Tagged: ego Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • hardie karges 4:26 am on February 25, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , ego, , , , , , , , , ,   

    Kindness and Compassion are the Heart and Soul of Buddhism  

    Buddhism in Bhutan

    Compassion has no expiration date. It’s never too late to make new friends with old enemies. This is one of the secrets to a good life: no grudges, no scorched earth, no retribution, and, most importantly, no regrets. It should be simple, since you don’t really have to do anything, but in fact it’s one of the hardest things ever, so attached as we are to our egos and our ‘face’ that we spend so much time and effort saving, lest someone steal it right off of our heads, haha. 

    The Dalai Lama once said that his religion was simple, and that’s kindness, which is compassion, in a word, same thing, same time, and that’s Buddhism, too, in a word. All the elaborate lists and literary expositions that comprise the Buddhist Abhidharma are unnecessary to describe the heart of Buddhism, so why waste so much time and effort when you can put it all in a word, or two? Because yes, there is another word that needs to be included, and if karuna is the first word, then metta is the second, often translated as ‘lovingkindness’ or simple ‘friendliness.’ 

    Put the two words together, and you’ve captured the heart and soul of Buddhism. In fact, modern standard Thai language does indeed often combine the two words for extra effect, so mettakaruna is a word or phrase that you will hear often there. Suffering is famously the back-story to Buddhism, that and its cessation, and that’s pretty much all you need to know. The cosmology of self and rebirth are important but debatable, IMHO, and thus of secondary importance, ditto nirvana. The analogy to Christian forgiveness might be worth mentioning but it isn’t necessary. Be good; don’t be bad. It’s that simple. 

     

  • hardie karges 2:33 am on December 10, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Age of Reason, , , ego, , , rationality, reason   

    Buddhism: Rational if not Scientific  

    There is nothing mystical about Buddhism in its essence. The Middle Path is all about rationality, ratio, ratiocination, and rations. All of which is to say that Buddhism is a rational philosophy, surprise surprise. All the fancy metaphysics came later, as did the elaborate superstitions and multiple realms of heaven and hell. So, if that’s what gives your life meaning, then that is convenient. But it’s not for me, metaphysics maybe, but not superstitions. Don’t forget that the Buddha and Aristotle came from similar genetic stock, and sometimes they came to similar conclusions. 

    Rationality was quite novel in its day, if not downright radical, culminating in the European Age of Reason in the 17th century. So, it was something of a revelation in 500BCE that causes preceded effects—almost all the time, haha. But monks double down on the concept to this day, as if it were the latest thing since quantum physics. That’s how seriously the concept is taken. And, from that simple beginning, the more elaborate concept of Dependent Origination is spun like the finest weaving from the finest silk, even though the concept is very simple.  

    Everything is linked in a causal chain of dependence that spares nothing and no one, nor would you want it to. The real beauty of it is that no fancy quantum leaps of faith or judgment are needed to see how and why things happen. There is no jealous war god. There is no green-eyed monster. All that is necessary is the simple practice of kindness and goodness toward the world and the practice of meditation for oneself, i.e. non-self. Ego and selfish considerations are for the birds in their search for immediate gratification. You and I, we’ve been through that. 

     

  • hardie karges 4:07 am on November 26, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Calvin, , ego, , , , hungry ghosts, , Maharshi, Mary Baker Eddy,   

    Buddhism in the Bardo Realm: Facing Reality  

    All critiques, analyses, and deep discussions of arcane doctrines fall flat in the face of reality. The only important thing is the reduction of suffering. That’s why the Buddha made suffering the focus of his Four Noble Truths, the bedrock of Buddhism, without which there would have been no Buddhism. Because this is the heart and soul of Buddhism, long before the superstitions began creeping in, the past lives and the hungry ghosts and the glittering deities and the evil wicked monsters. And don’t forget the fancy metaphysics, which can be just as superstitious as gods and demons.  

    Because metaphysicians like to talk about perfection, and duality, and free will, and ego, without a shred of proof as to the veracity of any of it—or even the empirical presence of any of it. Who’s ever seen ego? Not Freud. Who’s ever seen predestination? Not Calvin. Who’s seen perfection? Not Mary Baker Eddy. Who’s seen duality? Not Maharshi nor Maharishi. Yet they can all expound on the topics as if they really exist, verbs putting on long pants and a suit to become nouns, leave the hiking boots for tomorrow, in case the latest vehicle won’t fly. 

