because I like it (which is the only reason I drink anything except water, honestly) then I don't owe anyone, including other Buddhists, an explanation for that.
@Tosh, yes, it sure looks like a paradox. In the same spirit with AA, the Alanon side of things holds to the same attitude toward modifying the behavior of others (the alcoholic, of course).
It's been hard for me to NOT speak up about the obvious, that indeed the modification of other people's behavior is in mind.
You can't reach inside another person's brain and change the circuits around so to change their behavior, which would be the only sure-fire way to do so. Putting pressure on them verbally/behaviorally might cause them to choose for themselves to change their behavior, but YOU didn't change it, they did. It's not a long stretch to imagine you have the power, through force of coercion, to make a person 'change'. It's a pretty ubiquitous assumption to the point a person just assumes it to be true.
But the point in Alanon (which is just plain folk wisdom in any wisdom tradition) is to change yourself and detach from your precious idea of 'change' for your target.
Who am I to expect or demand a person to change? Am I the Change Police? It's rather self-centered, and assumes waaayyyy too much authority and wisdom, on my part, doesn't it? That's hyperbolic but essentially how I unpack the central message.
What I can do, with difficulty, is change myself. And with insight into how difficult it is to change myself, what I'm expecting others to change into is looking even more self-centered and grandiose than ever.
People can suggest, cajole, spew, argue, threaten, but where the rubber hits the road, the only reason it works is because we let it work. That little moment of choice is still there, between impulse and action.
I think that it is important to honestly examine where the impulse to express criticism toward the actions of another is coming from. As buddhists (and people interested in buddhism) we know that these sorts of desires and motivations can have all sorts of different roots. Are you expressing these thoughts out of genuine concern because this person is putting themselves in harms way, or are you playing dharma police and trying to control the behavior of others because you are convince that YOU have found the one and only yellow brick road to enlightenment? Or, perhaps, it is something entirely different.
I have a few very embarrassing stories from my early days of flirting with dharma where I decided to play teenage buddha. I'd rather not go into any more detail, haha.
Point is, there may be times when expressing concern is appropriate and comes from a place of compassion, other times, not so much
Ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
Thanks guys,
:clap: .
My feeling and inclination is towards 'we are the change that ripples'. In other words our change effects others. That is sufficient. So my approach accords very much with the Theravadin approach.
It is not unnatural to use our experience, our compassion and empathy, our knowledge, our experience, our humour, our skill with words, our innocence, our 'beginner mind' etc. to help. That is a natural human tendency.
If we are sangha or teachers of dharma, we are providing skilful example and means. So that level of skill is part of the three jewels.
A. A. seems to be doing something right. Tosh and others have illustrated this model of total abstention.
Can we break free of our tendencies to preach, meander in samsara, change the behaviour of others, be cloyingly kind, contrary, wise guys, unhelpfully paradoxical etc? I hope so. I think so.
As we all know one of the favoured dharma pursuits is pointing out our fellow travellers who are 'not really on the true and authentic path'.
The Buddha spent a lot of time doing that...
I'm pretty sure none of us here have reached a Buddha state. We're not really qualified to be doing that for others. Especially on the internet. Buddha knew his path. The rest of us are still bushwacking and tripping over tree roots and getting poison ivy on ours.
How to do 'insightful ' AND ' lol '....
This idea of 'justification ' is extraordinary.
Who has to justify what they eat and drink ? And to whom ?
What a deeply weird and controlling notion.
I find it difficult to find the words to adequately convey my utter indifference to other peoples response to what I freely choose to eat and drink...lol.
Its only matched by my complete indifference to what they eat and drink.
The only enlightening thing about finding fault with others, is that the activity mirrors back to us faults we might have to correct in ourselves.
And when it comes to judging others and presuming to know the only way to do things or live, there you are again, that's your personal defilement to work on.
Do not condemn the judgment of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.
^^^ I feel this mirroring back or the finger that points is pointing at us or our perception of a situation.
We are in essence judging ourself.
The Buddha was not critical but revelatory, in other words able to provide independent assessment with wisdom and compassion.
If we have the experience, wisdom and compassion of a Buddha then we know what is our defilement and what is of value to others unfolding (unless we subscribe to the all Buddhas are perfect tinkerbells model of Buddhas).
The idea of perfect Buddhahood or the necessity of restraints on pointing out is to reflect on the nature of right speech. The perfect speech is silence. The Buddha in effect stepped back to the level of a Boddhisatvah in order to expound a path.
Can we ascertain what is our defilement, our higher impulse? I hope so. I think so.
:wave: .
In the suttas the Buddha regularly critisised what he regarded as false views, and regularly lectured on ethical behaviour. Naughty Buddha!
Buddhist practice will challenge our habitual assumptions and behaviours, that's the point of it really. So there will inevitably be some panty-twisting involved.
