Observations
I am now two thirds of the way through Becoming Enlightened by the Dalai Lama.
In short, he has taken 2,600 years of documents, read most of them, meditated more than most people, is the Buddha incarnate and has condensed all of these teachings and experience into 250 pages.
My short interpretation is this:
The first step is making the choice ( Read more... )
In short, he has taken 2,600 years of documents, read most of them, meditated more than most people, is the Buddha incarnate and has condensed all of these teachings and experience into 250 pages.
My short interpretation is this:
The first step is making the choice ( Read more... )
Second: Where would you find the most value in this kind of conversation? Would you benefit most from me sticking to what I understand the Buddhist view to be or should I toss in hypotheses from other fields as well?
Third: This kind of thing is always fun for me but I have few opportunities. In my line of work, I have more answers than the people who come asking. There are only a few I can get into questioning with.
OK. Onward. The Buddhist view is not to rise above the feelings caused by a tragic event but to find perspective on the tragic event by understanding your place in a greater series of events. When the death seems like it is your entire life, that is rough. When it is a small bit in something much larger and you feel value and connection to the bigger picture, the death is still tragic but not crippling. I have not read anything that suggests that death does not feel tragic for those left behind but I must say I have not read enough to feel confident addressing the Buddhist views on death.
It is always best to stop the pain of others. Easing personal pain is in a neck and neck race with stopping the pain of others. It would be a Buddhist's duty to stop the person from committing further acts of violence.
Painful experiences are not opportunities to learn to suffer. They are motivation to see a larger picture and find more understanding as well as being opportunities to help others. To go to a less severe example of problem people at work, the people causing the problems are obviously deficient in their own ways. Their deficiency causes them to be miserable and take it out on those around them. It would be the Buddhist's job to recognize this frailty and do what they were able to nurture this poor ass.
"A life without passion. . ." The response to this would be that there is more passion to be found when one experiences their own passion and the feelings of others. Cultivation of empathy is one of the core values. In this sense everything is even more intense because you experience your own experience and the experiences of others.
I think that addresses what I understand the official views to be.
Now, on to addressing Betty's. . .
Reply
I guess I see what you mean, but to me it all still sounds so very presumptous. How can anyone really know what the bigger picture is? It goes against all of my emotional instincts to think that way. I guess to me, Bhuddism feels like a limitation more than anything else. I'm not a violent person, but feel that sometimes violence is justified and necessary and desirable. Empathy isn't always helpful in every instnace. Some people's deficiencies run too deep and you have to do a cost/benefit analysis-- do I recognize that this person kills because of the horrible life they have led, and try to feel compassion for all of their pain, or do I send them away to be assraped in prison until the end of time?
In this case, my choice would be to rally to change society so that society stops producing so many broken people who turn to violence. I'm really not concerned with helping someone once they have turned, because I see little value in that-- but there's a lot of value to trying to prevent more people like this from becoming.
This could be a function of my age, but I'm not one to sit by passively and put salve on other people's miseries and work with the compassion-- I like the anger and rage in me, because it burns at a constant rate, and allows me the energy to fight to change our society. I want to put my energy towards reform, so that we can eradicate the root causes of unhappiness and violence-- poverty, social injustice, environmental devastation, homelessness, materialism, etc.
Reply
>How can anyone really know what the bigger picture is?
No one can know the whole bigger picture but isn't there more to know than you know? There is no way to know all history but you keep studying to learn more. . .
>sometimes violence is justified and necessary and desirable.
Yes, but only under extreme circumstances and should be avoided. If everyone avoided violence, there would never be need of it. This is an ideal rather than a reality. It would be up to each person do do what they could do to solve things without violence. It is not a philosophical absolute. Of course, certain people believe in certain aspects that make the most sense to them. It is not written anywhere that one ought to set themselves on fire to protest war though the people that did it were Buddhists. All apples are fruit, all fruit are not apples.
>I send them away to be assraped in prison until the end of time?
Compassion does not always mean being kind and friendly. You don't invite pedophiles to elementary school sleep overs. All the same, if you understand what makes them tick, you can most effectively deal with them. You may not be drawn to managing a prison population but some people are. Those people would be better at it if they understood the population. You are a better historian if you understand the people and cultures you study. Think of the example of colonizations and taming the "savage" man vs. cultural study and respect. It would be inappropriate now to go to a foreign country, demand their valuables, and pour molten gold down the throats of the chiefs of the dissenters. That was cool in the 1500's. Empathy goes a long way in any profession.
>my choice would be to rally to change society. . .
Yes. As you poignantly wrote once, one person can make a difference. I don't think the Buddhists think that you can solve everything today. It is only a matter of doing your part.
Whether you, personally, want to help those who have already turned or want to make a difference to those who are still impressionable is a personal decision and entirely up to you and what you are drawn to. One is not better than the other. They both serve the human race.
>I'm not one to sit by passively. . .
The anger turned to energy may be age but the motivation to make change will not subside in you. Anger, emotionally speaking, tends to be a filter that prevents people from seeing all the options. The best debates are won with clear thinking and founded in logic. What is causing the anger in you now will refine and get polished over the years. You will be even more effective as the anger transforms simply to drive. Without the anger you will be free to act more effectively and efficiently and make a more profound difference.
The reform you speak of will come through your ability to apply your education and ability to collect and express your thoughts to others rather than your ability to throw a Molotov cocktail through a logger's window.
The ability to empathize with your enemies will make you 100 fold more effective against them. When you understand their motivations and obligations, you can address what compels them rather than fighting them on the front. The more you understand your enemy, the more you can cause change.
Reply
I'm willing to go on the assumption that more will become clear to me as I get a little older and less polarized. I think I was an unusual child, as I spent most of my life trying to apply education, feel empathy, and use my skills to put together petitions or motions for the local community council. The molotov route didn't occur to me until I was an adult and currently, I'm about half and half. Because my anger and rage comes from failed attempts at logic and empathy (because I was 7...), it's taking longer and is more difficult to move back to that now. Also, for my undergrad dissertation, I spent a year living in a tree with radical environmentalists, and I go back every summer to touch base and reconnect with that part of myself because their story will be written once I finish up here.
I feel more useful there cooking up meals, digging through dumpsters, chopping up firewood, attending protests or doing nightwatch than I do here with some of the organized fluffy activism.
Anyways, thanks for the awesome conversation. Hopefully we'll have many more.
Reply
I wish you the best of luck modernizing your past emotions and methods.
I think you may find that there is not the disconnect you perceive now between calm and effectiveness. Time will tell.
Reply
Is the book you are thinking of my Alasdair Macintosh, Rod Coronado or Kate Evans? Or is it fiction? Either way, let me know.
Reply
It has a group of people who survive a world-changing event because they are able to live in harmony with nature. They cultivate rooftop gardens and live free of what is left of the outside world. There are religious overtones to their group, it is Atwood's play on the idea of Dirt Worshipers. She does it respectfully and one of the themes to this book and others is doomsday warnings of the consequences of man's abuse of his own power.
It takes place simultaneously to another book she wrote called Oryx & Crake. That book is absolutely amazing but does not emphasize the same characters.
Reply
Leave a comment