jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Jul 10, 2013 15:56:44 GMT 1
It is said that emptiness is the key to compassion.
I wonder how everyone interprets this statement?
|
|
|
|
Post by bristollad on Jul 10, 2013 18:15:32 GMT 1
Because my enemy is totally lacking in inherent and permanent enemy-ness from their own side, there is space for me to appreciate them as another suffering sentient being and hence for compassion to arise. The same applies to my friends or those who are neither friends nor enemies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rudy on Jul 10, 2013 21:19:07 GMT 1
My immediate thougts are much the same as bristollads:
In essence, me and my friends or enemies are not different things that are entirely seperate from each other.
I do not like to suffer, so how can I want suffering for others? That would be the same as not wanting my arms to hurt, but wishing pain to my legs...
If only we could think and act out of the unifying thought of emptiness, violence, hatred, jealousy and all other negative emotions would simply not even exist. Only realistic emotions like love and compassion combine sensibly with emptiness.
|
|
graham
Senior Member
Posts: 96
|
Post by graham on Jul 11, 2013 4:18:37 GMT 1
It is said that emptiness is the key to compassion. I wonder how everyone interprets this statement? A lack of compassion is a misunderstanding of emptiness. |
|
matt
Senior Member
Posts: 425
|
Post by matt on Jul 11, 2013 18:05:04 GMT 1
I agree with the others and would add that through negative attitudes and emotions we reify the self. And this is a great deal of normal mental activity. So even just a good understanding of emptiness can work against that and create the conditions of compassion.
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Jul 12, 2013 14:08:03 GMT 1
Thanks very much guys.
This is very interesting to me. I have found there are always two ways to look at things in Buddhism.
One is from an intellectual or analytical perspective, which we frequently do when reading or listening to teachings. This is extremely important since it is really necessary to understand the principles upon which statements such as “emptiness is the key to compassion” are based.
From this perspective, the path from emptiness to compassion has always seemed a little dry or even obscure (indirect). While it’s nice to think that by breaking down the barriers of self that the result of emptiness meditation is compassion it doesn’t exactly “gel” for me, intellectually. What I mean is that it might just as easily result in a “familiarity breeds contempt” or “merging” or “loss of distinction”, which doesn’t indicate compassion. This is purely focusing on a “reasoning” approach.
However, the other way of looking at things is experiential, which is really where the change occurs. We can study forever but if we cannot personalize the teachings we will never become enlightened.
For me, when I meditate on emptiness, particularly the selflessness of self, and attempt to actually experience it, I find that the negation of the object opposes my reflexive way of viewing others through a perspective of “what they mean to me” or “what does their good fortune mean to me” or “what does their suffering mean to me”.
So this brings up an interesting understanding of how I ordinarily experience compassion, which is through the “I” filter. While I might experience sympathy, empathy, sadness for others there is still the element of what it means from the perspective of (or comparison to) my situation. This would also seem to mean that I feel more “compassion” for someone in less fortunate circumstances than myself rather than someone who I view as more fortunate., whereas both are as deserving of the same level of compassion when an experience of myself as inherently existent is removed.
Clearly I am still thinking this through but I thought to share some of this rather than just posing the topic and running away…
Jeff
|
|
graham
Senior Member
Posts: 96
|
Post by graham on Jul 15, 2013 0:02:58 GMT 1
Jeff,
Most of what you say is far beyond my own experience, but I agree. I think an analytical understanding only gets one about 10% of the way there, or maybe even less. The majority of one's understanding comes from experience/meditation, and few are fortunate enough to have the dedication or karma to obtain such realizations. One thing that I strongly believe, however, is that one's karma becomes much stronger with more practice and experience. I don't know if it actually says this anywhere in any of the teachings, but it's just something I strongly feel, or sense, in my own life. In fact, it's so obvious sometimes that it almost makes me chuckle. At the risk of sounding crazy, I feel like the world is constantly speaking to me and sending me messages, and only sometimes am I awake enough to listen. Sort of off track from the OP, but still applicable I think.
|
|
tamara
Senior Member
Posts: 178
|
Post by tamara on Jul 16, 2013 2:08:51 GMT 1
Jeff wrote;
``For me, when I meditate on emptiness, particularly the selflessness of self, and attempt to actually experience it, I find that the negation of the object opposes my reflexive way of viewing others``
Yes, this is what meditation on emptiness is for.
Jeff, I find your writing awesome.
Especially mentioning the shift from intellectual understanding to direct experience which is crucial.
I think in future more and more Western commentaries on Buddha`s teachings will emerge and we live in a fascinating time to see it happen.
Perhaps even Western `Songs of Realization` will emerge.
The book I am reading right now is Karl Brunnhoelzl`s `The Heart Attack Sutra`.
A fantastic experience to see emptiness presented by a scholar with European roots and background.
Tamara
|
|
jeff
Senior Member
Posts: 128
|
Post by jeff on Jul 16, 2013 14:00:43 GMT 1
At the risk of sounding crazy, I feel like the world is constantly speaking to me and sending me messages, and only sometimes am I awake enough to listen. Sort of off track from the OP, but still applicable I think. Me too, only I don't think it's crazy  |
|
