Love disguised as attachment???
-
A large portion of BGR Love is actually attachment NOT real love. It is the type of "painful", "sacrificial" love that one mistakens as true love. How do we get rid of such an attachment towards the other person
-
There is probably love, but a very narrow kind of love with lots of attachment to emotions and feelings.Originally posted by snowstar:A large portion of BGR Love is actually attachment NOT real love. It is the type of "painful", "sacrificial" love that one mistakens as true love. How do we get rid of such an attachment towards the other person
I wrote a few days ago in qns abt buddhism,Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Welcome back.
What is real love? Pure love itself is not problematic, and in fact is to be cultivated, such as the practise of metta (loving kindness), as well as the unconditional compassion of a Bodhisattva. These are very important qualities that each Buddhist must cultivate in our lives.
Even love for your family and spouse is fine, and I have said before there are many lay practitioners, who have families whom they love and care, and yet these practitioners also have attained enlightenment (even today). Some of the highly enlightened forummers here have families too. There has been many lay persons who attained enlightenment and liberation since the days of the Buddha. My local dharma teacher too is a lay practitioner who has family too, same as my Taiwanese teacher though he has in recent years moved to live alone in his dharma center to spend more time in self-cultivation as well as responding to the visits of his students. Though, my Master (who has passed away) is a monk.
The difference is, is one able to transcend one's attachment to family, or spouse, or anything? You can love them and that is fine, but is there any attachment to them as 'one's posession'? You can't live without them... why? Because it is the grasping of the 'self'... your 'self' holding onto feelings, emotions, and attachment on someone. What if some day your loved ones has to depart from you? Is there a pain in your heart because you have developed such a deep conditioning, your memories, the things you all did together, that you find so precious and have become deeply identified with... and yet all that has to come to an end. What hurts is your ego, your attachment, the sense that my possession has to depart from me... When a thought of losing your loved ones arise, does it lead to fear surging through your entire bodymind? This is surely a sign of deep rooted conditioning and attachment due to the illusory 'self' and the posessiveness of self (attaching to 'mine').
So the problem is not with love but with attachment and possession, and if that is dissolved/liberated then there is no problem. Your love does not have to be tainted with strong grasping on feelings and possession, though of course that is not very easy but can be achieved through gradual practise.
If there is unconditional love... the attachment to feeling, persons, identification, the sense of certain people as your 'posession' can dissolve... and yet it is not unfeeling because you have pure unconditional love and compassion for each of them.
And this unconditional love, being unconditioned, expands to include every single person... in this way there is no exceptions.
As my taiwanese teacher said... one's obsession with someone can be 'expanded'... to become the unconditional love and compassion encompass everyone, like a bodhisattva.. and this love is not just fixated or focused on a single person. A bodhisattva treats every sentient being equally with compassion and sees the Buddha Nature within each sentient being. He is not obsessed with feelings, possessions, etc.. therefore if say, his wife were to pass away, he would not suffer because of his self-centered attachments to persons and feelings. Maybe he may be sad for a while, but he didn't fixate his love and attachment entirely on that single person (which would then be attachment to the form of a 'self' and 'other person') -- his compassion and love is also 'shared' among all other sentient beings... a form of 'greater love'.. so he does not feel so much of the suffering of losing one's attached possession.
Furthermore, a Buddhist who have developed wisdom, or gained enlightenment, will be able to have more wisdom when dealing with relationships, will know what kind of relationship to engage and what kind to avoid, and will know how to cope with relationship in life -- i.e not get entangled in relationship, or become obsessed with it causing detrimental effects on your life.
~ Fa Yin Xuan Liu (2), Ven Shen Kai
~ Fa Yin Xuan Liu (3), Ven Shen Kai -
nod nod..Originally posted by snowstar:A large portion of BGR Love is actually attachment NOT real love. It is the type of "painful", "sacrificial" love that one mistakens as true love. How do we get rid of such an attachment towards the other person
A wise man had given me this advices:
We often hear ppl and some teachers or enlightened masters say non-attachment but what exactly is non-attachment? If anyone takes 'non-attachment' too literally, they is an immediate art of 'non-attachment' to master. This is a wrong understanding.
