"Compassion means skillful action" - huh?

[Vmarco]

Who walks the walk of compassion better than the Dalai Lama?

 

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

 

"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

[Vmarco]

I'm currently watching the TV show "House MD", and there's a lot of food for thought about this issue. I think it would be delusional to call Dr. House a practitioner of "true compassion" that masks his seeming lack for common empathy. The character is very rich and good for raising awareness of many facets of the human psyche, about belief systems, perpetuation of emotional pain and their effects.

 

"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people" House

[Vanir Thunder Dojo Tan]

k im just gonna SAY it then.


Whensoever there is a request for your assistance/help with which you are able to assist; do not offer your help unrequested but every bit of effort you are able to afford when asked...

But first and foremost, just breathe.

Then, be harmless.





This is compassionate by autonomous relativity to the universe around us.

[Vmarco]

For the xxxx, I'll revise that so it is irrefutable:

 

According to the Bodhisattva of Compassion, real compassion arises from seeing the world as it really is. Without seeing the world as it really is, real compassion is impossible.

I have been instructed to apologize for using the term anal, in the context of a group of personality traits including meticulousness, compulsiveness, and rigidity believed to be associated with excessive preoccupation that lingers into adulthood. Although this common Americanism was not addressed to anyone in particular, I have been informed, that since this is a psychological disorder, and that since it is presummed that I am not a medical professional, that the term shall be removed.

 

In order to not lose the meaning, I will ponder on an more appropriate word to replace it with at post #15.

[Owledge]

The issue with Shugden is that he found in his research that it is a harmful deity, so out of compassion of trying to protect his people he suggests people don't worship it. As you say it is not easy to live up to the principles you teach.

If it were just that, it would be fine. But he decreed social discriminatory means against Shugden worshippers, and that's such a basic folly. It's the behavior of a high-ranking Western politician. It's Dr. House behavior. Putting one's own agenda of supposedly 'protecting people' above respect for their free will.

 

Sure,...express mundane compassion wherever applicable,...yet keep in mind, that 6 billion Mother Teresa's will not lift our spiritual predictament up one iota.

You say "keep in mind" as if it is a common truth while it is just a thesis. Not a good sign to confuse a thesis with truth.

It's a bold thesis, too. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Just look at the degree of Teresa-like behavior in a social subgroup and look at how much suffering there is, how emotionally healthy they are, how close to what Lao Tzu regards as life in harmony with the Tao.

For me the 'spiritual predicament' is that fear generates more fear and love generates love, and there's still a widespread habit of trying to fight fear, while fighting is a function of fear. Fear and love both perpetuate themselves, and only the courage to not nourish fear can reduce fear in the world.

It is difficult to imagine a world with 6 billion Teresa-minded people, but such a world would surely be almost beyond our current comprehension. I think it would quickly lead to a massive ascension (frequency jump if you will) for humankind, making that ascended state the new average.

 

All one needs to do is to find a small scale example of something in the real world and then extrapolate. Real world examples are very empirical, grounded.

It's still highly philosophical though, since suffering can be a useful part of spiritual growth. It is debatable whether the average degree of suffering in the universe (very theoretical of course) did ever change. It might be part of the game of life that while there's motion everywhere all the time, basically nothing changes, since that would ruin the whole game.

No point actually trying to explore this, since it goes way beyond what the mind can handle.

Edited January 21, 2013 by Owledge

[Vmarco]

You say "keep in mind" as if it is a common truth while it is just a thesis. Not a good sign to confuse a thesis with truth.

It's a bold thesis, too. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Just look at the degree of Teresa-like behavior in a social subgroup and look at how much suffering there is, how emotionally healthy they are, how close to what Lao Tzu regards as life in harmony with the Tao.

 

Regardless of my post,...please define the difference between a thesis and a truth. Can you give an example? For instance,...."there is no singularity because there is no time" is a thesis; whereas "there is no present in time" is an absolute truth.

