In Love - what to do about it?

A place to discuss casual topics amongst spiritual friends.
kayy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:20 pm

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by kayy »

If we didn't have problems we wanted to fix, why would we be interested in Buddhism? If we didn't suffer, why would we want to find a way to suffer less? I mean.... that's obvious, right?!

:shrug:
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Of course, it's actually not-self help. 8-)

I don't think the "self help" angle is necessarily a bad entry door into the Dhamma... everyone's got problems they want to fix don't they? It's just unfortunate that the term has become synonymous with your Dr. Phil and Oprah crowd. In the Dhamma space, you've got people like Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda who have written texts such as "How To Live Without Fear And Worry", "You and Your Problems" and "Who is Responsible For Your Problems?" and I'm sure many people have had their first taste of the Dhamma through such avenues.

Apologies for the slight detour.

Metta,
Retro. :)
Sanghamitta
Posts: 1614
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:21 am
Location: By the River Thames near London.

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by Sanghamitta »

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Of course, it's actually not-self help. 8-)

I don't think the "self help" angle is necessarily a bad entry door into the Dhamma... everyone's got problems they want to fix don't they? It's just unfortunate that the term has become synonymous with your Dr. Phil and Oprah crowd. In the Dhamma space, you've got people like Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda who have written texts such as "How To Live Without Fear And Worry", "You and Your Problems" and "Who is Responsible For Your Problems?" and I'm sure many people have had their first taste of the Dhamma through such avenues.

Apologies for the slight detour.

Metta,
Retro. :)
I think deciding to leave prison is an important step. I think that thinking that this is achieved by painting the prison walls a cheery yellow and declaring that prison is all that exists is another issue altogether.... :namaste:
The going for refuge is the door of entrance to the teachings of the Buddha.

Bhikku Bodhi.
kayy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:20 pm

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by kayy »

Sanghamitta wrote:
retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,

Of course, it's actually not-self help. 8-)

I don't think the "self help" angle is necessarily a bad entry door into the Dhamma... everyone's got problems they want to fix don't they? It's just unfortunate that the term has become synonymous with your Dr. Phil and Oprah crowd. In the Dhamma space, you've got people like Ven. K. Sri Dhammananda who have written texts such as "How To Live Without Fear And Worry", "You and Your Problems" and "Who is Responsible For Your Problems?" and I'm sure many people have had their first taste of the Dhamma through such avenues.

Apologies for the slight detour.

Metta,
Retro. :)
I think deciding to leave prison is an important step. I think that thinking that this is achieved by painting the prison walls a cheery yellow and declaring that prison is all that exists is another issue altogether.... :namaste:

I don't quite understand. Are you saying that this is what I'm doing, or what Retro is doing?

If you say it's what I'm doing, you misrepresent me.
User avatar
Lazy_eye
Posts: 996
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: Laurel, MD
Contact:

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by Lazy_eye »

kayy wrote: I think spiritual practice has no goal if not to find happiness and peace in the midst of what Buddhists call "the cycle of birth, sickness, old age and death", i.e. samsara. I don't think that the ultimate spiritual goal and the profanities of daily life are mutually exclusive, or even separable at all. Good luck trying to get out of that cycle. We're all going to die, whether we try to get round / over / through it or not.

I have found some sorts of spiritual bliss / communion or whatever you want to call it in a relationship / sex, and no it doesn't last. But neither does anything. Is that a reason to jettison it? Or are you looking for something permanent? If so, good luck t'ya ;)
I think all Buddhists, in some way or another, are seeking relief from dukkha. It's like riding in a cart where the axle hasn't been properly fitted to the wheel, and the cart sort of bumps along, making us sick. Put another way, there's a kind of existential ache we have, an itch to be scratched, and we keep looking around in the world for ways to deal with that ache, and none of them prove satisfactory. Which is why we end up on the spiritual path.

