|
Post by prady on Dec 23, 2005 9:42:02 GMT
i would like to talk about attachment... what is it practically.... how do we losen it and get rid of it with out turning borg.... what do u guys think?
|
|
|
Post by ironfeather on Dec 23, 2005 13:19:39 GMT
That sticky feeling Pema Chodron calls shempa... and congrats on moving up, Prady... a mod already! ;D Hi Satori, Hi anyone else I know in here...
|
|
|
Post by Satori on Dec 23, 2005 13:26:27 GMT
Hi Ironfeather! I'm so glad you joined!!
|
|
|
Post by prady on Dec 23, 2005 13:27:55 GMT
hello IF how groovey to have u come to play ;D
|
|
|
Post by nighthawk on Dec 26, 2005 13:42:08 GMT
I think it's always been a worthwhile conversation to discuss getting 'unattached' to what we are attached to .. but what about being attached to being unattached .. like floating off into the void and finding myself being such a 'good' person for cutting off my nose to spite the face .. and still being a self-righteous prig .. Ich!!!
|
|
|
Post by prady on Dec 26, 2005 20:33:26 GMT
I think it's always been a worthwhile conversation to discuss getting 'unattached' to what we are attached to .. but what about being attached to being unattached .. like floating off into the void and finding myself being such a 'good' person for cutting off my nose to spite the face .. and still being a self-righteous prig .. Ich!!! i think this is what i mean!!! u genius!!!! i wsa in a state i describe as 'borg' all trekies will understand... in all the best situations i guess we need to strike a balance...mmm...this attachment idea is doing my head in...if we cut all our attachments we become dead...if we dwell on attachments we go crazy...and we have attachment for everything...do some attachments serve us benefit? are all attachments the terror of the path??? how do we work with attachment sensibly??? coo lots of questions and no answers!!!!
|
|
|
Post by nighthawk on Dec 26, 2005 21:16:55 GMT
May I have another run at this then? .. and I'd like to put it in a broader context. I would suggest that we commonly think that the physical universe, although enticing, lives in the lower realms, and to move on we need to free ourselves from the enticing aspects, attachments, and release as our spiritual selves. I think that the joke of the universe is that we have it back to front. I more than suspect that the physical universe is an art form and we are continually creating that art form .. or living in ignorance of who we are and letting the whole thing degenerate into slop. If one is creating one's life then attachment is not an issue. You are not attached to anything. You are creating it newly from moment to moment and letting the last moment dissolve and fall away. Letting the sand from the mandala flow into the sea and starting again.
|
|
|
Post by Satori on Dec 26, 2005 21:34:21 GMT
May I have another run at this then? .. and I'd like to put it in a broader context. I would suggest that we commonly think that the physical universe, although enticing, lives in the lower realms, and to move on we need to free ourselves from the enticing aspects, attachments, and release as our spiritual selves. I think that the joke of the universe is that we have it back to front. I more than suspect that the physical universe is an art form and we are continually creating that art form .. or living in ignorance of who we are and letting the whole thing degenerate into slop. If one is creating one's life then attachment is not an issue. You are not attached to anything. You are creating it newly from moment to moment and letting the last moment dissolve and fall away. Letting the sand from the mandala flow into the sea and starting again. Interesting perspective, as it certainly ties in with the belief that we are not physical beings, striving for the spiritual, but rather, spiritual beings, learning more about ourselves through the physical. And that the goal is to bring the spiritual in and express it fully in this world.
|
|
|
Post by Satori on Dec 26, 2005 21:35:47 GMT
I could say more on this subject, but for now I'd just like to add that I think a common misconception about the terms "attachment," "detachment," and "non-attachment" is that we are to disconnect from things altogether, and that if we don't, we are somehow "attached" to them. But that's not at all the purpose of non-attachment and, in fact, has the tendency to eventually move into the area of nihilism, IMO. It's no wonder people start to get depressed a lot on the path when they engage in this type of thinking.