    But the Buddha probably knew that he was on to something so sublime that it was simple enough to satisfy the threadbare renunciant while subtle enough to satisfy the schooled philosopher—but only for a while. Because soon enough, they’ll be wanting more more, bigger bigger. Just like celebrants banging the drum, the religionists will want more dogma, and the devotees will want more karma. And Original Buddhism will become Big Rig Buddhism, and then there will be Diamond Dog Buddhism, at the same time there’s Crazy Wisdom Buddhism, and so, soon enough, we’ll be right back where we started, and someone will have to sit down and try to figure out what to do next. Hi. 

     

  • hardie karges 4:11 am on September 17, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ego, Machiavelli, , ,   

    Buddhist Non-Selfishness…  

    Be kind to all sentient beings, even the ones that troll you on social media. Because the important thing is not to get even. The important thing is to get odd. Be the difference. Be the one who walks away from a silly dispute, rather than the one who dukes it out until the last man is standing and the rest are all down on the ground. The one who gets the last word is not necessarily the one who wins. The one who wins is the one who is right, but that is not always immediately known. 

    The important thing is to treat people better than they treat you. That way, we are assured that the world will become a better place, later if not sooner, better and not badder. Because the ego is a heartless bastard, intent on nothing but its own imaginary superiority for its own imaginary self, in the mistaken belief that somehow more benefits will accrue to it that way, benefits quantitative in nature the very proof of their inferiority. It’s probably safe to say that if you can count it, then you can’t count ON it, for much of anything but grief and sorrow. 

    Where does this selfish ego find proof of its own exalted status? It doesn’t. That’s pure greed and the will to power, the alpha male proving Machiavelli’s ‘might makes right,’ no matter that the future will prove him wrong—eventually. And that is the crucial trick, to play for time, in the hopes that things can only get better. It’s trendy to say that time doesn’t exist, that the only time is NOW, but the Buddha never said that. The Buddha said to save 25% of your wealth for those inevitable rainy days when work is not possible. Pragmatic considerations are more important than abstract metaphysics. 

     

  • hardie karges 12:04 am on May 28, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ego, , no self, ,   

    Buddhist No-self (Anatta) and Non-Dualism  

    The Buddhist concept of “No self”, Anatta, doesn’t mean to imply passivity and no confidence. But it does imply non-aggression and no selfishness. Remember the middle path. But this is one of the oldest and thorniest problems that Buddhism has had to deal with, and the modern repercussions are almost as absurd. Back in the old days, 2500 years ago, or so, Brahmanism was consolidating its doctrines of a cosmic Brahman and a cosmic Atman, reality and self, whose highest goal was to unite in some sort of cosmic union… 

    But the Buddha came along and said something like, “Meh,” declaring that the idea of a cosmic self, whether individual or universal, was not only not likely, but wrong. And thus began the Buddhist doctrine of anatta, which was never intended to argue that you and I don’t even exist, but just not in any permanent way. Well, now the ‘Non-dualists” come along and say no, you don’t exist at all, just something like a collective figment of imagination that asserts itself through the power of repetition, so something like a cloud Matrix. 

    But reality is reality, and science doesn’t support the non-dualist conclusion, any more than it supports the original Hindu idea of Brahman and Atman in cosmic union. But science can support the Buddhist attitude, as long as it avoids superstitions (not always easy) and sticks to asking the right questions in order to avoid contentious answers. Ego is a term I usually avoid, though, given the historical circumstance that Freud has forever made in changing our use of that term.

    And that is something which the ‘ancients’ could’ve had no knowledge of, and which is about as familiar to the modern American as quantum mechanics. Passivity has been something of a problem for Buddhism, though, and that is not a desirable conclusion except for monks, possibly. But most of us live and navigate the real world, and it’s nice if we can make that a bit better, without being obsessive about it. As always, the best path is the middle one… 

     

  • hardie karges 11:44 am on July 17, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , ego, , , id, , , , , ,   

    Buddhism 101: Anger is a Warning Sign of Impending Danger… 

    Anger is like a lying dog, that, when provoked, rises up in consciousness, and strikes the nearest hand that most recently fed it. Because it’s blind, and usually vicious, hatefulness optional, and it infects everything it touches, anger does. But it’s not always so easy to recognize, because it comes in many forms, most often in concert with hatred, true, but equally conversant with deception and denigration and the other delusions of sense perception, always a prime source of suffering, no matter the particular place and time in question…

    And then there is the other ‘poison’ of Buddhism, besides hatred and delusion, which is greed, or sensual desire, with which anger is also often associated. But sometimes the symptom is worse than the disease, and this could often be one of those cases, in which the anger is worse than the moha, raga, or dvesha itself. These are also variously known as the Three Unwholesome Roots and the Three Kileshas, which are also available in a convenient Five-Pack for serious abusers, but who’s counting?

