On Attachment

[Barry]

In another thread (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccotalk/53272-keeping-waccobb-net-safe.html#post89951), Jeff included a short note:


...

PS. FWIW, "attachment" is what life is about, in my opinion. There wouldn't be much point without it. We could start a new thread on the topic if you wish.

So here's a new thread "On Attachment"!

What is, or how do you define "attachment"? Are there different kinds? Are some healthy and some not? How do you tell? Who or what gets attached to who/what? What if its reciprocal? What if its not?

Do you agree with Jeff that attachment is what life is about? If not, why not? And if not, what is it all about, anyway? :wink:

How do you deal with attachment in your life? Do you avoid them? Treasure them? Break them? Does this serve you? Would the object of your attachment agree? (My toaster if very happy that we are attached!)

I trust someone will mention the Second Noble Truth along the way along with some enlightening comments.

I have been encouraged, delighted and entertained by the thoughtful conversation on "The Ego Thread (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccotalk/53557-ego-thread.html#post90334)" and elsewhere lately, so let us continue with the rich subject of attachment...

[Braggi]

... I have been encouraged, delighted and entertained by the thoughtful conversation on "The Ego Thread (https://www.waccobb.net/forums/waccotalk/53557-ego-thread.html#post90334)" and elsewhere lately, so let us continue with the rich subject of attachment...

Oh no, what have I done? :wink:

I'm about to leave town for the rest of this week. I'm very curious to see where this goes while I'm gone.

This isn't really a post-and-run because Barry started this thread.

I'll just say that it's my attachments that I live for. They give my life meaning. They give me purpose. They are the stuff of life and they are the hope for the future. They are the source of joy and pleasure.

I have no interest in de-attaching until I'm on my death bed and maybe not even then.

I love life and I'm very attached to it.

I think all this attachment is quite healthy.

-Jeff

[NudeTea]

What is, or how do you define "attachment"?
Negative connotations with the word.

Are there different kinds?
No doubt.

Are some healthy and some not?
For me, the are unhealthy.

How do you tell?
When I get a clammy feeling and start pulling away.

Who or what gets attached to who/what?
Give me 8 hours with a therapist and maybe I'll know better.

What if its reciprocal?
Then the other person needs therapy too.

Do you agree with Jeff that attachment is what life is about?
Probably not.

If not, why not? And if not, what is it all about, anyway? :wink:
I had an attachment to my family and kids back in the 80s. Then it turned out I was replaceable, my wife told me it was over, and I could no longer see my kids at night; I could no longer tell them bedtime stories at night; I had to wait for two weeks to see them. I went crazy in the head, and the only way I could survive was to emotionally detach. I am really hesitant to attach again; the pain was intense and the recollection of it even now is reviving intense emotions.

[Gene]

Attachment brings misery and pain.

[Barry]

...
What if its reciprocal?
Then the other person needs therapy too.

LOL!




If not, why not? And if not, what is it all about, anyway? :wink:
I had an attachment to my family and kids back in the 80s. Then it turned out I was replaceable, my wife told me it was over, and I could no longer see my kids at night; I could no longer tell them bedtime stories at night; I had to wait for two weeks to see them. I went crazy in the head, and the only way I could survive was to emotionally detach. I am really hesitant to attach again; the pain was intense and the recollection of it even now is reviving intense emotions.
Ouch! Thanks for putting your other comments in context and revealing your pain. There it is, the Second Noble Truth (https://www.viewonbuddhism.org/4_noble_truths.html).

[Zeno Swijtink]

Attachment brings misery and pain.

For me attachment meant commitment.

Being there, showing up.

There is the Woody Allen quote that 80% of success is showing up. I think it's more.

I took out this book titled "Talent is Overrated." It says that life is mostly about applying oneself, about deliberate practice.

Attachment is defining oneself as one who is committed to care for these expanding circles of beautiful beings.

[Barry]

For me attachment meant commitment.
...

Hmm:thinking:, I think those are two separate things. For sure, they are often connected. For instance, I could be committed to go to the gym, but I do not feel attached to it. In fact I may hate it!

[Braggi]

Attachment brings misery and pain.

... and joy and pleasure. Which do you choose to embrace and why?

Everything in life is a mixed blessing.

The difference is what you emphasize.

The difference is what you choose to dwell on.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

... I could be committed to go to the gym, but I do not feel attached to it. In fact I may hate it!

So get over it Barry. Let the attachment flow.

Maybe you'll start to enjoy it.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

What is, or how do you define "attachment"?
Negative connotations with the word. ...

I'm sorry for your difficult experiences. There is nothing more terrible than losing access to your child. That loss will never be replaced. Lost time can never be given back.

The thought that comes to mind though is the old saw, "The best revenge is living well."

Something for you to ponder: Filling your life up with your loss makes less room for the positives to come in. If you can release your attachment to your loss and your obvious anger and angst, perhaps you can appreciate new attachments that much more.

Everyone has to make their own choices and I wouldn't attempt to choose for you, but I choose to embrace the good stuff while I can and fill my life with all the love and pleasure I can reasonably and ethically experience. I try to create a place of love and pleasure I can share with others. I serve others to increase their joy and pleasure. By living this way my life becomes bigger and fuller and the hard times become a smaller and smaller part of my entire existence.

I've suffered great losses in my life as well. But they are not the greatest parts of my life. I give thanks for what I still have and I celebrate every moment I reasonably can.

I love my attachments. Me and and a fine truckload of my attachments are about to head out for a great party. Be back in a few days.

-Jeff

[Zeno Swijtink]

Hmm:thinking:, I think those are two separate things. For sure, they are often connected. For instance, I could be committed to go to the gym, but I do not feel attached to it. In fact I may hate it!

How can you be committed, for years, without being attached?

Attachment puts your commitment on auto-pilot.

[NudeTea]

Hmm:thinking:, I think those are two separate things. For sure, they are often connected. For instance, I could be committed to go to the gym, but I do not feel attached to it. In fact I may hate it!

I agree. Commitment is a cognitive choice. Attachment would be an emotional one, imho.

[hales]

Okay, so what is the glue that holds relationships together, if there is no attachment? I think a certain amount of attachment is normal, healthy and useful, just like a bit of ego is necessary to navigate life, and to be successful. If you don't care what happens to you or others, then what? If you don't care if you see your child or partner or not, then why bother?

BTW, if I wasn't attached to my relationships, why would I bother committing to them?

I see no point in denying that a lot of our emotional foundation is similar to other primates.. we do form attachments and the help us find meaning, safety, security and also reproduce and protect our offspring.

I think the practices of Buddhism is what happens when we have enough time and security to reflect on our lives and what makes them livable or not livable. I believe there is a way of balancing self and others, attachment and non-attachment, the harsh realities of life, with acceptance and even gratitude.

Sure, if we experience pain and loss, we will seek a way to avoid them in the future, and probably will try to minimize our attachments. I have done this at times, anyway. What I'm trying to do now, is try to figure out what are reasonable things to (try to) have in my life, and also, what am I really passionate about. My desires and attachments are and will be tempered by experiences of loss and disappointment and disillusionment, but also of the fulfillment of some of my desires. I don't intend on avoiding attachments, just on keeping them in balance. I want to love and be loved, for instance so I am still swimming up-stream with the other salmon.. ; )

I'm kind of attached to being healthy and active, so I do things that make me feel that way and support me being that way in the future.

I want to be understood, so I try to communicate clearly and I continue to study people and communication.

(Having these human desires and attachments doesn't mean I can't let go, when I need to, or accept the truth of what is happening )

Scott.







I agree. Commitment is a cognitive choice. Attachment would be an emotional one, imho.

[NudeTea]

Responding to Hales:

Okay, so what is the glue that holds relationships together, if there is no attachment?

Cognitive commitment. An awakening each morning to the re-assessment of my choices in life from this point forward and that I do want to continue in this commitment another day.

I think a certain amount of attachment is normal, healthy and useful, just like a bit of ego is necessary to navigate life, and to be successful. If you don't care what happens to you or others, then what? If you don't care if you see your child or partner or not, then why bother?

Yeah, I see your point but it's not that I don't care. I do care. But everything in life is temporary. The loss of jobs, marriages, homes, friends ... I can't let the loss of these things rob me of my joy.

BTW, if I wasn't attached to my relationships, why would I bother committing to them?

That's obviously your life's story and I can appreciate that.

I see no point in denying that a lot of our emotional foundation is similar to other primates.. we do form attachments and the help us find meaning, safety, security and also reproduce and protect our offspring.

Well if you're gonna bring in the primates, I guess you're calling in all my family now LOL

I think the practices of Buddhism is what happens when we have enough time and security to reflect on our lives and what makes them livable or not livable. I believe there is a way of balancing self and others, attachment and non-attachment, the harsh realities of life, with acceptance and even gratitude.

I've never studied Buddhism but it's interesting to read what you wrote here.

What I'm trying to do now, is try to figure out what are reasonable things to (try to) have in my life, and also, what am I really passionate about.

Passion is a great endeavor! Cool! (insert gratitude here)

I'm kind of attached to being healthy and active, so I do things that make me feel that way and support me being that way in the future.

I want to be understood, so I try to communicate clearly and I continue to study people and communication.

(Having these human desires and attachments doesn't mean I can't let go, when I need to, or accept the truth of what is happening )

Thank you for your thoughts. Very enjoyable.

[theindependenteye]

For me, "attachment" has multiple meanings.

