Lesson in Self-Cherishing/The ego

[Tao_Equus]

I agree, the Greek 'apathea' means 'lack of emotion', joy is most certainly an emotion. Ego thelli sto xasa para polly ke den thelli ti apathea.

TE

[Bandit]

i count my suffering as joy

[Thomas]

Apathea as a theological (and philosophical) term is more accurately 'detachment', at worst 'disinterest' - 'apathy' is derived from the term, but its current meaning is far from the philo/theological understanding.

Its origin lies in Stoic philosophy.

Thomas

[Tao_Equus]

Originally Posted by Thomas

Apathea as a theological (and philosophical) term is more accurately 'detachment', at worst 'disinterest' - 'apathy' is derived from the term, but its current meaning is far from the philo/theological understanding.

Its origin lies in Stoic philosophy.

Thomas

Fair enough

TE

[rdwillia]

Wow, this thread has taken on a life of it's own! I believe Samabudhi and Ciel have said perfectly what I would have. With that being said;

Originally Posted by Seattlegal

Interesting! I believe this is what medical professionals call "shock." One of the treatments for it consists of talking to the person, in order to try to "keep them in their body." One would have to be well-practiced in order to maintain this state without putting the body into peril. People sometimes die from shock.

Seattlegal, I'm not sure, but I feel like I might be picking up on some sarcasm here and in your last comment, it's difficult to tell in text form. I sincerely hope I'm not coming across as being arrogant. Compared to a lot, I have suffered very little, though I am fully aware of the phenomena of shock. I must defend Samabudhi's clarification that there is a huge difference between someone in shock and a Bodhisattva. As he mentioned a Bodhisattva is very aware. A Bodhisattva is not in a virtually mindless state of attempted survival, he/she simply considers themselves as the lowest of all and is able to detach him/herself from being affected by the pain that they very much feel.

The idea of the Bodhisattva is a large portion of Mahayana Buddhism. I'm not prepared to defend the idea of, nor do I want to force beliefs upon others about what a Bodhisattva is, but wanted to share what I thought to be helpful advice to those who already "buy into" it.

Originally Posted by Bandit

to never have pain would make us not human & not be able to relate.

without pain we would not know, what no pain is & we would not be having this discussion. even in love there can be pain. loving ourselves & loving others is possible to do & i guess if we loved each other the same way we love ourselves, there may not be as much pain. but i think contrast is a good thing & it took me years to figure that out.

Hi Bandit, It's only through suffering through many countless lives, since beginningless time and unexhaustable compassion, that a Bodhisattva has been able to overcome personal pain and suffering in the first place. And therefore you do have and equaling factor. You have endless suffering... until now! The contrast is there because the only reason someone would vow to become a Bodhisattva is because they have experienced seemingly endless suffering.

this seems to me like one would stop experiencing if he is entirely 'beyond' & it appears to be a bit of a self centered & cheating yourself approach, perhaps with out realizing.?

One would stop experiencing if they so desired, but the whole idea of a Bodhisattva is that they become liberated and are able to skillfully pick and choose their "attachments". Because they have been liberated, they choose the conditions of their rebirth, they come back to help us along the path.

It's very interesting, I have heard others refer to the Bodhisattva's approach as being self-centered. Please don't take this as an attack but that completely goes against the whole idea. The idea is to almost forget the 'self' all together. If one is not doing this, they're not a Bodhisattva. Have we completely, this day in age, given up on the idea of someone working solely for the benefit of others? Although I know exactly what you mean, I definitely don't feel that we're cheating ourselves if we're not suffering. Yes, we can learn a great deal from our suffering but eventually we want to get out of it, especially if we want to be of any real benefit to others. I, right now can't really help anyone on a large scale or possibly even a small one. But if I become enlightened, I can offer a great deal of real help.

Originally Posted by Thomas

Again, more cautious yet, 'pain' of the sensible/bodily order is surely another issue altogether? Without a sense of pain, we are at great risk of damaging the health and wellbeing of the organism, therefore this order of pain has its place. Pain, in this sense, is saying 'there's something wrong' whether it be a disorder, a natural process, or that you're sitting too close to the fire...

Hello Thomas, of course you must take everything into consideration. You wouldn't want to go around cutting off fingers or sitting too close to the fire to make your point. This body is our vehicle and yes, we must take care of it to the best of our ability. The idea is that you wouldn't be ignoring these 'pain' warnings. The goal isn't really to not feel pain (I should have worded my original post more carefully) but to passify it. If you were sitting too close to the fire you would still feel it and know to get away from it. But if you were for some reason forced to sit too close, you could passify the pain because you would have completely destroyed any self-cherishing so that there would be no basis for suffering. If you really didn't praise yourself, you would be utterly unimportant and you wouldn't feel hurt when your body is being injured. So is the plan anyway.

Thank you everyone!