Non-attachment comes from attachment. It cannot be separated because it has never been separated. We have to undergo the entire pain, suffering, attachment; we have to cry, fight and feel helpless to understand non-attachment. Because non-attachment does not stand alone, it has its root from attachment. If a person talks about non-attachment without talking about attachment, then it is just blind talks. Without these pains, suffering, feeling of being lost and so on, 'non-attachment' cannot arise because it is a single whole. Before non-attachment is fully understood, we continue to be attached along the path of understanding non-attachment.
So what does that mean?
It means that the pain, aversion, sadness and struggle are all parts of the process of trying to be non-attached and before you 'fully' realised the 'face' of non-attachment, the 'how of fighting the battle' is to replace one form of attachment with another form of attachment. -
Actually, there are also attachment in family and friendships.Originally posted by snowstar:A large portion of BGR Love is actually attachment NOT real love. It is the type of "painful", "sacrificial" love that one mistakens as true love. How do we get rid of such an attachment towards the other person -
the instance you think about attachment or non attachment, you are, attached.
when you try to analyze love, whether it is "disguised as an attachment" you are attached to the concept of love "disguised as an attachment". -
We are all attach to this world. So, everything we do is attachment. If there is no attachment, you don't just renounce material things but also your life! Therefore, death is the end of any attachment.
-
Enlightened people are free from attachment, so although you are still attached it does not mean that there aren't people who are non-attached.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:We are all attach to this world. So, everything we do is attachment. If there is no attachment, you don't just renounce material things but also your life! Therefore, death is the end of any attachment.
One who has ended all attachments does not necessarily end his life. Since he is not attached to life nor death why would he want to kill himself? Furthermore, one's death can cause sadness to one's loved ones. Anyway, even if one is liberated, he can still live and teach the dharma to others. Only a very attached person, so attached that he can no longer stand his own suffering, will want to end his own life. A liberated person is carefree, blissful, and would therefore not think about death.
Also, detachment does not necessarily mean throwing away your material things. One can still enjoy the material world without attachment.
Furthermore, if you are unenlightened, death will not be the end of your attachment. Only through enlightenment can you end attachment -- what is needed is a quantum leap of perception.
Anyway even unenlightened people can overcome much of their attachment if they practise. -
Thanks for showing us clarity and deep insight to this question posted by TheGoodEarth. I believe a minority of the people might have the wrong perception thinking that death is the solution to end attachments. But in fact it is their over-attachments to the worldly matters that they cannot handle that is why they choose death.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Enlightened people are free from attachment, so although you are still attached it does not mean that there aren't people who are non-attached.
One who has ended all attachments does not necessarily end his life. Since he is not attached to life nor death why would he want to kill himself? Furthermore, one's death can cause sadness to one's loved ones. Anyway, even if one is liberated, he can still live and teach the dharma to others. Only a very attached person, so attached that he can no longer stand his own suffering, will want to end his own life. A liberated person is carefree, blissful, and would therefore not think about death.
Also, detachment does not necessarily mean throwing away your material things. One can still enjoy the material world without attachment.
Furthermore, if you are unenlightened, death will not be the end of your attachment. Only through enlightenment can you end attachment -- what is needed is a quantum leap of perception.
Anyway even unenlightened people can overcome much of their attachment if they practise.
I like to thank the moderator AEN for his fast and insightful response on every single new thread posted! He has dedicated much of his time and effort maintaining this wonderful forum for the benefit of us all! -
A good post. I often ask myself about bgr stuff, all types of human relationships, and how I should look at it from the Buddhist point of view.
Although the concept of non-attachment is often taught to followers in many ways, some of us (like myself) tend to think non-attachment is mutually exclusive of attachment.
Isis's comments about understanding non-attachment through attachment is quite interesting and thought-provoking. There's a Chinese buddhist quote which says, fan2 nao3 ji2 shi4 pu2 ti2 ('Troubles and worries are the Bodhi nature itself', feel free to correct my translation).
Is there any detailed and yet simple instructions in scriptures that tell the layman beginner buddhist how to attain the type of non-attachment that Bodhisattvas have achieved?
I find it a struggle to practise non-attachment when yet I am taught to sincerely care for people at the same time. AEN mentioned that one can be non-attached but yet not unfeeling. But how? The 'how' worries me a lot...