One is equivalent to commitment, and for me that's absolute. I've been married 48 years, and it'll be till death. I have two children, and I'll be there for them no matter what. I make agreements to do a project a year or two years hence, and I'll honor that contract unless I croak. I've renegotiated commitments, but I've never walked away from them.

>>An awakening each morning to the re-assessment ... that I do want to continue in this commitment another day.

I think there's a positive aspect to this reassessment, but I don't subscribe to the implication -- if that's what's implied -- that attention to one's personal integrity allows for unilateral abrogation of contracts with others.

I've been immensely lucky in the person I chose to marry, in finding my life's work, in doing the grand slalom between crises, in managing the money dance, all that. And probably I'm still influenced by my father's walking way from his wife & kid when he saw greener pastures elsewhere.

But whatever the source, to me a contract is a contract, period.

>I can't let the loss of these things rob me of my joy.

And this I agree with absolutely. Though I don't think I've been thorougly tested on that issue. I've had losses, but not on the level of Job.

This is the other meaning of "attachment," an emotional involvement such that your essential being is crippled by the loss. I think you can have deep attachment on the first level -- vehement commitment -- and still maintain relative freedom on the second. In fact, I thinK that otherwise the underlying fear of loss can inhibit committed action. Somehow, it has to do with an acceptance of the fact of death, of failure, of loss as part of the grand game, an acceptance of the possibility -- and the inevitability -- of pain. My impression is that's what some people are talking about when they describe "detachment." I connect with that, though I don't know how I'll come through when my foot's in the fire. Ascetics, I guess, try to buy insurance by killing desire. That's not for me.

Peace & joy--
Conrad

[nurturetruth]

Reason for editing: practicing non attachment

:thumbsup:

[hales]

Hi, Nurturetruth..

I like and agree with what you have said, except for some minor quibbles about infant development, on which I am not an expert, except for having helped raise a kid, having done a little reading, and also having been an infant, a long time ago.. ; )

[See my comments in Red interspersed below:]


Q. What is attachment? Are some attachments healthy while some are not? Are there different kinds? Who or what gets attached to who/what? Do you agree with Jeff that “attachments are what makes life?”
Interestingly enough, one of the synonymous for attachment is in fact “connection”.

It has been my experience / observations that as humans, we have the capability of having both healthy attachments as well as unhealthy attachments .
This applies to the attachment to objects, thoughts, feelings, and relationships.
Unhealthy attachments to beliefs and ideologies have sadly led to global war, famine, political, social and economic upheavals, as well as contributed to some destruction of our habitat and general dysfunction on all levels of society because they have the potential to divide us from each other rather than join or connect us.
The capacity to form and maintain healthy relationships is in my opinion, one of the most important trait of humankind, for without it , we would not be able to survive, learn, work, or procreate. Healthy attachments are necessary in helping to form and maintain healthy emotional relationships as relationships in all forms create the glue of a family, community, and society.
In this sense, I completely agree with Jeff in that our attachments is what life is about!


(I agree about healthy attachments being part of what holds together families, communities, and societies .. but when it is warped, suppressed, or exaggerated, it becomes something unhealthy, like jealousy, isolation, extreme nationalism, racism, etc.. )

"At birth, a baby is essentially emotionally "unattached”."

This is the part I had a hard time accepting. I think the infant is so attached that it doesn't realize that mother is a separate being. The child has not individualized in it's own awareness, or realized that mother is a separate entity, and it gets upset when it's needs are not automatically met on demand. In Utero, the infant is directly connected via the umbilical cord , and I believe it shares the mothers feelings. It is the environment that the baby is surrounded by, in all senses. If mom is stressed or angry, or relaxed and happy, I think the baby shares those feelings. After delivery, I presume the sudden separation and new environment is quite a shock, but hopefully the appropriate bonding takes place between the mother and baby, yet often in our society doesn't take place, (as it sounds like you described.. ). I didn't have this experience, fully, as I was in intensive care for while, after delivery, and my son also was in a separate room, in a plastic box, for a few days after delivery. I really believe that this kind of care can be very disturbing to the emotional development of infants. Both the parent and the child do not have a certain primal bonding experience, that is the foundation for (all?) future relationships.

In fact, it might be part of why we are so concerned about this issue of attachment, vs. non-attachment. I think many people have not had healthy bonds at these critical points in their development, so they do not know how to be present in their relationships with themselves, their family members or other intimate and non-intimate relationships.

It is in childhood when we form attachments with objects and to relationships usually w/our primary caregiver.
If we form healthy attachments in our first relationships, I believe it can help set the tone for our future adult relationships.
As far as our attachment to objects are concerned, its my thought that a pacifier is one of the first objects we are liable to form attachment with. It is plastic – and not the same as having mother’s milk and her breast, to suck and to cuddle with. This could be the start of creating an unhealthy pattern of reliance on objects .