I'd agree with you, though, that spirituality is not separable from the profanities of daily life...this is something the Zen teachers remind us of again and again. Want enlightenment? Scrub a rice bowl...
Another reason I'm a little wary of monasticism is because of my "political conscience" if you wanna call it that. I don't really like the idea of me going off to liberate myself and find blissful truth, whilst leaving the rest of the human race to continue working to earn money and have children who will then work, to pay for my food, monasteries, robes and so on. Society is based on this, whether we like it or not. You can't escape society; we're all connected to each other. Some people will argue that the vocation of a monk or nun is ultimately selfless because it means they can liberate themselves then come back to society to help the lay community liberate themselves. This implies that it is therefore possible for a layperson to attain liberation...which is what I was saying in the first place ;)
Would you say that someone like Thich Nhat Hanh, for instance, is just a parasite feeding off of the hard-working rest of the human race? Or when Stephen Batchelor spent all those years in monastic training (in two traditions!), he was just wasting his time? Why did Joseph Goldstein and Jack Kornfield and Sharon Salzberg and all those other respected lay teachers feel the need to travel to remote parts of Asia to study with clerics?

How many $$$s do most of us shell out each month to support cable TV companies, the music and movie industry, the psychiatric profession, the "well being" industry...all these things we look to for temporary relief?

I think it's important to have a strong lay tradition...dhamma is there for people of all capacities. But rather than rejecting the monastic element in Buddhism, I see the monastic and lay communities as equally necessary...they support each other.
kayy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:20 pm

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by kayy »

Lazy_eye wrote:
kayy wrote: I think spiritual practice has no goal if not to find happiness and peace in the midst of what Buddhists call "the cycle of birth, sickness, old age and death", i.e. samsara. I don't think that the ultimate spiritual goal and the profanities of daily life are mutually exclusive, or even separable at all. Good luck trying to get out of that cycle. We're all going to die, whether we try to get round / over / through it or not.

I have found some sorts of spiritual bliss / communion or whatever you want to call it in a relationship / sex, and no it doesn't last. But neither does anything. Is that a reason to jettison it? Or are you looking for something permanent? If so, good luck t'ya ;)
I think all Buddhists, in some way or another, are seeking relief from dukkha. It's like riding in a cart where the axle hasn't been properly fitted to the wheel, and the cart sort of bumps along, making us sick. Put another way, there's a kind of existential ache we have, an itch to be scratched, and we keep looking around in the world for ways to deal with that ache, and none of them prove satisfactory. Which is why we end up on the spiritual path.

I'd agree with you, though, that spirituality is not separable from the profanities of daily life...this is something the Zen teachers remind us of again and again. Want enlightenment? Scrub a rice bowl...
Another reason I'm a little wary of monasticism is because of my "political conscience" if you wanna call it that. I don't really like the idea of me going off to liberate myself and find blissful truth, whilst leaving the rest of the human race to continue working to earn money and have children who will then work, to pay for my food, monasteries, robes and so on. Society is based on this, whether we like it or not. You can't escape society; we're all connected to each other. Some people will argue that the vocation of a monk or nun is ultimately selfless because it means they can liberate themselves then come back to society to help the lay community liberate themselves. This implies that it is therefore possible for a layperson to attain liberation...which is what I was saying in the first place ;)
Would you say that someone like Thich Nhat Hanh, for instance, is just a parasite feeding off of the hard-working rest of the human race? Or when Stephen Batchelor spent all those years in monastic training (in two traditions!), he was just wasting his time? Why did Joseph Goldstein and Jack Kornfield and Sharon Salzberg and all those other respected lay teachers feel the need to travel to remote parts of Asia to study with clerics?

How many $$$s do most of us shell out each month to support cable TV companies, the music and movie industry, the psychiatric profession, the "well being" industry...all these things we look to for temporary relief?

I think it's important to have a strong lay tradition...dhamma is there for people of all capacities. But rather than rejecting the monastic element in Buddhism, I see the monastic and lay communities as equally necessary...they support each other.

Point taken about TNH, Batchelor, Goldstein etc. In order to teach a lay community effectively, though, I would still argue that it is necessary to have real experience as a lay practitioner, so as to gain a real understanding of the things we have to deal with living in society, having jobs, relationships and so on.

