Compassion

[Vmarco]

1. "If I have any understanding of compassion..., it all comes from studying the Bodhicharyavatara" HH Dalai Lama

 

2. "The whole of the Bodhicharyvatara is geared toward prajna, the direct realization of emptiness, absolute bodhichitta, without which the true practice of compassion is impossible." The Way of the Bodhisattva

 

3. To be aware of Absolute Bodhicitta, is to understand:

a) that everything you perceive is a dream.

b ) only the consciousness you had before you were born can correctly discern reality.

c) that there is no present in time.

d) You will never understand Who you are, until you realize When you are.

 

4. In the commentary on the Dalai Lama's (DVD) The Four Noble Truth's, Robert Thurman stressed that, "Buddhist teachings on compassion are grounded in the direct realization of Emptiness; without which, compassion is impossible."

 

5. In the book Crazy Wisdom, Chögyam Trungpa said, "Compassion is not so much feeling sorry for somebody, feeling that you are in a better place and somebody is in a worse place. Compassion is not having any hesitation to reflect your light on things. As light has no hesitation, no inhibition about reflecting on things, it does not discriminate whether to reflect on a pile of shit or on a pile of rock or on a pile of diamonds. It reflects on everything it faces."

 

6. Sakyamuni Buddha's greatest teaching, (purportedly) according to Sakyamuni, is that only through the perfect wisdom of the Heart sutra comes the perfect compassion of a bodhisattva. If compassion arises from form alone, it is false compassion, no matter how well intended.

 

Sogyal Rinpoche tells us that the practice of Tonglen depends upon our ability to awaken within ourselves the reality of compassion. Just as we cannot perform the Unity Breath until we can feel Love, we cannot practice Tonglen until we truly can feel compassion.

 

Compassion is not the same as pity. With compassion, while we are aware of what another is going through, we also honor that other and their path. We are there not to rescue, but rather to understand and to love. Instead of joining the other in his or her pain, we absorb the pain into ourselves and return peace, joy, and love.

 

And so compassion, Sogyal Rinpoche warns, is much more difficult to achieve than we might think.

 

8. Sharon Salzberg said, "Sometimes we think that to develop an open heart, to be truly loving and compassionate, means that we need to be passive, to allow others to abuse us, to smile and let anyone do what they want with us. Yet this is not what is meant by compassion. Quite the contrary. Compassion is not at all weak. It is the strength that arises out of seeing the true nature of suffering in the world. Compassion allows us to bear witness to that suffering, whether it is in ourselves or others, without fear; it allows us to name injustice without hesitation, and to act strongly, with all the skill at our disposal. To develop this mind state of compassion...is to learn to live, as the Buddha put it, with sympathy for all living beings, without exception."

 

9. Kenchen Thrangu Rinpoche: said, "...everbody thinks that compassion is important, and everyone has compassion. True enough, but the Buddha gave uncommon quintessential instructions when he taught the methods for cultivating compassion, and the differences are extraordinarily important."

[Aetherous]

This definition of compassion is strictly limited to (certain types of) Buddhism. The actual definition of compassion in any English language dictionary doesn't include the Buddhist defintion whatsoever.

 

Maybe this thread would be best served in the Buddhist discussion forum, where it won't confuse people.

[Vmarco]

This definition of compassion is strictly limited to (certain types of) Buddhism. The actual definition of compassion in any English language dictionary doesn't include the Buddhist defintion whatsoever.

 

Maybe this thread would be best served in the Buddhist discussion forum, where it won't confuse people.

 

 

Maybe......on the other hand,...you're too confused to remain on this forum.

 

IMO, the Buddhist definition of compassion is closer, if not exactly, what Lao Tzu pointed to.

 

Perhaps those who confused about compassion are like "monkey's catapulting through the jungle; totally fascinated by the realm of the senses....if anyone threaten it, it actually fears for its life." The Hua Hu Ching

 

When Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Recognize that everything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth," he was pointing the same thing as the Buddhists.

 

Of course, some, like yourself, may imagine that the whole of Taoism points to an embracing of confused people, and avoidance of any integrate with the reality beyond confusion.

 

Anyway, the question (and thus post) regarding source information on compassion beside the Western patriarchal dictionary, which you are appear confused about, was from a request.

 

To understand the Tao, just as to understand real compassion, one must venture beyond narrow cerebral views.

 

Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Intellectual knowledge exists in and of the brain. Because the brain is part of the body, which must one day expire, this collection of facts, however large and impressive, will expire as well"

Edited April 10, 2012 by Vmarco

[Aetherous]

Ridiculous.

[Lucky7Strikes]

Maybe......on the other hand,...you're too confused to remain on this forum.

 

IMO, the Buddhist definition of compassion is closer, if not exactly, what Lao Tzu pointed to.

 

Perhaps those who confused about compassion are like "monkey's catapulting through the jungle; totally fascinated by the realm of the senses....if anyone threaten it, it actually fears for its life." The Hua Hu Ching

 

When Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Recognize that everything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth," he was pointing the same thing as the Buddhists.