Edited January 21, 2013 by Vmarco

[JustARandomPanda]

Prove that wrong,...can you see, hear, smell, touch, taste, or think in the present? No you cannot! It is impossible.

 

You got a problem with this statement VM. Most people are like me in that they already feel their "experience" as they're experiencing it to be "the Present". Hence the popularity of books like The Power of Now. (which imo is not a bad book if it gets people to actually start questioning and examining daily. That is the point after all and if it accomplishes that aim then it's a helpful book imo. ).

 

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt that what I experience as "Now" aka the Present is in fact not so at all. But that's just because I also give benefit of the doubt that the Buddha's teachings are true (actually Hinduism teaches a ton of the same things...)... that is...that until one proves to one's self that the senses are not 'you' and that the 'experience of (people's typical) now' doesn't happen in the absence of those senses - curiosity or willingness to see if there's more to explore to go beyond - (gate gate paragate parasangate bodhi svaha) won't arise.

 

That's why people here are disagreeing with you and deci belle.

 

Then again...I do remember when you first got here you said you weren't looking to converse with people like me but rather people whom already had a high level of realization - ie you're looking for someone like deci belle.

[Owledge]

Regardless of my post,...please define the difference between a thesis and a truth. Can you give an example? For instance,...."there is no singularity because there is no time" is a thesis; whereas "there is no present in time" is an absolute truth.

Wow, you actually don't know the difference. Your lack of confusion is real.

 

 

 

By the way, here's an anecdote from my shaman:

A while ago an Indian yogi (a REAL indian yogi, haha) came to him for an ayahuasca ceremony. He was very sure of himself, he was a highly advanced guru, knowing far-out stuff, having seen things and all.

He took the brew and nothing happened. Nothing.

Next day he participated in the second ceremony. Nothing happened there either. He couldn't believe it so he upped the dosage ... twice. He had a shitload of entheogens in his body, but nothing happened.

A while later he reported to the shaman his realization that he had been massively fooling himself, that his whole spiritual path and 'yogi-career' was an escapism from ordinary life.

What a huge spiritual growth!

Edited January 21, 2013 by Owledge

[sati]

[Birch]

Neat story Owledge. And for how many is the 'spiritual journey' a way of attempting to get or achieve things for oneself that one hasn't been able to get or achieve any other way? And for how many is it a source of companionship when one has been singled out for one's different and difficult ideas? For how many is it a search for love not received when it was 'supposed' be there? For how many a way to create understanding in a world that just doesn't add up? For how many is it a way to become powerful when one is powerless?

 

----and that would just be me speaking for myself---

[Owledge]

The story is more about mixing up means and ends than where motivation comes from. About self-corruption and weakness. About losing sight.

One can become 'successful' in modern society by writing books about how to be successful.

[C T]

Wow, you actually don't know the difference. Your lack of confusion is real.

 

 

 

By the way, here's an anecdote from my shaman:

A while ago an Indian yogi (a REAL indian yogi, haha) came to him for an ayahuasca ceremony. He was very sure of himself, he was a highly advanced guru, knowing far-out stuff, having seen things and all.

He took the brew and nothing happened. Nothing.

Next day he participated in the second ceremony. Nothing happened there either. He couldn't believe it so he upped the dosage ... twice. He had a shitload of entheogens in his body, but nothing happened.

A while later he reported to the shaman his realization that he had been massively fooling himself, that his whole spiritual path and 'yogi-career' was an escapism from ordinary life.

What a huge spiritual growth!

Why did you put emphasis on 'REAL'? Is it real because you personally know this yogi, or that you have absolute faith in your shaman that he is incapable of spoofin a scoop?

 

Interesting story, nonetheless.