If I tell myself to practise non-attachment, I find myself attached to becoming an unfeeling, cold or indifferent person. Surely this is wrong, I know. But it's really very hard to understand and practise non-attachment the way Buddha and Bodhisattvas intended for us to understand and practise. -
Like I wrote..Originally posted by Spnw07:A good post. I often ask myself about bgr stuff, all types of human relationships, and how I should look at it from the Buddhist point of view.
Although the concept of non-attachment is often taught to followers in many ways, some of us (like myself) tend to think non-attachment is mutually exclusive of attachment.
Isis's comments about understanding non-attachment through attachment is quite interesting and thought-provoking. There's a Chinese buddhist quote which says, fan2 nao3 ji2 shi4 pu2 ti2 ('Troubles and worries are the Bodhi nature itself', feel free to correct my translation).
Is there any detailed and yet simple instructions in scriptures that tell the layman beginner buddhist how to attain the type of non-attachment that Bodhisattvas have achieved?
I find it a struggle to practise non-attachment when yet I am taught to sincerely care for people at the same time. AEN mentioned that one can be non-attached but yet not unfeeling. But how? The 'how' worries me a lot...
If I tell myself to practise non-attachment, I find myself attached to becoming an unfeeling, cold or indifferent person. Surely this is wrong, I know. But it's really very hard to understand and practise non-attachment the way Buddha and Bodhisattvas intended for us to understand and practise.
And this unconditional love, being unconditioned, expands to include every single person... in this way there is no exceptions.
As my taiwanese teacher said... one's obsession with someone can be 'expanded'... to become the unconditional love and compassion encompass everyone, like a bodhisattva.. and this love is not just fixated or focused on a single person. A bodhisattva treats every sentient being equally with compassion and sees the Buddha Nature within each sentient being. He is not obsessed with feelings, possessions, etc.. therefore if say, his wife were to pass away, he would not suffer because of his self-centered attachments to persons and feelings. Maybe he may be sad for a while, but he didn't fixate his love and attachment entirely on that single person (which would then be attachment to the form of a 'self' and 'other person') -- his compassion and love is also 'shared' among all other sentient beings... a form of 'greater love'.. so he does not feel so much of the suffering of losing one's attached possession.
Also I think this can only be achieved through gradual practise, it is not easy to overcome. -
Yes, I have read what you have just quoted about unconditional love. The concept I can roughly understand from the surface, but how to do it EXACTLY in real life? That's the most perplexing and frustrating part for me.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Like I wrote..
And this unconditional love, being unconditioned, expands to include every single person... in this way there is no exceptions.
As my taiwanese teacher said... one's obsession with someone can be 'expanded'... to become the unconditional love and compassion encompass everyone, like a bodhisattva.. and this love is not just fixated or focused on a single person. A bodhisattva treats every sentient being equally with compassion and sees the Buddha Nature within each sentient being. He is not obsessed with feelings, possessions, etc.. therefore if say, his wife were to pass away, he would not suffer because of his self-centered attachments to persons and feelings. Maybe he may be sad for a while, but he didn't fixate his love and attachment entirely on that single person (which would then be attachment to the form of a 'self' and 'other person') -- his compassion and love is also 'shared' among all other sentient beings... a form of 'greater love'.. so he does not feel so much of the suffering of losing one's attached possession.
Also I think this can only be achieved through gradual practise, it is not easy to overcome.
What and how exactly did the Bodhisattva do when he was just a layman like the rest of us, without great wisdom and all that, arrive at the stage of non-attachment but yet with compassion?
For example, You and I are now just online acquaintances. If let's say I suffer due to sickness or maybe commit suicide, the intensity of your feeling is almost definitely different compared to another scenario whereby you get to know me in person and for a long time.
Hardly any Buddhist (there will be some of course, but definitely not in great numbers) in this lifetime can achieve the level of non-attachment of even a first stage saint, much less an Arahant or Bodhisattva.
As such, many youngsters who hear of such concept feel that Buddhism is cold and indifferent and hard to understand and do in real life.
At my level of understanding, with my present intellect, I can only struggle... -
You seem to have misunderstood many things, based on what you have written above.... ai yah... to much trouble (takes too long) to explain to you what you have misunderstood...