    Still, it all counts as demerit in a lifestyle that prides itself on making merit, and doing good, and so worth making a sea change in order to avoid the choppy waves, right? But that gets into issues of global warming and rising sea levels, when simply wearing a life jacket and learning how to swim might accomplish much the same thing in a much shorter amount of time. Why get a brain operation if a pill can cure the headache? That’s what I want to know.

    Hatred, delusion, and greedy attachments can take a lifetime to cease, overcome, or even diminish, much less cure, though, so in the meantime please do us all a favor and control your anger, okay? It becomes you. And there are many American Buddhist ‘teachers’ who might disagree with that, but they may not be so smart, after all, since they often look to Freud and Jung, rather than Buddha, for inspiration, as if the notion of superego were somehow scientific and Freud’s ego were what the Buddha was really talking about in denouncing the Brahmanistic cosmic atta/atman. It wasn’t. So, let go of all anger, the sooner the better. It sucks.

     

  • hardie karges 10:47 am on May 22, 2022 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Brahmanist, ego, , George Harrison, , , , , , ,   

    Self, Ego, Identity, or the Lack Thereof in Buddhism… 

    Permanent self and immortal soul are a convenient fiction, but a fiction, nevertheless. And this is what the whole ‘no-self’ on ‘non-self’ debate is all about, or at least WAS. And if it’s disturbing enough that that principle is often misrepresented, it’s downright ridiculous that there is often even a debate over the preference or appropriateness of ‘non-self’ vis a vis ‘no-self.’ But the issue is very clear within the historical context of the competition and ongoing debate between the Brahmanists, Buddhists, and Jains way back some 2500 years ago.

    And the reverb echoes even today when George Harrison opines during his last days that these souls go on forever, so death is essentially meaningless. And whatever qualms you might have about such a statement from a scientific viewpoint would hopefully be secondary to the hope and optimism that it might do for you in the short-term of this life span. But it’s very popular now amongst ‘non-dualists’ as much or more than Buddhists to claim that thoughts have no thinker and actions have no doer. They even claim that the Buddha said that, but if so, then I can’t name the sutra, and even if he did it was likely in a metaphorical usage.

    Because Buddhism in general is nothing if not mental training, and so to conclude that there is nothing there, nothing at all, would seem counterintuitive. But that is the modern ‘non-dualist’ assertion, that any and all self-identity is detrimental to one’s spiritual well-being. And that may or may not be true, but I don’t think the Buddha said that, because it would render the Eightfold Path pointless. When you believe in yourself, don’t believe too much, just enough to accomplish what you need, not enough to inflate your ego. That’s the Middle Path between excess and lack…

     

  • hardie karges 5:20 am on December 1, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ego, , , , possessions, ,   

    Buddhism 202: Slavery to Self and the Addictions of Ego… 

    Slavery can also be self-inflicted, addiction to money and ego and possessions and false gods, you name it. And I suppose it’s not even a bad thing, necessarily, as some Buddhist devotees proudly display their ‘slavery’ to the Buddha, just like any latter-day Krishna devotee named Das (Sanskrit for ‘slave’). But those are particular and peculiar exceptions to the general rule that freedom is better, self-control the best kind of control, and any exception to that rule to be approached with extreme caution. Because morality demands free will, or at least the illusion of such, to whatever extent possible, given the limits imposed by biological existence and the vicissitudes of circumstance. For we are nothing if not crippled, by space and time and the frequencies at which we are sentient, to light and sound, especially, somewhere between infrared and ultraviolet, and 20 to 20,000 Hz in this world best defined physically by mechanical waves of the kind that shock and reverberate, percussion with repercussions, and the sonic blasts that level all buildings and pretenses to greatness and permanence. Addictions are false gods and self-slavery, selling yourself to the highest bidder for selves and souls on the credit card for true believers, no down payment required and discount options available with bulk purchase. But every purchase comes with a warning: that warm fuzzy feeling that felt so good the first time may not feel so good the last, in some sliding scale of proportionately inverse pleasure, calculated to leave you wanting more the more you have, just the opposite of the Platonic need for what you don’t have, instead the Satanic need for what you do have. But in the end it’s all just ‘maya’, illusion, because it ultimately gets you nowhere, and advances you not a whit, because all your frills and bangles, fancy buttons and silk bows, won’t make you a better person, and that’s the mark of progress…

     

    • Dave Kingsbury 4:15 am on December 7, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Invigorating perspectives, as always, Hardie! Our addictions aren’t always obvious to us, it seems …

      • hardie karges 5:01 am on December 7, 2019 Permalink | Reply

        No, not always obvious, and not even necessarily bad. Thanks for your comment…

        • Dave Kingsbury 5:29 pm on December 7, 2019 Permalink

          The word carries a pejorative association for me, so interesting to consider it from another angle … I suppose enthusiasm and dedication, for example, require a degree of obsessional focus in a distracting world.