 

Btw, i think your interpretation of the Dalai Lama's position wrt the shugden fiasco is rather shallow and indicates your refusal to see the bigger pic. I can't tell you what this pic is simply because you wont believe my version anyway, but i am quite certain there is a lot more to it than what the public thinks they know. If you were really interested to dig further and deeper, you may uncover the almost unsavory behavior of one head honcho of a dissident group who have made it his life purpose to destroy the DL's credibility, and this is woven deeply into the fabric which underlies all the half-truths, semi-lies and ignorance which abound in this current upheaval.

 

(scoop as in 'an exclusive piece of news' story. Spoofing as in deceiving).

[Aaron]

I have been instructed to apologize for using the term anal, in the context of a group of personality traits including meticulousness, compulsiveness, and rigidity believed to be associated with excessive preoccupation that lingers into adulthood. Although this common Americanism was not addressed to anyone in particular, I have been informed, that since this is a psychological disorder, and that since it is presummed that I am not a medical professional, that the term shall be removed.

 

In order to not lose the meaning, I will ponder on an more appropriate word to replace it with at post #15.

 

 

Well the only mention of anal that I can think of is the anal stage in cognitive psychology. Anal retentive is a Freudian term, but not widely recognized as an actual psychological condition. Now if you were actually contacted by the moderation staff regarding using that term, I wonder why I never was? I've actually questioned whether someone was being anal and although I do have a degree in psychology and worked as a case manager and counselor for a brief period, I am by no means a psychological professional. Perhaps there's something more to this than meets the eye?

 

Anyways, my new policy is just not to respond to people that whine and threaten other people. They are better served by being ignored, because more often than not you will simply offend them without knowing regardless of what you say.

 

Aaron

[Aaron]

Compassion is seeing someone is sick and asking if there is anything you can do for them.

Compassion is getting some food for a homeless person.

Compassion is shutting up when you could say something nasty.

Compassion is being nice to someone, even though they might not deserve it.

Compassion is changing yourself, rather than worrying about changing others.

Compassion is blind.

Compassion is all-seeing.

Compassion is not easily defined.

 

 

Aaron

Edited January 21, 2013 by Aaron

[Owledge]

Why did you put emphasis on 'REAL'? Is it real because you personally know this yogi, or that you have absolute faith in your shaman that he is incapable of spoofin a scoop?

To emphazise the guy's conviction about himself that he's the real deal. Of course "real" is a shallow label, as I hinted at before in a different context

 

I can't tell you what this pic is simply because you wont believe my version anyway...

Drama queen.

 

Btw, i think your interpretation of the Dalai Lama's position wrt the shugden fiasco is rather shallow and indicates your refusal to see the bigger pic.

Too bad I'm refusing to see the bigger picture, otherwise I could check out info links about your claims. ... Especially evidence that the DL is taking that supposed intrigue into consideration in a way that won't do more damage than good and giving his opponent exactly what he wants.

[Birch]

"One can become 'successful' in modern society by writing books about how to be successful."

 

Weird, huh? One can also become powerful by telling other people how and why to live.

[Owledge]

"One can become 'successful' in modern society by writing books about how to be successful."

 

Weird, huh? One can also become powerful by telling other people how and why to live.

What I was trying to point out is that someone writing guides on how to be successful should be able to present credentials, and if the only credentials are the writing of those guides, then it's a pyramid scheme. Just like getting rich through investment funds. That wealth is empty. It's not an accomplishment.

[Birch]

I would tend to agree Owledge. However, I've been thinking ths one over some more and many of these people (the pyramid schemers) still employ sales and communication techniques that other people could learn from. I'd love to find out how many of the 'get rich' clients actually do.

[Owledge]

Yeah, every case has its details and uniqueness.

 

It's just that recently I became aware of something:

A good help for the general public has to be one that would work if followed by everybody. Relatively easy to make that test and a good indicator of whether advice is socially nourishing - good for humankind, or rooted in the 'old fear-based survival of the fittest crap'.

[Birch]

Yeah, every case has its details and uniqueness.

 

It's just that recently I became aware of something:

A good help for the general public has to be one that would work if followed by everybody. Relatively easy to make that test and a good indicator of whether advice is socially nourishing - good for humankind, or rooted in the 'old fear-based survival of the fittest crap'.

What's the 'fear-based survival of the fittest crap' based on? If anything? I'm not referring to social-darwinist BS (which would also be a misnomer since AFAIK Darwin did not speak to socially constructed ecologies, did he?)

[Owledge]

Social darwinism is a constructed inaccurate term, yes.

And it won't get more profound than fear-based. ... Well, you could get more specific: fear of death. The root of all fears.

Pursuing ideas that don't benefit society as a whole can be seen as rooted in the belief that there's so much competition out there that not standing out will not ensure a satisfying existence. It's an inadequacy issue, which most likely is a combination of rational and irrational fears so to speak. Rational fears meaning those threatening conditions in society that are created by everybody's fear-based behavior.

This points to the saying: There's nothing to fear but fear itself.

Fear is not easy to deal with, but if noone does, it only gets worse. What society needs is motivation to have courage, not guides on how to live comfortably with our fears - because they significantly shape our behavior, our perception of reality and thus our society. It is OK if we can't overcome all our fears. I'm just saying that the easy path should not be glorified. Following a guide on how to be rich is an admission of weakness, of failure, and thus not related to "being successful" in terms of being productive to society.

People give clear feedback about socially inacceptable behavior. Things like the term "banksters" and common opinion about criminal politicians and all. It's just that the power that fear awards to people nourishing it makes them not having to care for those opinions, so that (social) standpoint won't represent an incentive to change. Those who make themselves agents of fear are running a pain-avoidance scheme, and thus only pain can give them an incentive to change. I don't mean by creating empathy. Those people are usually way beyond help like that. But the initial means for turning things around for an agent of fear is the removal of the comfort zone.

I've seen some examples of that. I tried to encourage someone with great compassion and positivity to free himself of his obsession, but it was housed in a castle he erected for it, and I didn't have the means (or intention) to tear it down. If you try to help those people, you might believe you've gotten through to them, but then they come back and haven't changed one bit.

[JustARandomPanda]

Talking about what is compassion doesn't help one to see if there is such a thing as Absolute vs Relative compassion or whether they're related or not.

 

To that end I'm making an offer:

 

 

1. To the first 2 TTBs to PM me I'll mail them a mala free of charge. This offer is open to regular posters as well as lurkers. The mala is the same kind I use myself - 108 sandelwood beads.

 

2. In return I ask we begin the cundi dharani (pronounced 'chundi') and continue non-stop for the next 40 days. Do 3 reps of 1 set (to use a weightlifting term). That is - one rep is chanting the dharani 108 times (one for each bead) either silently or out loud while focusing one's attention on the sound of the dharani. 3 reps = 1 set is a traditional number used in dharani/mantra meditation across many spiritual traditions.

 

3. Here are two cundi dharani's on Youtube. The first is really good for getting the pronunciation right. The second shows one way to set the dharani to music (which may make doing the dharani practice more enjoyable for some).

 

 

 

 

 

The one thing all people who've seen their 'original nature' unanimously agree upon is that threads like this will never actually let one experience it. As Chan Master Hsuan Hua said - "talking about it is like cooking sand expecting it to turn into rice. You could cook sand for eternity but it will never turn into rice."

[Aetherous]

There isn't absolute or relative compassion. Relative bodhicitta (awakened mind) is compassion.

[JustARandomPanda]

There isn't absolute or relative compassion. Relative bodhicitta (awakened mind) is compassion.

 

I'm not here to dispute or not dispute the above statement. I'm saying posts like yours don't do anything to convince a worldling like me that it is truth.

 

Hence my offer to anyone who's interested.

[Aetherous]

Just clearing up the terminology...if you doubt what I just said is true, google fu it.