The goal is not to detach from life and everything in it, such as our bodies, our careers, our relationships, our possessions, our dreams, etc. Rather, the goal is to learn to disengage from ego's "false concepts" concerning those things! Ego incorrectly perceives our identity to include our bodies, thoughts and feelings, behavior patterns, opinions, belief systems, possessions, status, etc. And when those things feel threatened, it will feel as though we ourselves have been threatened. And we immediately go into a "fight or flight" type of reaction as a result.
The reality is that it's only our false concepts of who we are that have been threatened. We are NOT our bodies, our thoughts, emotions, feelings, our behavior (thank goodness for that!), our opinions, possessions, and status. Instead, we are the ones who are utilizing those things in order to learn about ourselves in this world and overcome our karma.
So, rather, it's a process of learning to disengage from ego's control by recognizing who we really are and no longer agreeing to continually buy into the false concepts of who we think we are.
|
|
|
Post by nighthawk on Dec 26, 2005 21:51:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ironfeather on Dec 27, 2005 12:31:22 GMT
Prady: yes, understand borg reference very well... I did pretty mean impression of a Borg-Yoda in other sangha somewhere. Scared myself! Was a reply to our favorite hedgehog.
As for "detaching"... very interesting conversation. Perhaps middle path applies there too? My memory already playing tricks again, I like what Tim and Satori said, but I cannot remember a word of it! erg....
|
|
|
Post by nighthawk on Dec 28, 2005 2:40:19 GMT
Have been thinking about attachments this evening.
I have this idea that there are ideas to which we are collectively attached and which are far more dangerous to humanity’s future than the physical experiences we commonly talk about. Perhaps foremost on the list is the idea that we are doomed to some kind of apocalyptic end, that fire and brimstone are our destiny. My sense of things is that this idea is woven deeply into our common psyche. We stop dreaming of a workable future and working towards a worthwhile future. We can’t make a difference, we think, and so we abandon the idea and fall into greed and doing whatever we can to have more fun and acquire more stuff. The cost for giving up is to forget our power, to forget who we are.
Shaking that root attachment is an act of meditation, transforming one’s inner self from confusion and chaos to clarity and finding the natural order in the universe and surrendering to it, shedding the cloak of ignorance and being a stand for the truth, unadorned with the embellishments that would have us blame and point fingers. Those who have led the charge into our ignorant ways will have to deal with the product of their activity all on their own. The ultimate solution lies in discovering one’s own self fully and completely and bringing that forth into day to day life.
Being honestly you works.
Tim
|
|
|
Post by Satori on Dec 28, 2005 9:32:03 GMT
Hi Tim, Interesting post. The macro level of collective consciousness in groups is very powerful. And just like the micro level, it can be focused on either positive or negative outcomes. For instance, when a person identifies themselves as a "victim," they inevitably encounter more experiences in which they feel victimized. I used to see it all the time working in the legal field. A person would be in an auto accident, and then once they identified themselves as some type of victim due to the experience, they seemed to become accident-prone, having slip-and-fall accidents, more auto accidents, etc. The universal law of attraction is in force whether we believe in it or not, i.e. what we believe, we attract. And this applies to groups of people on the macro level as well. Some groups identify themselves as victims, since they have been persecuted throughout history, but then that type of thinking only perpetuates the cycle and never allows them to break free of it. Or as you indicate, there are those who project a particular futility about the future of mankind and, thus, help create the very future they are so afraid of. I think all of this stems from a sense of powerlessness and not having the awareness that we can make changes, whether on a micro or macro level. What we believe, we create, so if we want to truly make changes in our lives and in the world around us, then we must begin with ourselves and change our own thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Satori on Dec 28, 2005 9:34:51 GMT
As for "detaching"... very interesting conversation. Perhaps middle path applies there too? Absolutely. The middle path between "attachment" and "detachment" would be "non-attachment." Or maybe a better example would be avoiding the extremes of "sympathy" and "apathy" by showing "empathy." Moderate ... not maniac = the middle path.
|
|
|
Post by ironfeather on Dec 28, 2005 23:16:15 GMT
Hmmmm....
English is very clumsy where buddhist concepts are concerned... One look at online Pali-English dictionary made that very clear. So what is "non-attachment" anyway?
|
|