I would agree entirely! Unless of course, those decisions have harmful effects on others. If that is the case, then those decisions can appropriately be criticized.
But at the same time, "criticism of harmful activity" and "panties in a twist" are not necessarily the same thing. One can exist without the other.
Well said.
Indeed. But I get to twist my own panties through MY practice. Not you inflicting your practice on me.
What if that person is a loved one and they are eating and / or drinking themselves to an early grave?
My in laws have both developed diabeties recently (they're in their sixties) through a life time of terrible diets. Should my wife simply accept this as none of her business or should she offer advice on some changes they could make (she has extensive knowledge on nutrition)?
@Bunks, I think your wife could suggest some things, but they might not hear it. In one ear out the other.
You can offer advice...but it's up to them to take it. My Mother is obese.
She can hardly walk....She'll be bedridden soon, I think. I've talked and talked to her. In all kinds of ways. After giving my two cents...I now feel like it's none of my business. If it is....there is still nothing I can do about it.
I can't control how she lives her life and I can't do it for her.
Let me know when you figure out what to say that works ...
I might be wrong, @Bunks, but I don't feel @Citta's comment and your example quite relate.
Not having to justify one's life choices has little to do with voicing your opinion when you feel that somebody's choices could be putting their lives at risk.
Fact: She can hardly walk and could be bedridden soon. Does she realize this?
Offer: Have you offered to help in some way.
Reality: Your job is done if she has not accepted your offer(s) of help. To continue on and on about it is nagging and does no one any good.
Preach on, brother. Some people just get so pent up about such trivial things.
Just gotta relax, and let those panties slip to the floor.
Some people don't even realize they have panties (not meaning Vastmind).
Yes. I think you're right. I was actually quite shocked that someone could be so indifferent about the fact that someone close to them could be killing themselves and not care about that. I assume I misunderstood Citta's comment.
You can offer, but if they aren't ready they won't listen even if they hear. I can give a million examples of this with my own mother. I cannot even count the times I have tried to share things with her, from spiritual things to diet to science, or whatever. And she hears me, but it doesn't sink it. And sometimes years later, she comes back with the same information as if it's new, and I just laugh and tell her "don't you remember when I told you that 5 years ago?" and she hasn't a clue. If the light isn't shining on that part of their path, it can't light the way to the wisdom.
I feel it is quite natural, a human tendency, to wish well being for ourselves and others. Compassion and empathy is no 'great attainment'. It is common enough human decency. I do notice that our interior alignment, calm abiding, being in the moment etc, is in itself transformative of others . . .
http://www.thebuddhadharma.com/web-archive/2012/11/8/you-are-already-enlightened.html
Precepts, rules, levels of practice indulgence (all the practice I have done enables me to preach at lesser mortals syndrome) is a measure of personal integrity and alignment.
The intractable insistence of our dharma being applicable to others is no more realistic than assuming we can always modify irrational or self destructive behaviour by argument. Sometimes we are just talking to ourselves . . .
'Look to your own salvation', were I believe the Buddhas final words. Good advice.
http://www.phrases.org.uk/quotes/last-words/buddha.html
Where can we find people that cares about our health and choices is what I'd like to know. Besides our friends and family of course.
Inside ourselves I would suggest . . . :wave: .
My remarks were specific to the forum @Bunks. They were not a general observation about concerns about loved ones.
It was suggested on another thread that people were looking to 'justify' eating meat.
My reply was to state that no one on this forum has to 'justify' what they eat to another member. That the very idea that they should was all about control...
I have no interest in what other members of this forum have for lunch and what I have is none of their business.
Is that clearer ? It wasn't about family.
It was about the tendency that a tiny few members have to assume that they have the right to lecture others about what is on their plate.
Some members here do seem rather fond of giving lectures.
I don't see any "inflicting" going on, just some over-sensitivity on ethical questions.
And if we don't want our ideas challenged, then why come on a Buddhist forum? Why bother with Buddhist practice at all?
No, there's a bit of inflicting going on. I'm surprised (and not pleasantly) that you refuse to see it.
Insisting someone else is wrong because of the path you are on is not challenging. If you want to toss out a challenge to the practice of people, come up with something more creative that "be a vegetarian/vegan" because we've been down that road a few times.
I haven't "insisted" on anything. I'm really puzzled by this over-sensitive attitude of "I'm going to do exactly what I want to do, how _dare _anyone suggest something else."
There are different ways of "inflicting". I'm surprised you can't see what's really going on here.
I more meant the general way it's gone about in the forum over the limited time I have been here (A couple years). With your particular comments, it was more my irritation over your "Well Buddha did it, so clearly it is acceptable to question the inethical behavior of others" Except you aren't Buddha, and Buddha didn't tell people not to eat meat, as we've gone over before.
I just wish people would share their experience, and leave it at that, rather than by basically saying "I do it this way, and this way is the right way."