Of course it depends on the student. Personally, I feel the need for teachers with experience of a lifestyle similar to mine. Other lay practitioners, as I know, prefer the teachings of some of the monastic community. When it comes down to it it's just a personal feeling caused by our personal karma, that we attempt to justify using 'rational' thought and language.

Best wishes

Katy
User avatar
Lazy_eye
Posts: 996
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 3:23 pm
Location: Laurel, MD
Contact:

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by Lazy_eye »

kayy wrote: Point taken about TNH, Batchelor, Goldstein etc. In order to teach a lay community effectively, though, I would still argue that it is necessary to have real experience as a lay practitioner, so as to gain a real understanding of the things we have to deal with living in society, having jobs, relationships and so on.
I read ya. Definitely appreciate having teachers around who have insight into those things -- either from personal experience, or in some cases just because they have a real affinity with laypeople.
Of course it depends on the student. Personally, I feel the need for teachers with experience of a lifestyle similar to mine. Other lay practitioners, as I know, prefer the teachings of some of the monastic community. When it comes down to it it's just a personal feeling caused by our personal karma, that we attempt to justify using 'rational' thought and language.
When I started out exploring Buddhism, I felt alarmed and threatened by the emphasis on monasticism. Maybe I felt my balls would fall off if I thought about it, or that I'd feel some mysterious urge to ordain. And so at first I tended to minimize that aspect of the tradition. My entry point was through Zen, anyway, where these days even priests can get married. :)

But, you know, this was just ignorance and aversion. It makes a lot more sense to try and understand rather than shutting it out.

I agree about rationalizing one's karma. So easy to fall into that mental trap.
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19932
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by mikenz66 »

Lazy_eye wrote:
kayy wrote: Point taken about TNH, Batchelor, Goldstein etc. In order to teach a lay community effectively, though, I would still argue that it is necessary to have real experience as a lay practitioner, so as to gain a real understanding of the things we have to deal with living in society, having jobs, relationships and so on.
I read ya. Definitely appreciate having teachers around who have insight into those things -- either from personal experience, or in some cases just because they have a real affinity with laypeople.
I appreciate having contact with a variety of teachers. However, those I really trust happen to be monastic.

I think that there can be some seriously mistaken impressions about monastics among those who have not spent time with them. All monastics were once lay people, and thus may have had various experiences in terms of relationships and so on that they can, and do, draw on. (Though one of my teachers was a novice since age 13 and sometimes jokes that there was no point asking him questions about sex...). Besides, it would be foolish to assume that monastics do not have to deal with most of the same sorts of interpersonal and organisational conflicts as the rest of us...

Metta
Mike
kayy
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 6:20 pm

Re: In Love - what to do about it?

Post by kayy »

Lazy_eye wrote:
kayy wrote: Point taken about TNH, Batchelor, Goldstein etc. In order to teach a lay community effectively, though, I would still argue that it is necessary to have real experience as a lay practitioner, so as to gain a real understanding of the things we have to deal with living in society, having jobs, relationships and so on.
I read ya. Definitely appreciate having teachers around who have insight into those things -- either from personal experience, or in some cases just because they have a real affinity with laypeople.
Of course it depends on the student. Personally, I feel the need for teachers with experience of a lifestyle similar to mine. Other lay practitioners, as I know, prefer the teachings of some of the monastic community. When it comes down to it it's just a personal feeling caused by our personal karma, that we attempt to justify using 'rational' thought and language.
When I started out exploring Buddhism, I felt alarmed and threatened by the emphasis on monasticism. Maybe I felt my balls would fall off if I thought about it, or that I'd feel some mysterious urge to ordain. And so at first I tended to minimize that aspect of the tradition. My entry point was through Zen, anyway, where these days even priests can get married. :)

But, you know, this was just ignorance and aversion. It makes a lot more sense to try and understand rather than shutting it out.

I agree about rationalizing one's karma. So easy to fall into that mental trap.


Yeah - I've started to realise lately that the more I understand and accept something, the less threatened I feel by it. You have to turn towards something to be unharmed by it, rather than turning away. I guess that's the whole point of...well.... Buddhism, really, isn't it? Turn towards life and death, rather than turning away and distracting ourselves, shutting it out.... :soap:
Post Reply