M.R. says "our attachment to the ego is fundamentally linked to the suffering we feel and the suffering we inflict on others....(after letting go of the ego) we no longer have the need to think, speak, or act in an affected and selfish way." this sounds great, but its being suggested by a long time Buddhist....do you think that absolutely ANYONE do this? Could "you" commit to this kind of change with all "your" responsibilities and obligations?
Sorry group three for the last minute post. had a break in yesterday while i was in class, so i have had a lot to do in the past 24hrs. this is a quik one so hope to get some quik responses.
I found Ch. 10-15 interesting in that it dealt with emotions that we would all like to either over come or deal with in a more positive manner. I liked how he drew connections between the emotions we feel and how they can almost be compared to diseases that can be contracted from over exposure. However, i don't agree with his analysis of not being able to have two contradicting emotions at once. The chapter on hate gave me a question to ask. He draws the conclusion that we consider people full of hate as those with a disease that should be cured. If this is true, then what are we to do with the people that enjoy their hate affecting those around them? Surely this is an extreme position, but there are people who like to be down on themselves and bring others with them? If they don't want to be helped should we still try to relieve their anger or just ignore it and continue to let them keep bringing others moral down?
ReplyDeleteYou bring up a good point,and personally I have no interest in doing so. I suppose anyone can let go of the “self” (what ever the self is) and ultimately stop being selfish, but not everyone has an interest in doing so; nor do they have the time or money for the guidance and training. What would be to gain from doing so? What would the cost be? Is it necessary? Or is suffering as bad as people play it out to be? I wouldn't know and I'm not all that interested in the muddy politics of happiness.
ReplyDeleteThe human mind holds infinite potential. :) So sure I think anyone can.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletemaybe that's a cop out answer...
ReplyDeleteThe state of ego loss is reminiscient of the mindset of a child, [that is] unaware of society's perceptions or the mind's own constantly altering of perception. For me, finding this detachment from the ego means finding that simplified state where we are less affected by our environment and are more in tune with our own deep-seated consciousness. Less concerned with how we are interpreting life and more aware of a present reality. To appreciate life with a reverence for all of the Earth, as opposed to limiting your consciousness to one's own unique cloud.
This seemed like a relevant definition to include:
deep-seated: Being so far below the surface as to be unsusceptible to superficial examination, study, or treatment.