        • hardie karges 6:38 pm on December 7, 2019 Permalink

          Yes, I know it’s difficult to see the word as positive, but the name Das confirms it, just checked modern Hindi, and it’s the same, but with connotations of ‘devotee’, now, of course. For me the distinction is that between self-control and control by others, and that’s very central to the implicit meaning of Buddhism, even if seldom articulated…

        • Dave Kingsbury 3:46 am on December 8, 2019 Permalink

          I can see the distinction you describe – a very important one in an increasingly homogenous world, I reckon.

  • hardie karges 1:24 am on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , ego, ethics, , , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhism and the long winding path: No soul for me, please, and make that karma ‘lite’… 

    Salvation implies a soul to be saved. I’d prefer some enlightenment, in this lifetime. And that’s a fundamental tenet of Buddhism, of course, the lack of a permanent enduring soul to guide you through the ages, or even a solid existent self to call your own in this lifetime, the basis for egotism and possession, and all the misgivings of misplaced attachments. And if that seems like a significant deviation from the teachings of Christ, then it was even more of a deviation from the early Vedic-inspired teachings of India, including Jainism and what we now call Hinduism. For if the Vedantic Hindus want a Self to unite with a Cosmos, an Atman to unite with a Brahman, then the Jains want to find a soul in everything, every little thing, be it rock, insect or umbrella. It’s not just that everything is alive, but it’s permanent and enduring. The Buddha thought he saw something simpler than all these machinations of overwrought mentality, which are just linguistic conveniences standing up and asking to be counted, when in reality there is really nothing there, just ‘mental formations’ or something like that. After all, if everything has a soul, then what do we do to acknowledge that? The Jain answer was: not much. Just sit, sit, and sit some more. It’ll all go away sooner or later. Every action was possessed of karmas, plural. Now that may seem like a strange definition of karma, but they likely invented the concept, so that’s their right. Others saw it differently, for once the cat of karma was out of the bag, so to speak, then there is no end to it, the generation-jumping karma of retribution and the things we’ll do to avoid it. If religion craves certainty, then this became the Hindu leitmotif, past lives and reincarnation, which, like conspiracy theory, cannot be disproven, so it must be true. But don’t we need some semblance of free will, simply for the dictates of morality and ethics? So I prefer something simpler, ‘karma lite’ if you prefer: Do good and life is good. Do bad and life is bad. That’s karma, actions. You will be rewarded by them, not for them…

     

    • quantumpreceptor 7:08 am on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Hardy, good job boiling things down and making them simple enough to live them.

      QP

    • Passport Overused 8:01 am on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Great post 😊

    • hardie karges 10:57 am on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Thanks

    • Dave Kingsbury 4:41 pm on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      You will be rewarded by them, not for them… great insight here, the circle squared perhaps?

    • hardie karges 11:45 pm on October 27, 2019 Permalink | Reply

      Actually I may have modified a quote from the Dalai Lama there, so should give credit, not sure of his exact words. ‘Circle squared’, though: I like that…

  • hardie karges 10:39 pm on June 1, 2019 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , ego, , ,   

    Freud and the Buddha, ego and self… 

    Life is too short to waste time in pathetic displays of ego, though many of our so-called leaders offer litle guidance in that regard. And ego is one of the traditional pet peeves of Buddhism, though I doubt that the Buddha or anyone else in his time could really conceive of it the way we do in our post-Freudian world. Even if the discipline of psychology has largely been transformed from the science of the mind to the science of behavior, his tripartite division of ‘the mind’ into the three paradigms of id, ego and superego still linger in the consciousness of those of us who studied him, though such distinctions may now seem quaint, fanciful and downright misleading in our post-rational era of particles, genomes and information bits and bytes. But that classical era of psychology shines a light on the Buddhist role of psychology as analogy and metaphor, with many such ‘mental formations’ as self, soul, permanence and eternity serving as linguistic conveniences where no such observable entities may truly exist. But if it feels good, then we do it, and even the Buddha was sympathetic to such machinations and intellectual short-cuts if the results are beneficial to society and the individual in perpetual limbo and looking for a path forward where such is a trail with few markings. We spend half our lives being born and half our lives dying, gathering moments for memories all along the way, and looking for signposts to mark our progress…

     

← Older posts

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel