there is a limit to be a responsible person ?
-
Maybe it was due to past incidents and mistakes-> i was quite irresponsible in some way and thererfore to repent and to learn my mistakes.. i become a very responsible person. However, i feel that im being plagued by this sense of heaviness in my heart, and burden... of constantly having the need of being responsible at all time. To be responsible, i practise suppression my own desire.
Exactly all of us are meant to born free [ i feel ] but then in reality, we do not just live for only ourselves. We have commitment and responsibility to others. Sometime, i wish to lose there sense of restraint and abandon of all cares in the world and just be.
But then it will be going against my ethics..
i want to hear your opinion on it ... -
Yes the thought of repentance, of shame, is a right thought. However it should not be attached to.... just like Buddhists should not be attached to right and wrong.. the Buddhist saying goes 'Shan4 Er4 Jie1 Fan2 Nao3'.. meaning whether right or wrong, if attached to, it will lead to sufferings.Originally posted by Isis:Maybe it was due to past incidents and mistakes-> i was quite irresponsible in some way and thererfore to repent and to learn my mistakes.. i become a very responsible person. However, i feel that im being plagued by this sense of heaviness in my heart, and burden... of constantly having the need of being responsible at all time. To be responsible, i practise suppression my own desire.
Exactly all of us are meant to born free [ i feel ] but then in reality, we do not just live for only ourselves. We have commitment and responsibility to others. Sometime, i wish to lose there sense of restraint and abandon of all cares in the world and just be.
But then it will be going against my ethics..
i want to hear your opinion on it ...
But since repentance is right.. we shouldn't suppress such thoughts either. I mean when you recognised that you made a mistake... it is good to repent. It would even be better if you can repent in front of the Buddha... my dharma teacher repents 108 times everyday in front of Buddha, prostrating each time she chants the repentance verse.
When we repent, we just recognise that we ought not to make the same mistakes. But if the 'wrong' is identified with 'self', it becomes guilt. Anyway you say you wish to lose the sense of restrain and abandon all cares in the world and just be.. yes, you can abandon the cares of the world any time. That doesn't mean you cannot be a responsible person.. don't you think? I mean responsibility doesn't necessarily equate to attachment, or am I wrong? It is only because you are identified with it, there is suffering.
And of course the Bodhisattva is the perfect example... the Diamond Sutra stated,
The Buddha told Subhuti, "All Bodhisattvas, Mahasattvas, should subdue their minds thus: 'I must cause all living beings--those born from eggs, wombs, moisture, by transformation; those with form, those without form, those with thought, those without thought, those not totally endowed with thought, and those not totally without thought--to enter Nirvana without residue and be taken across to Cessation. Yet of the immeasurable, numberless, boundless numbers of living beings thus taken across to Cessation, there is actually no living being taken across to Cessation. ' Why? Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva has an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life, he is not a Bodhisattva." (more such quotes from Diamond Sutra can be found in "excuse me, are you a Bodhisattva?")
The true Bodhisattva has the HEAVIEST burden and responsibility in the world. And yet, to him, that is not a responsibility.. because he is not attached to "an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life".
As for 'To be responsible, i practise suppression my own desire.', well, if what you do is considered inconsiderate to others... and you cannot help it but suppress your own desire, then do so. Because otherwise it may not be morally right.. it just depends on the situation at hand. Wisdom is required. But suppressed desires will strike back, it is better to remove the root of it - because suppressing is like putting a rock on the weed to stop it from growing but not killing it. To be totally free is to severe the attachment completely.. to disidentify with forms, appearance, 'self'.
Also if one's thoughts is not morally right, one must also look into it and repent. You said 'it may be against your ethics'... if that is so, it may be better you drop any desires that will be 'against your ethics'. -
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:
Moral values are very subjective topics.
Yes the thought of repentance, of shame, is a right thought. However it should not be attached to.... just like Buddhists should not be attached to right and wrong.. the Buddhist saying goes 'Shan4 Er4 Jie1 Fan2 Nao3'.. meaning whether right or wrong, if attached to, it will lead to sufferings.