-
That's ok. I wouldn't have the patience to explain to someone like myself too. But yet I can't run away from myself...I have to face all that is in me.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:You seem to have misunderstood many things, based on what you have written above.... ai yah... to much trouble (takes too long) to explain to you what you have misunderstood... -
*sigh* there is no "you" to begin with... how to tell you that?Originally posted by Spnw07:That's ok. I wouldn't have the patience to explain to someone like myself too. But yet I can't run away from myself...I have to face all that is in me. -
Haiz, what to do, I bo tak chek lah..low IQ and EQ, so Buddhism very tough for me, but yet I agree with Cause and Effect. Haiz. Wu3 nai4.
-
What I said must be practised, it is not something only an enlightened Bodhisattva can achieve. If that is so there is no point discussing about it. Every Bodhisattva also begin practising as a commoner. That is you can gradually enlarge your 'scope' of love so that instead of fixating on a single person, you become like a Bodhisattva who shares this love with all others.Originally posted by Spnw07:Yes, I have read what you have just quoted about unconditional love. The concept I can roughly understand from the surface, but how to do it EXACTLY in real life? That's the most perplexing and frustrating part for me.
What and how exactly did the Bodhisattva do when he was just a layman like the rest of us, without great wisdom and all that, arrive at the stage of non-attachment but yet with compassion?
For example, You and I are now just online acquaintances. If let's say I suffer due to sickness or maybe commit suicide, the intensity of your feeling is almost definitely different compared to another scenario whereby you get to know me in person and for a long time.
Hardly any Buddhist (there will be some of course, but definitely not in great numbers) in this lifetime can achieve the level of non-attachment of even a first stage saint, much less an Arahant or Bodhisattva.
As such, many youngsters who hear of such concept feel that Buddhism is cold and indifferent and hard to understand and do in real life.
At my level of understanding, with my present intellect, I can only struggle...
We must practise, and that is why we must 'walk the Bodhisattva path'. (xing pu sa dao).. Actually all that I said can be, and must be practised by all of us.
Talking about enlightenment.. actually as what my Taiwanese teacher told us, all of all we must have confidence in our Buddha Nature, that our Buddha Nature is already complete and we all can attain enlightenment. There are many people who have attained enlightenment, probably much more than you think there is because I know many of them are. I've met many people who had transcendental insights, here in this forum, ppl in my dharma center, my teachers, etc.
My teacher also spoke about one of his students... who is very low in confidence of his own path. He thought he would never become enlightened, or that enlightenment is somehow a very far off, limited-to-few persons kind of thing. But after being transmitted the dharma by my (taiwanese) teacher, he practised diligently and attained enlightenment. What he attained is not yet full liberation or Xiu Zheng, but is an initial enlightenment (Jian Zheng). But he is very happy and called my teacher up, thanked him and told him the entire process of his awakening.
So moral of the story is we must be confident in our buddha nature, and practise.
All the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas were just like us once, but they practised and therefore became enlightened.
I'll post more later when I have time... -
BTW the difference between bodhisattva and sentient, is that sentient is 'you qing' -- have feelings, but bodhisattva is 'jue you qing' -- aware/awakened and have feelings. If we can be aware moment to moment of our feelings, then we are practising Bodhisattva path.
-
There is actually another way instead of "understanding" it and that is to live it. To realize it in your life. hahaha, that one you need a teacher to guide you, a teacher that understands what it is.Originally posted by Spnw07:Haiz, what to do, I bo tak chek lah..low IQ and EQ, so Buddhism very tough for me, but yet I agree with Cause and Effect. Haiz. Wu3 nai4. -
Erms, I do accept that unconditional love is something that must be practised and that it is not something only a Bodhisattva can achieve. It is the details in carrying it out, in thoughts and in behaviour that worries me.Originally posted by An Eternal Now:What I said must be practised, it is not something only an enlightened Bodhisattva can achieve. If that is so there is no point discussing about it. Every Bodhisattva also begin practising as a commoner. That is you can gradually enlarge your 'scope' of love so that instead of fixating on a single person, you become like a Bodhisattva who shares this love with all others.
