Avatar
Please consider registering
guest
sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register
Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
sp_TopicIcon
The Dalai Lama's Insights ...
July 5, 2008
11:10 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for SATURDAY/SUNDAY July 5/6 2008.

"When people get angry they lose all sense of happiness. Even if they are good looking and normally peaceful, their faces turn livid and ugly. Anger upsets their physical well-being and disturbs their rest; it destroys their appetites and makes them age prematurely. Happiness, peace, and sleep evade them, and they no longer appreciate people who have helped them and deserve their trust and gratitude.

July 6, 2008
7:04 pm
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for Monday, July 7 2008.

"Here is a general statement about Tibetan medicine: Human physiology is spoken of in terms of the three humors-wind, bile, and phlegm imbalances occur respectively from the "three poisons," or primary mental afflictions; namely, attachment, anger, and ignorance."

July 7, 2008
4:09 am
Avatar
free
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 433
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I like these. Keep posting.

July 7, 2008
2:05 pm
Avatar
free
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 433
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Can you explain why attachment is a poison.

free

July 8, 2008
11:59 pm
Avatar
soofoo
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

It is a Buddhist belief that all attachment leads to suffering.

I saw the Dalai Lama when he was visiting a local university a few years ago. He talked about anger. How he became miffed at one of his attendants, and how he was sorry about it. I was very impressed that he spoke of himself that way. He is considered to be a deity and yet he is very humble and inspiring.

July 9, 2008
2:34 am
Avatar
free
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 433
Member Since:
September 27, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

But doesn't non-attachment lead to loneliness?

free

July 9, 2008
7:13 pm
Avatar
soofoo
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Free,

I think of it this way.

1. There is a problem with being human in that we feel need, longing, desire, etc. Feeling that need and being unable to fill it creates suffering.

2. Christianity believes we can satisfy the need, longing, desire through the Christ and the Holy Spirit, God's Love.

3. Buddhism believes we can eliminate the need, longing, desire by releasing attachment and thus achieve Nirvana.

So you get rid of the need by having it no longer apply (Buddhist) or you get rid of the need by fulfilling it (Christianity).

The three poisons originated in Vedic literature, which is ancient Hindu text. So for a Buddhist, it's like reading the old testament. Hinduism is to Buddhism as Judaism is to Christianity.

July 9, 2008
7:17 pm
Avatar
MsGuided
Golden Horseshoe.ca
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Ok? so where does our breeding status fit in here?

This attachment "theory" doesn't match up with our physiological or emotional needs.

Since babies are born helpless, and need care at least until their teens being unattached as adults would leave every child born hungry and starving for affection.
Now if people were more like Bears it may work, but we have all this cultural, religeous and traditional "baggage".
This world would be in more of a mess than it is now.

Some of this philosophy works if you meditate in a temple somewhere, removed from the rest of society , and recieving "gifts" from worshippers to survive.
Think about how a person would percieve the world if they were dedicated to a sheltered life such as a Buddist Monk? Even Monks live amongst others. I'm sure they are very attached to eachother.

Perhaps attachment means excessive need without the realization and cultivation of self?

July 9, 2008
7:33 pm
Avatar
soofoo
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

MsG,

Buddhists believe that attachment interferes with love. Attachment is definitely not the same thing as love.
Non-attachment is a state of mind that requires a lot of discipline to attain. It is believed that human beings can attain a state of enlightenment (a permanent state of non-attachment) on this earth but that would be very rare.

If we were all enlightened, we wouldn't stop taking care of our children. We would just be totally at peace doing it.

July 9, 2008
7:42 pm
Avatar
soofoo
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

attachment (to a Buddhist) does not mean excessive need. Any need at all is attachment.

July 9, 2008
8:21 pm
Avatar
MsGuided
Golden Horseshoe.ca
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

TY soofoo for the clarification.

As long as we adhere to religeons that espouse power structures, inequality between the sexes, profess our inadequacies, repress sexuality, present divisive writings that build people up then tear them down, we will always feel flawed and incapable of finding this enlightenment. IMHO.
For now many are exposed to expected to have attachments, to god and to eachother.

This is why I am not religeous, or more preciseley non-cristian.