~rdwillia

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by rdwillia

Hi Bandit, It's only through suffering through many countless lives, since beginningless time and unexhaustable compassion, that a Bodhisattva has been able to overcome personal pain and suffering in the first place. And therefore you do have and equaling factor. You have endless suffering... until now! The contrast is there because the only reason someone would vow to become a Bodhisattva is because they have experienced seemingly endless suffering.


Thank you everyone!

~rdwillia

okee dokee rdwillia , i wont chase you around the mulberry bush, but it sounds like church dogma & i see some things different. i can turn it all off & on at will with no problems but will never consider myself or any other person 'beyond' the way it is being used.
if i need tegratol i know where to go, so i guess i am liberated in a different way.
i am more so looking forward to our discussion on progress & regress in Comparative Study, soon or after the New Year, so dont let me forget.

[Ciel]

Bandit,

You say you count your suffering as joy.
So strange a thing to hear from any soul. One can be indifferent to ones own suffering, but to applaud it would surely be the domain of the masochist.

[Bandit]

Originally Posted by Ciel

Bandit,

You say you count your suffering as joy.
So strange a thing to hear from any soul. One can be indifferent to ones own suffering, but to applaud it would surely be the domain of the masochist.

that sounds more like S&M.

you are entitled to your opinion.
i count ALL my suffering as joy & there is joy with suffering & suffering with joy & joy with joy. i count it all as joy. & have a very good reason for doing so.
maybe i have gone 'beyond' what you have experienced. not sure.

i understand your belief, but masochist?, not hardly.
i guess you do not understand mine.
& that is why we have different religions, because the beliefs are not all the same.

[rdwillia]

Hi Bandit,

okee dokee rdwillia , i wont chase you around the mulberry bush, but it sounds like church dogma & i see some things different. i can turn it all off & on at will with no problems but will never consider myself or any other person 'beyond' the way it is being used.
if i need tegratol i know where to go, so i guess i am liberated in a different way.

Ouch, that stings a little. But... no, no, no... I really don't want to come across like that. Dogma... the dictionary says;

"A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church."

One of the main qualities in Buddhism is that in the actual life lessons require no faith. An idea is given and one decides of his/her own accord whether it works or not. I am simply saying what I have because I have seen, on however small a scale, that for me, it's working already, with very little practice.

I think I know very well what you mean by counting your suffering as joy. I truly believe we can all have our own forms of liberation that can be very different and completely equal at the same time. I would never attempt to really impose my beliefs on you but you were here and discussing so I was attempting to clarify myself. Chase me all around that mulberry bush, it helps to to clarify my own beliefs to myself.

Back to counting suffering as joyous... I have a tendency to do this. My entire life I've been attracted to the rainy days, the sad songs, the sad movies, and as I said, I now know how to learn from my suffering. I also had a very serious drug problem several years ago and I'm very thankful for that experience. I wouldn't be where I'm at today without it, but I truly believe that even all of this this is an attachment I must break. I guess it stems from my feeling like I have suffered for countless lifetimes since beginningless time. I feel like a very "old soul" and it's exhausting at times. Sometimes it feels like life is just nagging me, constantly pecking at me. Nothing horrible most of the time but just enough to bug the hell out of me and make me think that there has to be something better.

A lot of people tend to misinterpret some Buddhist ideals for avoidance and I quite honestly live in a different world most of the time but I'm not spacey. It's quite different from avoidance, I truly believe that everything comes down to the mind and perception. We, as I've said way too many times, create our own experience by our thoughts and actions and the way we perceive things. Pain and suffering are a mind set, hell is a mind set, and so it follows heaven too, is a mindset.

I'm really ready to move on to "heaven" and honestly would like to figure it all out so that I can help show others how I did it, because obviously right now I'm failing miserably. I have a superhero complex and would like to save the world even if it's self-righteous to think that others may need help in the first place. Right now, it would be extremely arrogant to claim I know the way, because I don't. If you don't want to get away from your pain, then obviously you are doing better than a lot of us. Because I'm sick and tired of it and I believe that there's a link to self-cherishing in the suffering we experience.

Tegratol? If you don't mind my asking, do you have epilepsy? I have some PM questions if you do and don't mind discussing it.

i am more so looking forward to our discussion on progress & regress in Comparative Study, soon or after the New Year, so dont let me forget.

I completely forgot about this. Yes, I'll have to nag you about that.

Thanks!

~rdwillia

[Ciel]

Bandit,

There is understanding.
I simply choose another way, a different expression on life, wishing to see humanity released from the bonds that have bound it so long.

Peace

[samabudhi]

A question - the Buddha and Bodhisatvas are invariably shown smiling (or frowning?) - is there any tradition of a Buddha weeping?

The thousand armed Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara is depicted with tears.

