PDA

View Full Version : Right View & Intention



kazumi
11 Jun 2015, 11:18
I finished reading the chapters about right view and intention in 'The Noble Eightfold Path: The Way to End Suffering' by Bhikkhu Bodhi and checked a few other articles. Wanted to read on but I figured it'd be best to stop and... Meditate on it! What's awesome is that I was pretty sure I am very much capable of feeling compassion, understanding suffering, that other people want to be free from it and wish for (true) happiness. Compassion and all that jazz. But reading about how to get yourself to feel unconditional love for yourself and then for others and letting go made me doubt myself! Sometimes I hate it but I love it right now. I'm unsure. I doubt something that was actually a thought/certainty I've had for ages and wondered how it jived with the rest of my experience of the world. Bye bye overconfident empath! lol

But I doubt it now! & Planning to contemplate it during my meditation. My question is however, how does an 'urban warrioress' (Nah I'm not really that tough haha) handle life while understanding and not wanting to harm others?

But yeah, how do you combine letting go, and also standing up for yourself? How do you translate that you want peace in the language of people that would believe you much easier if you said that you were out to use them to get your goal :'D I'm not asking for a manual but I mean... How do the two ideas sync?

Okay, this isn't coming out exactly the way I mean to so I reserve the right to correc this post if I can afterwards but I thinkkkk that I still dare 'risk' posting this anyway.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, where I am I'm not entirely sure how I am 'supposed to' let go of things and keep being passionate too but instead of going from one side to the other to quickly I'm going to try and stick to one direction for some time and explore it before I figure out my next move.

kazumi
11 Jun 2015, 12:52
Hmm It seems I'm repeating myself a tiny bit because of the eventful gaps between posts.
need to look through old notes because I might have found a sync that works for me in the past...

- - - Updated - - -

Also would like to post this here because of the awesome sounding Pirahae people

https://ffrf.org/publications/freethought-today/item/13492-the-pirahae-people-who-define-happiness-without-god

Azvanna
12 Jun 2015, 02:38
My question is however, how does an 'urban warrioress' (Nah I'm not really that tough haha) handle life while understanding and not wanting to harm others?

But yeah, how do you combine letting go, and also standing up for yourself? How do you translate that you want peace in the language of people that would believe you much easier if you said that you were out to use them to get your goal :'D I'm not asking for a manual but I mean... How do the two ideas sync?


You be clear about what you want without being violent about it. You can find a way to voice your resolve if you have to and act on your resolve without being aggressive or expecting other people to change. You take full responsibility for all of yourself. Here is a podcast I have listened to about non-violence. It does take a little bit to get going and you do have to pay attention to what he's saying and think about it as you listen. The whole picture will come together for you by the finish. http://www.swamij.com/podcast/071230-first-no-harm-swami-j.mp3

MaskedOne
12 Jun 2015, 03:22
You be clear about what you want without being violent about it. You can find a way to voice your resolve if you have to and act on your resolve without being aggressive or expecting other people to change.

And here in a nutshell is why I would make a terrible Buddhist. :)

Azvanna
13 Jun 2015, 18:40
And here in a nutshell is why I would make a terrible Buddhist. :)

Lol ^.^ idk MO, you might be a perfect example of non-violence. You non-violently state your expectations and waste no energy on drama. If they don't change, they deal with the outcome - not you.

Someone more versed in those principles might be able to better respond to the OP though. I only know of them through Yoga practise.

MaskedOne
13 Jun 2015, 18:52
Lol ^.^ idk MO, you might be a perfect example of non-violence. You non-violently state your expectations and waste no energy on drama. If they don't change, they deal with the outcome - not you.

Someone more versed in those principles might be able to better respond to the OP though. I only know of them through Yoga practise.

I put energy into my theatrics...

Oh, wrong type of drama, sorry. :)

Other than that, we have a few people versed in Buddhism floating around. I've been mildly interested in Taoism at various times but I've never mustered much interest in Buddhism.

kazumi
14 Jun 2015, 07:16
I'll listen to the podcast soon, thank you. I think that the answer, for me at least, is more simple than it looks & was sort of in my question.
Words are just words~ they have what value we put in them. If I mind my own business and do what I do, and something happens... Then just 'roll with the punches', and do what's necessary to defend yourself but just to that extent. If some aggression or whatever builds up, then focus on letting that go during down time. There's and always will be a thin line between deflecting BS and becoming violent.

There are always factors that make such an approach difficult if not impossible at times, but hey. If you're perfect you might as well just quit right? lol. Well, okay, teaching is always an option~.

The book said though, that if an action, thought or word stems from a wholesome root, it in itself will be wholesome (hope I'm not misinterpreting or quoting) and so on. I guess one could say so, but still... Giving plenty of room for being saved be the possibility of cognitive dissonance lol. Though I guess that's factored in the part where you have to carefully question everything.

& yeah it's difficult for me to dig deeper than the surface on the topic because I get a lot out of most articles and quotes inspired by the buddhist philosophy, lol. But I've felt nudged towards research on it for so long. I can see how there may be something I really must learn because of the way I am somewhere along the road of researching it.

During a talk a while ago someone told me about a distinction between material and spiritual Buddhism? I can't remember whether he was just referring to the category without the religious stuff.

