Love and attachment
-
Hi all -
How do we love (our spouse/family/bf/gf/children/etc) without attachment? Is it even humanly possible?
Thank you in advance for your answers.
-
the motherly kind of unconditional love/compassion between a mother and her child is that of Buddhas/bodhisattvas toward sentient beings. what ever it is, Either it's for the Self or it's not for the self, but for the benefit of others. clean as that. fyi The Four Great Vows 四弘誓願 I vow to save innumerable sentient beings. I vow to eliminate endless afflictions/delusions. I vow to learn innumerable doctrines. I vow to accomplish the unsurpassed Buddha Way. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- With a wish to free all beings I shall always go for refuge To the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, Until I reach full enlightenment. Enthused by wisdom and compassion, today in the Buddhas' presence I generate the Mind for Full Awakening For the benefit of all sentient beings. As long as space remains, As long as sentient beings remain, Until then, may I too remain And dispel the miseries of the world. ----------------------- May I attain Buddhahood for the benefit of all sentient beings. /\
-
U can love another without attachment as long as u are attached ur ideas, concepts of what is love, what it is not, or what it is suppose to be. When u are present to your being,u are absent to your fictional self. WHen that does not transpire, attachment will stay One cannot give of what one lacks! Reconcile to that which is ''missing'' in u, and when u are self-fulfilled - ur love for another is simply sharing ur being. Just be porous to your ego
-
Originally posted by allkosong:
Hi all -
How do we love (our spouse/family/bf/gf/children/etc) without attachment? Is it even humanly possible?
Thank you in advance for your answers.
If you understand the sufferings of rebirth, you will not love your loved ones with attachment but rather help them to relieve from the sufferings of countless of future rebirths. Sinwei had mentioned, to free all beings but I think it will be good to start to free your loved ones first which I think it is easier.
-
TS, Muse over this: Two wolves (being, INNER) reside in each of us, the first is needs, fears, beliefs (eg, customs, traditons, religion), jealousy,comparing sympathy,possesivness, insecurity, fear of loss , anger, prejudice, always reacts ... the second is love, kindness, emphaty , gratitude, unlimiting beliefs always responds. The one that is fed daily evolves - whom are u feeding, even as u are reading it now? Both is love - but with a BIG difference - the first is a relationship, the second relates to what IS. the first is ego- based personality! - it eventually suffocates and kills the... (one remains accidental/stuck on the periphery) - the bird is always trying to take off but wings are always clipped - cos love has become bondage here - the giving here is to take back (lots of expectations) - though one assumes that one is sharing in reality one is a burden on another. One is being selfiish here.Why? cos one is being a burden when one expects the other to change, conform, fulfil ... Here it is fear-based needs (not love) and the anxiety is there to quickly make it a relationship. One is insecure. One is or remains shallow. One is mired in a pond! One remains a seed, a mere potential.Relationship is or used as a mechanism: using ... putting aside, using again and so on so forth. The other or another is a means to an end to one's needs, expectations and ... the second is soul-infused individuality! - it is everflowing abundant phenomena (essential/centre), it is a bird on a wing - one wing is love, and the other is freedom - love is freeing - the giving here is simply sharing what one IS, appreciating what IS. Here it is love unto itself and one simply relates - one is self-FULL here. One flows with existence like a river and partakes of what the other 'is'.One is abundantly rich within - hence one relates without fear(s) and one has no reason(s) to love. One has plunged to the very depths of one's being and the seed within has blossomed. Here the love is in motion, hence the word 'relating'. The means and the end(s) are unto themselves. Relationship is tenuous, relating is beautiful. Relationship is one thing, interdependence totally another. Relationship means one is separate; one independent and so is the other, and one decides to relate. Relationship is not interdependence, it is a contract bet two independent persons. Hence most relationships are 'shallow', because basically independence is false or misintepreted. Nobody is independent -- and if one is not independent how can one relate? With whom can one relate? The predicament of many is that they search and desire 'answers' on all four quarters outside of themselves and prop themselves up with whatever that resonates/validates them. However, they overlook this: it is a prop, when it is removed or gone ... one is bound to collapse. The 'answers' are and have been all along within; what is missing is the essential, the accidental - aplenty! The above is metaphysical n expansive - not confined to relationships or marriage but other areas of one's daily ... and what- have -you. PS - two personalities can only relate when they are conscious of their personas and know that behind the curtain of roles and .... are two throbbing ''individuals''. Otherwise, it is at most superficial n shallow - one never penetrates to the core of the other's being. Superimposed on a circle - one can only understand, accept n transcend, one cannot improve on a circle! The centre is being essential; the circumference(periphery) is being accidental Centre means - having a porous ego. self-'full' - one simply flows n responds Accidental means - one is egoistic, one lives with 'what was' or 'what it should be' and one reacts
-
the education of this chanting beads also displaying the education of having a centrally loving-nature or heart. It represented by the string that links all beads of phenomenons together harmoniously and peacefully. the beads representing your (our spouse/family/bf/gf/children/etc) :D
-
Originally posted by Fugazzi:
U can love another without attachment as long as u are attached ur ideas, concepts of what is love, what it is not, or what it is suppose to be.
