Originally posted by Storm
You can only control your reactions to your emotions. You cannot control your life so that you can prevent yourself from getting angry. You can only choose how to respond to that anger.
Not true. If you understand the Ten Worlds, you can realize when you are heading into Hell or Anger and stop yourself before you get there. It is not easy, not it is achievable.
Originally posted by Storm
You can only control your reactions to your emotions. You cannot control your life so that you can prevent yourself from getting angry. You can only choose how to respond to that anger.
I beleive you have the power to tame your own anger though. It's very hard, but possible.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Sometimes I can tell when I'm going to move into Hell or Anger. It is kind of like a flashing light in the back of my mind. I can then go somewhere else.
I would rather be in Anger than in Hell, because atleast in Anger you have some echo of power. When you are in hell, you simply desire for others to be there with you.
The scariest thing is to be in Hell by yourself.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
I beleive you have the power to tame your own anger though. It's very hard, but possible.
All of our emotions are a source of our passions, and those are what motivate us to act in the first place.
Originally posted by ShakyamunisonI agree. It's also a frame of mind reference. Though some people are great button pushers.
Yes, he has, but why do you care what he thinks? How you feel is your responsibility, and if someone says something, it is up to you to decide how you feel. No one can [B]make you mad. [/B]
This is how I do it. I see some of these people as mentally ill, then feel sorry for them. Damn, the worlds full of them. 🙁
LOL
Originally posted by Storm
Why would you? When handled in a positive way, anger can help people stand up for themselves and fight injustice.All of our emotions are a source of our passions, and those are what motivate us to act in the first place.
In each of the ten worlds are the other 9 worlds. If you are going to fight injustice, you are now in Bodhisattva/Anger and not in Anger.
http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/faqs/tenworlds.htm
http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/LectLS/Lectur28.htm
Originally posted by Storm
Why would you? When handled in a positive way, anger can help people stand up for themselves and fight injustice.
Anger, like violence, should always be a last resort. Anger is definately more useful than dispair or fear, but Anger is very dangerous. It can be poisonous to one's system.
Originally posted by Storm
All of our emotions are a source of our passions, and those are what motivate us to act in the first place.
True, and I am not saying that you shouldn't utilize Anger, or that you should always avoid it. Just reserve it for when you truly need it. When you have a tendency to become Angry for every little thing, you suffer, and that suffering is needless.
Emotions are just emotions. They do not have to run your life, nor do you need to submit to them. You have the right to decide which emotions you will enact on and which you will disregard.
even ultimate happiness has levels. believe me on that 😉. however, if you are to even have a shot at gaining that. you have to become completely selfless. practically stop existing while paradoxically still having the ability to see/feal/understand/accept, more than ever. and then you shall let it all flow through you. things that are, things that are not, and all things beyond. practically. relaxation without boredome is the best way to start for a normal man{get a comfortable white room with no sunlight and airconditioning, comfort of dry cool air can work wonders}. i suppose thats where the phrase "being STILL" comes from, not existing on a selfish level. dunno how much of that actually agrees with buddhism but what the heck.
Originally posted by leonheartmm
even ultimate happiness has levels. believe me on that 😉. however, if you are to even have a shot at gaining that. you have to become completely selfless. practically stop existing while paradoxically still having the ability to see/feal/understand/accept, more than ever. and then you shall let it all flow through you. things that are, things that are not, and all things beyond. practically. relaxation without boredome is the best way to start for a normal man{get a comfortable white room with no sunlight and airconditioning, comfort of dry cool air can work wonders}. i suppose thats where the phrase "being STILL" comes from, not existing on a selfish level. dunno how much of that actually agrees with buddhism but what the heck.
Much of what you say agrees with Buddhism. The Ego, and selfish desire, is the cause of all suffering and disunity.
Originally posted by Storm
Why would you? When handled in a positive way, anger can help people stand up for themselves and fight injustice.All of our emotions are a source of our passions, and those are what motivate us to act in the first place.