I do beleive anger has it's purpose tho. It exists in every mammal as a defense mechanism, and it is usefull for humans under the same circumstances. Obviously excessive anger is damaging.
For me anger saved my life, or perhaps kept me from harm when the situation presented itself.

One has to make sure it isn't the basis of their character or takes up too much room.
Be Well!

July 9, 2008
10:43 pm
Avatar
soofoo
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I think I am fortunate that I have never felt that I had to adhere to a religion. It has always been a matter of choice for me.

For me being Christian is a preference. It's like choosing vanilla ice cream. And I don't have to agree with other Christians about anything. I might agree with some Christians on some points. But I have the Holy Spirit. I have the Christ. How could another person, Christian or not, ever trump that? Of course they couldn't.

July 10, 2008
1:08 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for TUESDAY, July 8 2008.

Ultimately, the reason why love and compassion bring greatest happiness is simply that from the core of our nature these are deeply appreciated. The need for love lies at the very foundation of human existence. It results from the profound interdependence we all share with one another. However capable and skillfuI an individual may be, left alone, he or she will not survive. However vigorous and independent we may feel during the most prosperous periods of life, when we are sick, very young, or very old, we must depend on the support of others."/B>

July 10, 2008
1:10 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for WEDNESDAY, July 9 2008.

If one's cause is supported by sound reasoning, there is no point in using violence. It is those who have no motive other than selfish desire and who cannot achieve their goal through logical reasoning who rely on force.

July 10, 2008
1:11 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for THURSDAY, July 10 2008.

I often joke that if you really want to be selfish, you should be very altruistic! You should take good care of others, be concerned for their welfare, help them, serve them, make more friends, make more smiles. The result? When you yourself need help, you find plenty of helpers!

July 10, 2008
1:22 am
Avatar
Worried_Dad
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 43
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The Dalai Lama is one of my favorit-est people.

Thanks, Tez!

July 10, 2008
1:32 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

free

On 7-Jul-08 you asked:

"Can you explain why attachment is a poison."

Because everything is impermanent and always changing, especially people, sooner or later being attached to a particular person, place or thing, will result in the loss of same. If a loved one to whom we are attached rejects us and leaves us or worse still dies, then we grieve in direct proportion to degree of our attachment. My breakup with Joy is a classic example where my attachment to her led to a hell of a lot of emotional pain when she left me. I'm still not out of it yet. I am attached to my youth. Now that I am aging, damage to my body is a source of anguish for me. If I was unattached to anybody, place or thing I would be perfectly contented and a delightful human being to know.

If we are attached to some person, place or thing thing and somebody threatens to take that away from us or damage the object of our attachment in some way then we will sometimes react in anger. That emotional reaction can do untold damage to ourselves and/or others. If we are attached to something we really, really want but cannot have then we feel frustrated.

All of the above attachments cause suffering. This is why grasping or attachment is a poison. It ultimately destroys our peace of mind and inner serenity in the long term if not the short one. Think about the kinds of attachments that led to the Iraq war and those terrible casualties.

Aversion or hatred is the opposite side of the same coin. Aversion is attachment to not having some body, place or thing in our life.

Both attachment and aversion lead to loss of equanimity and peace of mind thus resulting in suffering.

July 10, 2008
2:30 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

free

On the 9-Jul-08 you asked the rhetorical question:

"But doesn't non-attachment lead to loneliness?"

Emphatically no. Attachment to having someone in our lives with whom we can share intimacies of thought, physical and sexual contact when we haven't anyone in our life, is what causes the emotional pain of loneliness.

July 10, 2008
2:56 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

MsGuided

On the 9-Jul-08 you wrote:

"This attachment "theory" doesn't match up with our physiological or emotional needs."

Being unattached to fulfilling needs does not mean not bothering about or ignoring those needs.

Everyone needs to eat including the Dalai Lama. Buddhist monks, with begging bowls in hand, seek their daily needs by humbly asking the locals to feed them. If one local says "piss off!" then a Buddhist monk, who is unattached to either food or his self-image, would in all probability respectfully say: "OK" and happily move onto the next house.