When u are present to your being,u are absent to your fictional self. WHen that does not transpire, attachment will stay
One cannot give of what one lacks! Reconcile to that which is ’’missing’’ in u, and when u are self-fulfilled – ur love for another is simply sharing ur being.
Just be porous to your ego
How does one be present to one's being?How does one reconcile with that which is missing in him/her?
What do you mean by being porous to one's ego?
Kindly elaborate. Thank you.
-
when i say be present to ur being - by that i mean what are u being now , eg, are u being kind now, are u being angry now, am I being rude now, am i being ...? it is a flowing. When that is transpiring eg , if someone is talking to u now, and u are being compassionate, that is compassion - u are in your being and yet being ..... it is a paradoxical phenomenon. To simplify further another eg - My holding a book can be said that i m reading it, only when i m reading it is then an expereince, a reality. By self I mean one's idea of onself, what one thinks of oneself - eg i m chinese, i m a buddhist, I am a teacher.... this are mental constructs, there is no flow, it is a noun. However, if u are being for eg - Buddha or for eg being a teacher the noun n the verb is a synthesis of both, there is the outflow of one's role and yet that role is being fulfilled from one's being ....? One cannot reconcile to that which one does not acknoweldge, recognise or understand Eg, I am always looking for love outside of me, the fulfil me , to make me happy or ... I am lacking in self- love. I cannot give what I lack. Hence, I say, reconciling to that aspect within oneself and knowing that one is lacking in, for eg, in this instance love, it could many other .... respect, responsilibity or .... Porous ego means when we go out to work or attend a party, or be a teacher or do anything outside of ourselves, the ego will inevitably come to play. That cannot be done away with, However, when one's ego is being porous - there is no identifications, attachments to what one does - one's fulfils the role eg of teacher, of a host , of a father but after that one becomes a nobody, one resides in one's being As long as one has a human body (alive) (mind included) one cannot escape this ego- traps, however, the understanding n knowing that one is egoistic is a possibility for inner transformation. Knowing transforms, knowledge never does. When the self (aka truth, god, existence or no-self, heart) is realised (actually all are realised, nothing new has top happen, it is recognising that which has been forgotten) the world does not vanish, things do not vanish - only the psycholigical interpretation of what is seen (perceived) is not there. No colour is imposed on transparency. Whereas with the ego ( ak thoughts, mind, conditioning, traditions, ... add on what comes to mind) the psychological interpretation, labelling, judging, is there) All expereinces that pass is of the mind, the ego, that which always abides is the now (aka existence, god, truth or even Being Buddha or Being Christ). When one identifies with what is only eternal one will see that whatever one does, has is all temporal and ephemeral. One cannot do away with self and try to be non-self as long as one is living ''bodily'' - the wise would synthesise and balance both . there is no centre (being without a circumference (Mind.body,ego), one who understands and is willing to ... there is a possibility of being free. The longing for each one of us is to be free but sadly too many are mired in rituals, concepts and think that one has to go out somewhere to find or be free. Rituals, concepts, scriptural texst, sutras are mere vehicles - the attachement to these are traps and it is wise to use b ut it has to drop along the way.