We must practise, and that is why we must 'walk the Bodhisattva path'. (xing pu sa dao).. Actually all that I said can be, and must be practised by all of us.
Talking about enlightenment.. actually as what my Taiwanese teacher told us, all of all we must have confidence in our Buddha Nature, that our Buddha Nature is already complete and we all can attain enlightenment. There are many people who have attained enlightenment, probably much more than you think there is because I know many of them are. I've met many people who had transcendental insights, here in this forum, ppl in my dharma center, my teachers, etc.
My teacher also spoke about one of his students... who is very low in confidence of his own path. He thought he would never become enlightened, or that enlightenment is somehow a very far off, limited-to-few persons kind of thing. But after being transmitted the dharma by my (taiwanese) teacher, he practised diligently and attained enlightenment. What he attained is not yet full liberation or Xiu Zheng, but is an initial enlightenment (Jian Zheng). But he is very happy and called my teacher up, thanked him and told him the entire process of his awakening.
So moral of the story is we must be confident in our buddha nature, and practise. All the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas were just like us once, but they practised and therefore became enlightened.
I'll post more later when I have time...
Of course, practioners who have achieved initial enlightenment will definitely be more than what I think. However, what I'm trying to say is, not all Buddhists can achieve initial enlightenment in their present lifetime. Without even achieving initial enlightenment in their present lifetime, the journey towards full enlightenment is a long and arduous one, compared to one who has some form of irreversible foundation of spiritual attainment to support him in his climb upwards. This is one of the main reasons why Christianity is so easily accepted by the young.
Christianity says anyone who accepts Jesus as their one and only saviour, will definitely go to heaven after the end of their days on earth. It's a one lifetime matter, compared to countless rebirths needed to even earn a little progress in one's spiritual cultivation.
If I had not believed in the logic of Cause and Effect in Buddhist teachings, frankly speaking, Christianity does seem to offer more hope... -
Yes, if only you can show proof that it is real, it is reality. Otherwise it is just simple beliefs and as for beliefs, take your pick, believe or not believe, it makes no difference.
-
Buddhism offers not only hope but realityOriginally posted by Spnw07:Erms, I do accept that unconditional love is something that must be practised and that it is not something only a Bodhisattva can achieve. It is the details in carrying it out, in thoughts and in behaviour that worries me.
Of course, practioners who have achieved initial enlightenment will definitely be more than what I think. However, what I'm trying to say is, not all Buddhists can achieve initial enlightenment in their present lifetime. Without even achieving initial enlightenment in their present lifetime, the journey towards full enlightenment is a long and arduous one, compared to one who has some form of irreversible foundation of spiritual attainment to support him in his climb upwards. This is one of the main reasons why Christianity is so easily accepted by the young.
Christianity says anyone who accepts Jesus as their one and only saviour, will definitely go to heaven after the end of their days on earth. It's a one lifetime matter, compared to countless rebirths needed to even earn a little progress in one's spiritual cultivation.
If I had not believed in the logic of Cause and Effect in Buddhist teachings, frankly speaking, Christianity does seem to offer more hope... You don't have to hope for some future state in a future lifetime, but actulize the perfect bliss of Nirvana through your practise. You can attain the transcendental wisdom and awareness, the unconditional love and compassion of a Bodhisattva and a Buddha. etc etc...
I'll post something later.. -
I'm still a Buddhist cos I have been constantly consoling myself with the above fact and tackling various character flaws of mine all at the same time. Very alone...Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Buddhism offers not only hope but reality You don't have to hope for some future state in a future lifetime, but actulize the perfect bliss of Nirvana through your practise. You can attain the transcendental wisdom and awareness, the unconditional love and compassion of a Bodhisattva and a Buddha. etc etc...
I'll post something later.. -
of course you are sad... you are tackling your character flaws when you do not even exist (not the way you think you exist, anyway)
-
wat seh, andrew, your explanation veri chim.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:of course you are sad... you are tackling your character flaws when you do not even exist (not the way you think you exist, anyway)
need to wait till next life to understand liao -
but if you give up now... you will just suffer for the rest of your life... (this life...)Originally posted by Spnw07:wat seh, andrew, your explanation veri chim. need to wait till next life to understand liao