 

Of course, some, like yourself, may imagine that the whole of Taoism points to an embracing of confused people, and avoidance of any integrate with the reality beyond confusion.

 

Anyway, the question (and thus post) regarding source information on compassion beside the Western patriarchal dictionary, which you are appear confused about, was from a request.

 

To understand the Tao, just as to understand real compassion, one must venture beyond narrow cerebral views.

 

Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Intellectual knowledge exists in and of the brain. Because the brain is part of the body, which must one day expire, this collection of facts, however large and impressive, will expire as well"

You make things overly complicated for no reason other than to quote bunch of fortune cookie quotes. To say what compassion is or isn't is, as Scotty said, ridiculous. Definitions and descriptions arise from the experience not the other way around, and all these qualifications you are listing don't really help a practitioner at all. Rather, share methods of understanding the compassion you've experienced. Not, "if it's not a, b, c, then it's not compassion" type of language. Why? Then your mind begins an attempt to designate the experience, in which case it is no longer what it was, as unfiltered, immediate, and mysterious.

 

If you say, this experience is not enough, so I must change it to something more, or add another element to it, the mind will orient itself to attaining something else than what it already has at its finger tips. You're sabotaging a natural progression of direct experience with egoic tendencies.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Lucky7Strikes

[theurgy]

Maybe......on the other hand,...you're too confused to remain on this forum.

<snip>

 

 

Sheesh, why so passive-aggressive Vmarco? I have noticed this tendency in your posts--you tend to react with hostility at the slightest hint of someone disagreeing with your views. The effect is often humorously ironic given the thread topics as is most certainly the case here. To this casual poster (mostly lurker), it gives the impression that you are perpetually reliving an argument you've had with a parent and your overly harsh responses come across as that of a petulant child trying to uphold a threatened sense of supposed identity. As if no one is quite grokking just how serious you are about Buddhism. "Actually Dad, it's called BUDDHISM AND YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT IT!!!!!!" It's ok, not everyone is a Buddhist. I'm sure you're really quite brilliant. Just providing feedback. Your presentation ruins the transmission of your message for me and most likely for 90% of the other readers who don't care to comment, as well.

 

[Marblehead]

Let's try to be compassionate while arguing about the concept of compassion.

 

Hehehe.

 

I just recently had a discussion of this concept. It didn't go well.

[Jetsun]

There are two different levels of compassion, the limited or relative and unlimited. You can overcomplicate these things though, unlimited compassion is just having a completely open heart which radiates compassion like a lamp over all those who come under it's influence, and every human has this heart already within them right now but its radiance is filtered through conditioning and ignorance which tells you that some things deserve compassion more than others and creates fear which contracts it's radiance. Emptiness or absolute Bodhicitta equalises all things which cuts through ignorance and fear so there are no barriers to your heart, yet this state is certainly not limited to Buddhists, many other paths lead to this point.

[Aaron]

Thanks for the information VMarco... I had actually asked Marco if he could point me in the direction of some good sources regarding compassion and he was kind enough to post them on the forum so that they would be available to anyone who might be interested.

 

In response to some of the comments made so far regarding compassion... In Taoism there are two different types of virtues, John C. H. Wu translates them as high virtue and low virtue. It's referred to in chapter 38 of the Tao Teh Ching. The difference between the two is that high virtue is without virtue, i.e. it is practiced without moral dogma or religious ideology. In Chapter 38 it goes a bit further and states that low virtue, what we would consider virtue in the Western sense, is without virtue, because it is steeped in virtue. In this sense one could say that the highest form of compassion stems, not from right or wrong, or moral dogma, but from the instinctual response one has towards another.

 

I was having problems with one particular chapter in regards to Taoism and compassion, in particular Chapter 5 where it says, the Sage and Tao are not sentimental, they treat all things as straw dogs. My initial translation of that chapter was that the Sage (and Tao) really didn't care about all things, but I realized later on, that's not what it means at all, rather it means that he doesn't play favorites. The pile of dung has just as much value as the pile of diamonds. So the Sage practices compassion by putting others before himself. He treats all things equally.

 

Also I think a lot of people think of "love" when they think of compassion and the two are separate things.

 

Anyways, I think it was a good original post and I also believe you have the right to post it wherever you want.

 

Aaron

Edited April 10, 2012 by Twinner

[Vmarco]

[Lucky7Strikes]

Then your quarrel is with, 1. HH Dalai Lama, 2. Shantideva, 3. Lojong, 4. Robert Thurman, 5. Chögyam Trungpa, 6. Sakyamuni, 7. Sogyal Rinpoche, 8. Sharon Salzberg, 9. Kenchen Thrangu Rinpoche. I was simply the messemger.

 

Of course, in today's ignorant World, people choose to beat-up messengers, rather than confront the message.

 

And who from that list asked you to deliver a message here? Don't be so dramatic.

 

There's nothing wrong with sharing what you think are good expositions on compassion, but it is another thing to share it and claim everyone who doesn't agree with your weaving of hand picked parts ignorant, then paint yourself as some holy messenger delivering goods here. You can go buy a dalai lama book from amazon with a click of a finger.