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by rdwilla

Seattlegal, I'm not sure, but I feel like I might be picking up on some sarcasm here and in your last comment, it's difficult to tell in text form. I sincerely hope I'm not coming across as being arrogant. Compared to a lot, I have suffered very little, though I am fully aware of the phenomena of shock. I must defend Samabudhi's clarification that there is a huge difference between someone in shock and a Bodhisattva. As he mentioned a Bodhisattva is very aware. A Bodhisattva is not in a virtually mindless state of attempted survival, he/she simply considers themselves as the lowest of all and is able to detach him/herself from being affected by the pain that they very much feel.

Actually, it wasn't meant to be sarcastic. It was thinking about my own personal experience with "shock," in connection to a very complicated childbirth. It's a situation where complete dissasociation would be selfish, because you have another life, that of the baby, to consider. Between complete dissasociation and completely remaining in your body is a very interesting state of awareness, which I was referring to when I mentioned that one would have to be well-practiced in order to maintain this state without putting the body into peril. This "between state" seems to be addressed in Buddhism, whereas in some other faiths/practices it is either "complete disassociation" or "completely in the body." I find the whole idea very interesting.

[rdwillia]

Hi Seattlegal,

Thank you for the reply.

Actually, it wasn't meant to be sarcastic. It was thinking about my own personal experience with "shock," in connection to a very complicated childbirth. It's a situation where complete dissasociation would be selfish, because you have another life, that of the baby, to consider. Between complete dissasociation and completely remaining in your body is a very interesting state of awareness, which I was referring to when I mentioned that one would have to be well-practiced in order to maintain this state without putting the body into peril. This "between state" seems to be addressed in Buddhism, whereas in some other faiths/practices it is either "complete disassociation" or "completely in the body." I find the whole idea very interesting.

I'm glad to hear you weren't being sarcastic. Sorry to hear about the complicated childbirth. I hope it all turned out well; I can't even begin to imagine. However, it's sounds like you understand the idea quite well. Thanks!

~rdwillia

[Netti-Netti]

Certainly one's attitude toward pain can be a type of self-cherishing. I would say the "Near Enemies identified by Jack Kornfield are also likely to have potential as forms of self-cherishing.

It is said that even devotees who are far along on the spiritual path and relatively free from attachment can still have occassional bouts of self-cherishing that cloud the mind. Some forms of it are fairly subtle.


I thought these obsevations from Jack Kornfield were quite insightful because semblances can be so deceiving. And we are easily taken in by a culture where everyone is always trying to perfect their skills as stage management experts:

The near enemies are qualities that arise in the mind and masquerade as genuine spiritual realization, when in fact they are only an imitation, serving to separate us from true feeling rather than connecting us to it.

The near enemy of loving-kindness is attachment. At first, attachment may feel like love, but as it grows it becomes more clearly the opposite, characterized by clinging, controlling and fear.

The near enemy of compassion is pity, and this also separates us. Pity feels sorry for that poor person over here, as if he were somehow different from us.

The near enemy of sympathetic joy (the joy in the happiness of others) is comparison, which looks to see if we have more of, the same as, or less than another.

The near enemy of equanimity is indifference. True equanimity is balance in the midst of experience, whereas indifference is withdrawal and not caring, based on fear.

If we do not recognize and understand the near enemies, they will deaden our spiritual practice. The compartments they make cannot shield us for long from the pain and unpredictability of life, but they will surely stifle the joy and open connectedness of true relationships.

~from A Path with Heart

[Nick_A]

Originally Posted by Netti-Netti

Certainly one's attitude toward pain can be a type of self-cherishing. I would say the "Near Enemies identified by Jack Kornfield are also likely to have potential as forms of self-cherishing.

It is said that even devotees who are far along on the spiritual path and relatively free from attachment can still have occassional bouts of self-cherishing that cloud the mind. Some forms of it are fairly subtle.




I thought these obsevations from Jack Kornfield were quite insightful because semblances can be so deceiving. And we are easily taken in by a culture where everyone is always trying to perfect their skills as stage management experts:

The near enemies are qualities that arise in the mind and masquerade as genuine spiritual realization, when in fact they are only an imitation, serving to separate us from true feeling rather than connecting us to it.

The near enemy of loving-kindness is attachment. At first, attachment may feel like love, but as it grows it becomes more clearly the opposite, characterized by clinging, controlling and fear.

The near enemy of compassion is pity, and this also separates us. Pity feels sorry for that poor person over here, as if he were somehow different from us.

The near enemy of sympathetic joy (the joy in the happiness of others) is comparison, which looks to see if we have more of, the same as, or less than another.

The near enemy of equanimity is indifference. True equanimity is balance in the midst of experience, whereas indifference is withdrawal and not caring, based on fear.

If we do not recognize and understand the near enemies, they will deaden our spiritual practice. The compartments they make cannot shield us for long from the pain and unpredictability of life, but they will surely stifle the joy and open connectedness of true relationships.

~from A Path with Heart

IMO very important Netti. Bit how many have the courage to admit these distinctions within. For example, how many do you think advocate peace only because escapist indifference has replaced the potential for true equanimity.

It is not easy to admit our motives.