I'll agree with this. Complete detachment from so-called 'negative' emotions doesn't ensure peace. And just like anything...a weapon, perhaps...it can be used for various purposes. The weapon itself doesn't have intrinsic moral value, so it's not harmful unless we make it so. We can hold a gun without doing harm. Maybe use it to shoot open a lock of a caged animal. Similarly, we can harbor anger without doing harm.
My only problem with this whole way of thinking (I agree with a decent amount of it however) is that there are sufferings in the world of all kinds, and while acheiving inner peace accomplishes something good within yourself, there are many who can't or won't acheive this....and it is only through becoming more entwined in the emotions of the world that we can hope to affect it...only in embracing everything (anger, love, hate, compassion, all of it, etc.) are we truly whole.
The point is to promote peace and unity. But how is a person unified with the universe who denies within themselves the opportunity to embrace and use very real aspects of existence like anger? It's only corrupting to those who allow themselves to be corrupted by it. Without it, the person is incomplete. But any of those negative emotions only become so with our application of them in ways that are destructive to the concept of "at one" and/or "unity".
Even concepts like "good" and "evil" are, to me, largely arbitrary and highly subjective so I have to use concepts like "unity" to accurately describe what I mean by "good". And in doing so, it abolishes a large part of what mainstream morality would consider part of the good/evil dichotomy. Neither exists in my mind, or both do simultaneously...and it calls into question the whole idea of "negative" anything.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
I'll agree with this. Complete detachment from so-called 'negative' emotions doesn't ensure peace. And just like anything...a weapon, perhaps...it can be used for various purposes. The weapon itself doesn't have intrinsic moral value, so it's not harmful unless we make it so. We can hold a gun without doing harm. Maybe use it to shoot open a lock of a caged animal. Similarly, we can harbor anger without doing harm.
I think you misunderstand me.
There is no such thing as Complete Detachment from Negative Emotions. To be detached from negative emotions is to ALSO be detached to positive emotions...to be numb.
What I am discussing is power over your emotions, the ones that make you feel bad, and the ones that feel so good you become obsessed and unfree.
I did not claim that you can achieve a state of being where you will never ever suffer. You will suffer regardless as long as you take part in this world, in this life. The point is, suffer less.
Choose to allow yourself to suffer over the things that are truly worth suffering over (loss of loved ones, pain of someone else, etc.) and to train yourself NOT to suffer only things that aren't worth it (not being popular, heartbreak over an abusive partner, not looking a certain way, etc.)
Most suffering that we endure is needless. Notice how so many people feel anger or sadness over the smallest and least important of things.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
My only problem with this whole way of thinking (I agree with a decent amount of it however) is that there are sufferings in the world of all kinds, and while acheiving inner peace accomplishes something good within yourself, there are many who can't or won't acheive this....and it is only through becoming more entwined in the emotions of the world that we can hope to affect it...only in embracing everything (anger, love, hate, compassion, all of it, etc.) are we truly whole.
It takes a lot of mental practice and maturity to achieve your own inner peace, I beleive. So yes, not everyone will achieve that realistically.
There are many conditions in order to get one self's mentality strong. Money, decent living, socialization of some sort, etc.
However, the problem is that people generally don't care about other people. People put thier own wants and needs before others, and as long as this happens, we will all still suffer.
We have the power to help others, and we delude ourselves into thinking we can't make a difference. There are many of us, no matter what religion or background, who thnk that someone else's suffering is THIER problem, not ours.
AS long as this happens, as long as we continue to remain Apathetic and unempathizing of other people's suffering, the collective suffering of the world will continue at the levels it has for centuries, perhaps even get worse.
Everyone has to do thier part.
**************
What does it mean to be whole ? To embrace Hate will accomplish what ? It's what we do all the time, and it only causes destruction.
To embrace one emotion of yours, is not the same as embracing yourself. Also you are thinking Inward.
