Dear Jana:

This quote from the Buddha speaks about maintaining compassion and loving-kindness, even in the face of extreme adversity and cruelty. The idea that we should not allow hatred to take root, even when faced with unimaginable suffering, highlights the depth of Buddhist teachings on non-violence and inner peace. The emphasis is on training our minds to remain unaffected and to cultivate compassion, even towards those who harm us. This teaching challenges us to rise above our instinctual reactions and aim for a higher state of consciousness where love and compassion prevail over hatred and harm.

I want to think about it further Wed morning and get back to you. What are your thoughts on this quote? How do you think we can apply these teachings in our everyday lives?

anita

Hi Jana

I haven’t seen that quote before.

The other day I was watching a old film about war where the soldiers behind enemy lines argued about taking some action that in some of their views would make then little different then the enemy. The danger is war is becoming what your fighting. You can see this in the conflicts today.

A story comes to mind that Campbell told “of a samurai warrior, a Japanese warrior, who had the duty to avenge the murder of his overlord. And he actually, after some time, found and cornered the man who had murdered his overlord. And he was about to deal with him with his samurai sword, when this man in the corner, in the passion of terror, spat in his face. And the samurai sheathed the sword and walked away”

Had the samurai killed the murder out of anger instead of his dharma, would the samurai still be a samurai?
I think there is truth in the saying that the end is in the beginning, the inner place from which we act matters.

Hello all:

Compassion (karuṇā) and loving-kindness (mettā) are central tenets of Buddhism. These virtues are meant to be extended to all beings, even those who cause harm. The teachings encourage practitioners to cultivate these qualities universally, without discrimination. The teachings aim at transforming the practitioner’s inner state, fostering a mindset where compassion becomes a natural response. This process takes time and practice.

The ideal of extending compassion to torturers is more about guiding one’s intentions and inner state than about expecting literal application in all situations (such as.. feeding/ helping a torturer to torture others out of compassion for the torturer).

Buddhism also recognizes the importance of boundaries and self-care. It’s essential to protect oneself from harm and not to enable abusive behavior. Tara Anand, a Buddhist and illustrator and visual artist from Bombay, India, currently based in New York City, in her article titled “Is an Aspiring Bodhisattva Allowed to Have Boundaries?” published in Tricycle, wrote: “Without healthy boundaries to enable self-preservation and allow self-care, it may be difficult to cultivate the steady stream of energy that is required to walk the path.”

Buddhability on Setting Boundaries: “Boundaries are limits and needs you express to yourself and others in order to feel safe, healthy, and comfortable.”, “Setting boundaries is how we share with others what behavior we find acceptable and what behavior we do not.”

Self-care is crucial for sustaining the energy and compassion needed to walk the Buddhist path. It’s about protecting oneself from harm and not enabling abusive behavior under the guise of compassion.

In real-life situations, the application of compassion can vary. While the ideal is to maintain an open heart, it’s also important to consider the context and one’s capacity at the moment. It’s crucial to have realistic expectations and understand that extreme compassion is a guiding star, helping practitioners cultivate a compassionate mindset, while also acknowledging the need for self-protection and contextual adaptation.
anita

HI Jana

Can we really be pure Buddhists to survive in real, practical life where you must socialize with all kinds of people including very bad ones?

I’m not sure how I feel about the notion of ‘Pure Buddhism’ and worry that it could be mistaking the boat for the destination.
Essentially your asking if it is reasonable to ask a person to be true to themselves, there belief, their values… when having to deal with Life? I feel that it is, but that that does not mean that when we fail, as we will, we do not hold the values we have.

It seems I’m hearing the question as permission to fail, which I don’t think is what your suggesting. I do know that if your resound to hate with hate, anger with anger, fear with fear… someone cutting you up in pieces with cutting someone up to pieces … your creating more of the same.

Its my feeling that the only tools we have to influence life direction is compassion and forgiveness.

Dear Jana:

You are welcome. As far as the quote about the impermanence of all things (“anicca” in Pali): this teaching asserts that everything in life— situations, experiences, emotions, people— constantly changes. Accepting this can lead to a more adaptable, less attached mindset, and to better coping with life’s unpredictability.

The principle of anicca is applicable in the context of fear and violence in the following ways: (1) recognizing that fear is a passing state can help mitigate its impact. By understanding that the intensity of fear will eventually subside, a person can manage their response to fear more effectively and avoid being paralyzed by it.

(2) understanding that a somewhat threatening/ scary situation will pass, can help a person respond to it mindfully in a way that de-escalates the situation, instead of responding to it impulsively, and escalating the situation.

(3) After experiencing fear or violence, the understanding of impermanence can help in healing. Knowing that the pain and trauma, while significant, are not eternal, can provide hope and facilitate the process of recovery and moving forward.

Anicca doesn’t mean accepting mistreatment but rather responding to it most effectively.

For example, in the Walpurgis Night situation you shared about, the leader’s behavior was authoritative and bossy, indicating a desire for control and dominance, common in group settings where one person tries to assert power. Out of fear, you chose to comply with the leader’s demands, which led to a decrease in his aggression, while your friend resisted, standing up for herself, which led to an increased aggression from the leader.

Your compliance gave the leader a sense of control, which appeased him. However, your friend’s resistance threatened his authority, leading to aggression. After such an encounter, it’s valuable to reflect on what worked and what could have been done differently. This reflection helps in building resilience and better strategies for future situations.

Finding a balance between standing up for yourself and avoiding unnecessary conflict is crucial. In any threatening situation, it’s important to assess the level of threat and potential for escalation. While complying to avoid immediate danger, subtly setting boundaries could have helped. For example, agreeing to gather wood but politely declining additional tasks, signaling a willingness to help without becoming overly submissive. Maybe saying, in a calm and respectful tone, something like: “Sure, I can help with that,” followed by “I need to head back soon,” could have balanced cooperation with gentle assertion..?

anita

Hi Jana

I am not sure if I understand this: “… using the adrenaline boost from fear, anger and hate, which I then take on as ‘being’ – I am angry, I am hate… and compassion nowhere to be found. When ‘I am anger and or hate’ getting even is the most likely driving force behind my actions.” Can you elaborate on it and maybe write some specific situations?

First I will say anger is a valid emotion often calling us to pay attention and take actions. The question is what energy feeds that anger? Compassion, Love, Fear, Hate…

Its difficult to explain personal observation…

Take Scenario A: where you noticed a injustice, to yourself or others, and you need to decide to act or not act.

Scenario A-1: your at a content place in your life and taking action is going to get messy. You see the injustice with compassion and it breaks your heart. You know that its a wrong that needs to be righted… do you act?

Scenario A-2: Your at a content place in your life and taking action is going to get messy. You see the injustice with compassion and it breaks your heart. You know that its a wrong that needs to be righted.. and you feel angry about it… do you act.

In which Scenario are you more likely to act A-1 or A-2 and why?

My observation is that for most people to act they need the energy from anger to act. This is not a statement of good or bad, right or wrong, it just is. And its my observation that the danger is that we begin to feed that anger with energy of ego righteousness and when it get really bad hate which history provides many examples.

There is another trap of most wisdom traditions and that is the practice as a escape from engagement with life messiness.

The Buddha suggestion is to avoid both those traps is to always act from a place of compassion. Its easy to sit by the side of a lake and be still. Much more difficult to take that stillness with you as you engage with Life, but that is what the wisdom traditions call on us to do.