 

I just don't like your attitude: "the whole ignorant masses vs. oh so holy me" type of shit.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Lucky7Strikes

[Vmarco]

There are two different levels of compassion, the limited or relative and unlimited.

 

Yes,...this is exactly so. As the teacher of HH Dalai Lama, from whom HH Dalai Lama acquired all his understanding of compassion from (as per the top post):

 

"Relative and absolute,

These the two truths are declared to be.

The absolute is not within the reach of intellect,

For the intellect is grounded in the relative."

Shantideva 9.2

[ralis]

[Vmarco]

 

And who from that list asked you to deliver a message here? Don't be so dramatic.

 

The requestor of that information has acknowledged so in this thread,...you are obviously attempting to pick a useless argument, and that shows both your inconsiderateness and fear of the subject of the thread.

[Aetherous]

Then your quarrel is with, 1. HH Dalai Lama, 2. Shantideva, 3. Lojong, 4. Robert Thurman, 5. Chögyam Trungpa, 6. Sakyamuni, 7. Sogyal Rinpoche, 8. Sharon Salzberg, 9. Kenchen Thrangu Rinpoche. I was simply the messemger.

 

Of course, in today's ignorant World, people choose to beat-up messengers, rather than confront the message.

 

I don't think anyone cares if you want to talk about a stipulative definition of the word compassion. That's all good. In the right context, it might even be interesting.

 

But you encounter problems when you say that the actual (lexical definition) is wrong, and the one you're using is absolutely right...not just in Buddhism but in all cases.

 

I find great value in the actual definition of compassion, as I'm sure others do. And little value in your stipulative definition.

 

Since you're quoting Buddhists and bringing a primarily Buddhist message (even though I don't think all Buddhist traditions would agree with it), it's not a bad thing to point out that this belongs in the Buddhist forum. That is not attacking you or the message. That is where it belongs.

 

Anyway...peace out.

[Lucky7Strikes]

The requestor of that information has acknowledged so in this thread,...you are obviously attempting to pick a useless argument, and that shows both your inconsiderateness and fear of the subject of the thread.

Good, then the context of this whole thread is different now.

 

I'm not picking a useless argument. This is a very constructive argument on your behavior. When someone posts bunch of quotes on compassion and in the next sentence tells a fellow practitioner how he doesn't belong here it sends off my bullshit alarm like crazy.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Lucky7Strikes

[Vmarco]

Yes. In general, critical thinking is lacking on this forum!

 

It is somewhat like your Joker icon,...what is a Joker? What is the joke? True teachers are assassins of the joke of ego.

[Vmarco]

IBut you encounter problems when you say that the actual (lexical definition) is wrong, and the one you're using is absolutely right...not just in Buddhism but in all cases.

 

That is where it belongs.

 

Anyway...peace out.

 

Please share,...where in the top post is VMarco's definition of compassion?

 

right where it belongs

 

See the animal in his cage that you built

Are you sure what side you're on?

Better not look him too closely in the eye

Are you sure what side of the glass you are on?

 

See the safety of the life you have built

Everything where it belongs

Feel the hollowness inside of your heart

And it's all right where it belongs

 

What if everything around you

Isn't quite as it seems

What if all the world you think know

Is an elaborate dream?

 

And if you look at your reflection

Is that all you want it to be?

What if you could look right through the cracks

would you find yourself - find yourself afraid to see?

 

What if all the world's inside of your head

Just creations of your own?

Your devils and your gods all the living and the dead

And you're really all alone?

 

You can live in this illusion

You can choose to believe

You keep looking but you can't find the woods

While you're hiding in the trees

 

What if everything around you

Isn't quite as it seems

What if all the world you used to know

Is an elaborate dream?

 

And if you look at your reflection

Is that all you want to be?

What if you could look right through the cracks

Would you find yourself - find yourself afraid to see?

 

[Aetherous]

Please don't misquote me.

[Lucky7Strikes]

Please share,...where in the top post is VMarco's definition of compassion?

You are filtering a group of messages together to weave together what you see as an outlined definition of "compassion." Ugh, whatever, I have other things to do.

Edited April 10, 2012 by Lucky7Strikes

[Vmarco]

When someone posts bunch of quotes on compassion and in the next sentence tells a fellow practitioner how he doesn't belong here it sends off my bullshit alarm like crazy.

 

In the same sentence?

 

Perhaps you should review the sequence of the thread before continuing.

 

Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Recognize that everything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth."

[Aetherous]

[dwai]

[Lucky7Strikes]

In the same sentence?

 

Perhaps you should review the sequence of the thread before continuing.

 

Lao Tzu purportedly said, "Recognize that everything you see and think is a falsehood, an illusion, a veil over the truth."

I wrote, "next sentence." And it was literally the next sentence. You wrote:

 

"Maybe......on the other hand,...you're too confused to remain on this forum."

 

So compassionate mr. sassy pants!

[ralis]

 

So compassionate mr. sassy pants!

 

I am always impressed as to how adults regress to childish responses.