If you are all you think about, and if your own happiness is your only concern, you will not truly be happy. If you reach genuineness, you will not be happy as long as you realize that others still suffer greatly.
You will only be happy trying to alleviate the suffering of others.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
The point is to promote peace and unity. But how is a person unified with the universe who denies within themselves the opportunity to embrace and use very real aspects of existence like anger? It's only corrupting to those who allow themselves to be corrupted by it. Without it, the person is incomplete. But any of those negative emotions only become so with our application of them in ways that are destructive to the concept of "at one" and/or "unity".
I didn't say to deny Anger, I said to control it. Controlled Anger can be very useful. Protestings, Rallies, Laws have been changed due to controlled anger. Anger let loose, only leads to more destruction.
It doesn't matter WHAT THE EMOTION...control it. Take charge. Don't let it control you.
Originally posted by DigiMark007
Even concepts like "good" and "evil" are, to me, largely arbitrary and highly subjective so I have to use concepts like "unity" to accurately describe what I mean by "good". And in doing so, it abolishes a large part of what mainstream morality would consider part of the good/evil dichotomy. Neither exists in my mind, or both do simultaneously...and it calls into question the whole idea of "negative" anything.
To me, Good is anything that promotes true unity. Good is anything that does not aim to disunify, separate, discriminate, or lead to false delusions of "us" vs "them". Good is selflessness.
To me, Evil is anything that promotes true disunity. Evil is selfishness, disregarding the pain and suffering of others, and promoting the idea of "us" vs "them". Seeing someone as superior and another as inferior, in some way, shape, or form. That is evil.
Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
In the American Constitution it states that a person should strive for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Why doesn't it just say happiness? I think... that happiness can not truly be attained. You can only pursue it...
"Pursuit to Happiness", starring Will Smith
1) Very Original 🙄
2) The American Constitution is a man-made series of articles, not a source of objective truth.
3) People have experienecd happiness. So have you, I am sure. If you never felt happy, then I am sorry. Happiness is not Eternal, but it can be Absolute, free from superficial and unnecessary conditions.
Originally posted by Goddess Kali
"Pursuit to Happiness", starring Will Smith1) Very Original 🙄
😮 Still some truth in there... and it's the "Pursuit of Happyness" with a "y"...
Plus, I didn't expect you to catch that... 😮
3) People have experienecd happiness. So have you, I am sure. If you never felt happy, then I am sorry. Happiness is not Eternal, but it can be Absolute, free from superficial and unnecessary conditions.
There's a difference between feeling happy and being truly happy...
Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
There's a difference between feeling happy and being truly happy...
Do you truly beleive it is impossible to truly be happy ? What do you mean by that ? Just because I am not happy every single moment of the day, does not mean I am not a happy person.
Why do you think that ? A lot of people will tell you they are truly happy.
Originally posted by Goddess KaliThat's true... They'll tell you that, not knowing what true happiness is. And will never be able to be truly happy. As I said, an unpursuitable dream...
Do you truly beleive it is impossible to truly be happy ? What do you mean by that ? Just because I am not happy every single moment of the day, does not mean I am not a happy person.Why do you think that ? A lot of people will tell you they are truly happy.
Originally posted by Ashestoashesjc
That's true... They'll tell you that, not knowing what true happiness is. And will never be able to be truly happy. As I said, an unpursuitable dream...
1) What is true happiness ?
2) Why is it unpursuitable ? Maybe its just unpursuitable to you because you have an illusion of what "true happiness" is in your mind.
Hmm. I think we understand each other Kali. It was more a semantic difference than an actual dissagreement of principles/beliefs. And a few of your responses were pretty close to paraphrasing sections of mine, so it's not too different. I still can't fully agree in a few areas, but the way my life is structured and the principles I adhere to aren't really at odds with much of Buddhism, so I can appreciate the effort you're making here to enlighten others based on your experience, even if it's overly Socratic at times.
😉