Buddhism does not equate non-attachment with prohibition, the two are very different concepts. A rich man who is unattached to his money can still manage his finances carefully. If however such an unattached man loses his money in a stock market crash, he would not incur suffering as a result. In other words it is not the having of money that is the poison, it is the attachment to having that money that is at the root of suffering caused by money loss.

A buddhist monk can have the very highest regard for his lama, yet upon the death of that lama, the monk will feel no grief unless attachment is also present.

Emotions are often, but not always, driven by thoughts. Negative thoughts both trigger off and sustain the continuous re-triggering of negative emotions. Thus the Buddha included "Right Views" as one step on the Eightfold Path to the elimination of suffering.

The Buddha's teachings are a complete package not just one oversimplified teaching such as "avoid attachment".

July 10, 2008
3:00 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Thanks for your expression of your appreciation in your post on the 10-Jul-08, WD.

July 10, 2008
8:13 am
Avatar
needtoheal
New Member
Members
Forum Posts: -1
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Thank you Tez and Soofoo for all of your information....

Need

July 10, 2008
5:00 pm
Avatar
MsGuided
Golden Horseshoe.ca
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 104
Member Since:
September 24, 2010
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

thanks Tez for the reply.

I must say I appreciate the Buddist injections/posts.

The Dali Lamas thoughts resonate deeply with me.

I guess i should widen my scope and seek out the info myself.Until I do, thanks SO MUCH Tez for bringing some real light into the libs!
:0)

July 10, 2008
10:30 pm
Avatar
guest_guest
Guest
Guests

hi Tez

i would say that, its ok to feel anger. Its temporary and its like a deluge of rain. Its good in washing away whatever is present. What I've read in most self-help books and it makes sense is, not to resist what we're feeling. Let yourself feel AND do whatever you want to do. The big problem is finding out what we want to do. The 2nd problem is, shaking that fear off to do what we want alone, and in front of other people. This last one is a big problem.

In public, not loosing that awareness of what we really want to do, is also a serious problem to overcome for social anxious people like me.

But I got a problem lately with anger! Like if stuff wouldnt work on my PC and I was really frustrated with lots of things going wrong in a row, i would ram my mouse down. Arghhhh. Maybe thats bad huh.

July 11, 2008
12:11 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

The INSIGHT From the Dalai Lama for FRIDAY, July 11 2008.

"Any conflict within humanity should be considered. as a family conflict. We must find a solution within this atmosphere."

July 11, 2008
12:26 am
Avatar
Guest
Guests

Guest_guest.

Thanks for your post.

You wrote:

"i would say that, its ok to feel anger."

I agree that what we feel is what we feel. Our past programming sees to that. What we think, say and do after we become aware of our feelings is what counts, IMHO.

Perhaps my greatest realization was that emotional arousals like anger require feeding to maintain that state of emotional arousal.

Aroused emotions are initially fed and therefore maintained by thoughts. That is why counting to ten before acting is such good advice. Thinking of counting to ten breaks the chain of thoughts that feed the anger allowing the level of arousal to subside a little.

Even the Dalai Lama admits to getting angry still. But he said that with him it only lasts a minute and a half nowadays. Of course you can be sure that the Dalai Lama always thinks and acts appropriately after he realizes that he is angry.

So when the Dalai Lama speaks of anger as being a poison, he is referring to unbridled anger expressed inappropriately because of wrong views on the nature of the trigger for that anger.

Forum Timezone: UTC -8
Most Users Ever Online: 247
Currently Online:
30
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
onedaythiswillpass: 1134
zarathustra: 562
StronginHim77: 453
free: 433
2013ways: 431
curious64: 408
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 49
Members: 110935
Moderators: 5
Admins: 3
Forum Stats:
Groups: 8
Forums: 74
Topics: 38542
Posts: 714222
Newest Members:
jessicawales, documentsonline, SafeWork, thomasalina, genericsmartdrugs, 才艺
Moderators: arochaIB: 1, devadmin: 9, Tincho: 0, Donn Gruta: 0, Germain Palacios: 0
Administrators: admin: 21, ShiningLight: 572, emily430: 29

Copyright © 2019 MH Sub I, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Policy | Health Disclaimer