And yes! that description, 'You non-violently state your expectations and waste no energy on drama. If they don't change, they deal with the outcome - not you.' is actually what I was kind of thinking about as well. Again, thanks for responding.

kazumi
14 Jun 2015, 22:26
I listened to the podcast. Yeah, that's the type of assertiveness that works in this context. Being immovable. Not stubborn though :p Okay I can work with this. Merci

nbdy
15 Jun 2015, 08:22
I think at the heart of it is being genuine and non-judgmental, being in touch with who you are, what you perceive, how you feel about it, etc., and then simply speaking and acting honestly from that place and allowing others to be who they are without expectations. I've not met a person yet who is able to do this all the time, but I've met a few who are close.

Domtar
16 Jun 2015, 08:10
I like this question! I leaned very buddhist and went to buddhist school for a while--

I confess my problems with it-- I discovered that I did not agree with the teachings about "nothingness" or trying to reach a state of emptiness as the ultimate goal of all existence (no thanks!)- I even kind of wonder if that's some trickster spirit interjecting some mischief to the heart of a beautiful spiritual traditions and teachings that in times before buddhism believed in a vibrant active spirit realm rather nihilism as pround..

However, the beauty of teaching the goal of compassion for all beings still feels a deep part of my purpose. It's complicated, as there are beings that cause suffering because they are damaged- but I think there may be beings that are causing suffering "on purpose". If it is due to damage the goal is to heal the damage and to see the true cause of the behavior.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with ayurveda but there is discussion there about the origins of harmful behaviors, in our ancestors deeds andexperiences-- many types of suffering canbelonglived, fort generations or entrenched within cultures and thinking patterns.

Is it honorable to be angry or violent to someone who is causing problems because of a sincere disability of mind/emotion/or body? I think in an emergency- self defense is fine so I will not presribe absolute non-violence- in fact I think absolute non-violence itself may be in opposition to compassion as an active protective force. However the goal would not so much be to harm those who cause harm, but to dismantle that within them causing harm, leaving the rest of them in tact. If possible simply using a shield, running away etc-- is ideal, however this can leave harmful beings with a certain amount of power to keep causing harm.

Anyways I think about this topic a lot, if you'd like to chat more about it, I love hearing others ideas on it and brainstorming together.

- - - Updated - - -

I will also add, my bent leaned toward absolute non-judgement as some kind of ideal but in some ways absolute non-judgment undoes itself as an ideal. I mean if one can not judge anything, one cannot judge judgement itself as good or bad. ThereforeI see judgement as at times a useful tool but with a lot of complications, including the limitations of the human mind to actually understand what forces caused an event or behavior to occur and to what exist that we consider "free will" to actively choose wrong doing may or may not have been involved.

Azvanna
25 Jun 2015, 01:25
I confess my problems with it-- I discovered that I did not agree with the teachings about "nothingness" or trying to reach a state of emptiness as the ultimate goal of all existence (no thanks!)- I even kind of wonder if that's some trickster spirit interjecting some mischief to the heart of a beautiful spiritual traditions and teachings that in times before buddhism believed in a vibrant active spirit realm rather nihilism as pround..
This is my major problem with Buddhism too. Maybe I'm too attached to existing :p




I'm not sure if you're familiar with ayurveda but there is discussion there about the origins of harmful behaviors, in our ancestors deeds andexperiences-- many types of suffering canbelonglived, fort generations or entrenched within cultures and thinking patterns.

This was taught to me in church as generational curses.
From a secular point of view, I was listening to someone speak recently about the chemicals that are in plastics and how those chemicals might be to blame for the onset of early puberty in girls. Also in the show, they were talking about how sensitive the fetus is in certain stages of development. In one case, scientists discovered that if the mother or father rat is too anxious at the time of conception, the offspring will be predisposed to anxiety. I think this is a very interesting commentary on nature vs nurture.



I think in an emergency- self defense is fine so I will not presribe absolute non-violence- in fact I think absolute non-violence itself may be in opposition to compassion as an active protective force. Oh wow! I've been looking for a way to word that belief. Very well put.


However the goal would not so much be to harm those who cause harm, but to dismantle that within them causing harm, leaving the rest of them in tact. If possible simply using a shield, running away etc-- is ideal, however this can leave harmful beings with a certain amount of power to keep causing harm.
So true. There is that quote: The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.





I will also add, my bent leaned toward absolute non-judgement as some kind of ideal but in some ways absolute non-judgment undoes itself as an ideal. I mean if one can not judge anything, one cannot judge judgement itself as good or bad. ThereforeI see judgement as at times a useful tool but with a lot of complications, including the limitations of the human mind to actually understand what forces caused an event or behavior to occur and to what exist that we consider "free will" to actively choose wrong doing may or may not have been involved.
Yes, it is a trick on words. I think the term 'Negative Capability' could also tie in with non-judgement. Negative Capability is a term coined by John Keats in this sentence:
At once it struck me, what quality went to form a Man of Achievement, especially in literature, and which Shakespeare possessed so enormously- I mean Negative Capability, that is when man is capable of being in uncertainties. Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.'
So I think in this context, non-judgement is about being okay with the not knowing. Non-judgement I believe seeks middle ground in that it attempts to step outside of the situation and take stock of it from a non-detached perspective. It is about not being too heavily invested in either point of view. Otherwise, you can get too caught up in believing your cause is righteous and not see the whole picture.