But since repentance is right.. we shouldn't suppress such thoughts either. I mean when you recognised that you made a mistake... it is good to repent. It would even be better if you can repent in front of the Buddha... my dharma teacher repents 108 times everyday in front of Buddha, prostrating each time she chants the repentance verse.
When we repent, we just recognise that we ought not to make the same mistakes. But if the 'wrong' is identified with 'self', it becomes guilt. Anyway you say you wish to lose the sense of restrain and abandon all cares in the world and just be.. yes, you can abandon the cares of the world any time. That doesn't mean you cannot be a responsible person.. don't you think? I mean responsibility doesn't necessarily equate to attachment, or am I wrong? It is only because you are identified with it, there is suffering.
And of course the Bodhisattva is the perfect example... the Diamond Sutra stated,
[b]The Buddha told Subhuti, "All Bodhisattvas, Mahasattvas, should subdue their minds thus: 'I must cause all living beings--those born from eggs, wombs, moisture, by transformation; those with form, those without form, those with thought, those without thought, those not totally endowed with thought, and those not totally without thought--to enter Nirvana without residue and be taken across to Cessation. Yet of the immeasurable, numberless, boundless numbers of living beings thus taken across to Cessation, there is actually no living being taken across to Cessation. ' Why? Subhuti, if a Bodhisattva has an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life, he is not a Bodhisattva." (more such quotes from Diamond Sutra can be found in "excuse me, are you a Bodhisattva?")
The true Bodhisattva has the HEAVIEST burden and responsibility in the world. And yet, to him, that is not a responsibility.. because he is not attached to "an appearance of self, others, living beings, or a life".
As for 'To be responsible, i practise suppression my own desire.', well, if what you do is considered inconsiderate to others... and you cannot help it but suppress your own desire, then do so. Because otherwise it may not be morally right.. it just depends on the situation at hand. Wisdom is required. But suppressed desires will strike back, it is better to remove the root of it - because suppressing is like putting a rock on the weed to stop it from growing but not killing it. To be totally free is to severe the attachment completely.. to disidentify with forms, appearance, 'self'.
Also if one's thoughts is not morally right, one must also look into it and repent. You said 'it may be against your ethics'... if that is so, it may be better you drop any desires that will be 'against your ethics'.[/b]
But im so tired inside.. i don't think that there is a need for me to be so responsible at all times. Note the 'so'.. I recongise that there is a need for a balance-view between my own needs and others. and yes AEN, i think im having serious attachment to it.. perhaps to the point of being prudish
Either do i think that i will be happy if i also cause harm to people.
but how to practise let go one a time.. i feel like letting it go all at the time.. it seems the most natural thing to do now -
=== JKrishnamurti.org - Daily Quote === This Choiceless Awareness
This Choiceless Awareness
Great seers have always told us to acquire experience. They have said that experience gives us understanding. But it is only the innocent mind, the mind unclouded by experience, totally free from the past - it is only such a mind that can perceive what is reality. If you see the truth of that, if you perceive it for a split second, you will know the extraordinary clarity of a mind that is innocent. This means the falling away of all the encrustations of memory, which is the discarding of the past. But to perceive it, there can be no question of 'how'. Your mind must not be distracted by the 'how', by the desire for an answer. Such a mind is not an attentive mind. As I said earlier in this talk, in the beginning is the end. In the beginning is the seed of the ending of that which we call sorrow. The ending of sorrow is realized in sorrow itself, not away from sorrow. To move away from sorrow is merely to find an answer, a conclusion, an escape; but sorrow continues. Whereas, if you give it your complete attention, which is to be attentive with your whole being, then you will see that there is an immediate perception in which no time is involved, in which there is no effort, no conflict; and it is this immediate perception, this choiceless awareness that puts an end to sorrow.
The Book of Life - October 10
I read this while browsing through " hi everyone "
nice, might be applicable to my problem
-
Then why even bother about right action, right discourse, right speech?
-
right discourse??Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Then why even bother about right action, right discourse, right speech?
errr what has all this has to do with my topic thread? -
Response to AEN's answer.Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Then why even bother about right action, right discourse, right speech? -
What answer?Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Response to AEN's answer. -
This answer:Originally posted by Isis:What answer?
"Also if one's thoughts is not morally right, one must also look into it and repent. You said 'it may be against your ethics'... if that is so, it may be better you drop any desires that will be 'against your ethics'." -
er i still don't get u..Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:This answer:
"Also if one's thoughts is not morally right, one must also look into it and repent. You said 'it may be against your ethics'... if that is so, it may be better you drop any desires that will be 'against your ethics'."
what does it has to do with right discourse?
if u r refering to the eightfold path, there isn't a right discourse.
and why are u assuming about me practising the eightfold path prior before posting? -
No, I am responding to AEN's answer to you on your question.His quote could not appear. Just some food for thought for him.Originally posted by Isis:er i still don't get u..
what does it has to do with right discourse?
if u r refering to the eightfold path, there isn't a right discourse.
and why are u assuming about me practising the eightfold path prior before posting? -
Oh..... sorry I almost missed your reply on this!Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:Then why even bother about right action, right discourse, right speech?
This has been discussed before actually...
http://buddhism.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=172265Originally posted by longchen:This is what i have read from Dzogchen books.
It says that when one is in the Dharmakaya view... one will feel fearless/unaffectable by thoughts... . Because of this, some practitioners may feel that they can do anything they want including harmful acts. But if we do harmful acts, the karma will nevertheless comes back...Originally posted by _wanderer_:Eternal Now you can read my mind huh? lol no la we probably don't read same books.
But well, I do agree most with Longchen's post, though when you say "view of the Dharmakaya", different pple would have diff understanding of what it means.
Basically I think the View refers to the Ultimate View (some call it View of Emptiness, some call it Primordial Wisdom, others call it something else...). I think Padmasambhava is reminding us not to get lost in conduct, thinking that there is "something truly virtuous" to adopt and "something truly nonvirtuous" to abandon in our conduct/actions. This means, while we are adopting virtues and abandoning nonvirtuous we should bear the View of Emptiness in mind, that NO truly existing person is performing any truly existing action towards any truly existing party.
However, having embraced this View of Emptiness, as what Longchen said, we should not think that we don't need to care about performing virtuous or nonvirtuous actions, because for us the unenlightened beings, we're still bound by karma. So though aware of the "lack of an inherent truly existing nature" of virtues and nonvirtues, we should still try to adopt virtuous behaviour and abandon nonvirtuous behaviour.
Thanks for all the sharing Longchen, Sinwei and Eternal Now. I found it kinda surprising and very interesting that diff pple have diff interpretations. I believe such sharings can help all of us sharpen our understanding of the Dharma and motivate one another to apply and actualize them. -
hm... i think i understand what u feeling....
then be responsible in some ways and less responsible in other way. whether the action will affect the love ones.... -
ok if u r refering this quote.. i could roughly guess what u mean...Originally posted by Herzog_Zwei:This answer:
"Also if one's thoughts is not morally right, one must also look into it and repent. You said 'it may be against your ethics'... if that is so, it may be better you drop any desires that will be 'against your ethics'."
i was thinking maybe i should rethink about my ethics and the way i handle matters due to this ethics value that is causing suffering for myself. I shouldn't be too attached to ethics values that aren't balanced. Since im not enlightened yet, i guess this way could be better for me.
To note of: let say by going against the values, i could have thought hey i could be happier, why care? But then if the actions created could affect somebody and cause suffering.In addition, the actions could also turn a situation ( unpredictable ) around against u.
The main conflict here is if it is creating immense self-suffering, isn't me creating a self-denial situation that there is a problem here? I need to deal with the underlying issue and to create constructive solution to the problems that will ideally bring to a win-win situation.
To drop desire against my ethics.. there might be a chance that i will regret about my action if i commit something against my ethics so it might be better.. ethics are rather subjective topics arr.. so it is very hard to say what is right and wrong here...
btw what does it has to do with right discourse, speech with the above quote? just curious -
-- double-posting--
-
Btw nice reading from the forum's past archive:
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=105352
Time does not exist.
Lots of treasures in past archive