I agree that natural nursing is better than substitution of baby formula and "binkies".. also, the simple distancing that takes place; the lack of the intimate connection between baby and mother makes a difference, though I think that if this was needed for medical or other reasons, a strong loving bond could reduce the effects.. however the habitual substitution of something fake for something real is going to have a deep impact on the development of the child and the parent-child relationship, as well! (I put words the have to do with attachment, bonding and separation in italics, just to emphasize the range of possible connections or lack thereof.. )

Also, many of the emotions we may have felt in childhood - what people call the "negative" emotions - we were taught not to share. At least this was my experience. So, I sought comfort from my blankets, and a stuffed rabbit I named : “Lovie”. I learned not to seek comfort from my mother, or father or my family. I was turning to objects instead.
(this lasted into much of my adult years as I ended up taking “Lovie” to college with me for which I experienced being made fun of in severe ways by my peers.)

I'm sorry you expienced having to substitute for real love from your parent and that you were ridiculed for it, later. I had to learn to find substitutes for real love and attention, as well. Also, my Mom was into Dr. Spock,
(not the Star Wars guy, this was a famous pediatrician who espoused puttting children on a schedule for feeding, etc..) so she had a sort of behavior mod approach to parenting. All in all I think she was a good parent and taught me a lot of very good skills and values, but the whole witholding the nunus.. really frustrating. I guess we all have our issues.. ; )
As adults, we seem to struggle with holding our emotions within because we fear that by sharing our inner souls with others, we will - as in childhood - be discounted, dismissed, or denied.

Yes, we do.. I mean I do also. Then again, sometimes I just won't shut up.. ; )

It's easy for me to understand how we as adults continue to seek comfort in other non-human objects, such as drugs, food, money, etc

Yes, sad but true..

It has been my experience and observations that healthy attachment allows for separateness as well as connectedness with both “objects” and with relationships.
.
How to tell if u have an unhealthy attachment?

I don't claim to have all the answers, but for me, I can recognize what feels healthy versus unhealthy.
Unhealthy attachment feels ‘needy’ and “clingy” to me.

I was thinking about what "addiction" means to me, and my idea that it's strongly wanting to feel good, no matter what, and perhaps being afraid of not feeling good.. I think there is a tie-in between unhealthy attachment and addictive behavior. Certainly this needs to be part of the "attachment" topic.. Maybe needy, addictive relationship patterns are just a desparate attempt to compensate for that normal, healthy bonding, and history of having one's needs met in a consistent, healthy way, that often does not occur.

(As we grow and develop, we even need at times to exeperience lack and frustration, so it's not just about always getting what we want. )

I also have experienced having attachments to my “expectations” or “hopes” in a way that brings me great disappointment . Then the ‘letting go’ process of attachment occurs. If one cannot let go easily, then this is a signal there is work to do in recognizing attachments. Until one gets good at letting go, one could feel like things are completely falling apart when u do let go.
However, things will not fall apart.

Actually, Kali, it's been my personal experience that things do fall apart. Separation, divorce, death, loss of homes, assets, income, employment, etc. .. Seriously, what Doesn't fall apart?
BTW, check this book by Pema Chodrun out, if you're not familiar with it, already.. it's handy when all hell breaks loose.. ; )

When Things Fall Apart: Heart Advice for Difficult Times Shambhala Classics: Pema Chodron: Amazon.co.uk: Books (https://www.amazon.co.uk/When-Things-Fall-Apart-Difficult/dp/1570623449)

hint: It seems there is something left, to be the observer, and to survive, after everything else is gone.

I have also noticed over the years that unhealthy attachment can form unhealthy co-dependence. Example: I need u to be the victim, so I can be the hero/teacher. Likewise , the hero usually needs a victim . And of course, the victim needs to have a villain unless the victim and the villain are one in the same: “the self”.

More regularly though, I have experienced unhealthy attachments in form of having projections or judgments towards myself or another.
For example: "I expect and need someone to be other than they are ".
It is my thoughts that this process imprisons not only ourselves, but also the other person. Neither party is free to ‘be” or grow /flourish appropriately.

Yeah, it doesn't work real well for me, either.

How do you deal with attachment in your life? Do you avoid them? Treasure them? Break them? Does this serve you?

We are always somewhere, and attached some level to something or someone.
And if there is to be attachment , I want to learn to be more and more OK with what is, with this moment. Because things change moment to moment.
I want to attach to “what is”, and detach from my own expectations, judgments and delusions/imaginings , even though I accept them as they are.
In my perspective, if I am to attach myself to a certain outcome, I start feeling detached from “what is.”

I, too, want to be present with what is, to accept it and enjoy it as much as possible, or to tolerate it if it's not so enjoyable.

I recently left a relationship because we had opposite styles of being attached/non-attached. She feared being engulfed and loved to be independent and uncommitted, while I feared being left behind and neglected, and I love (more) physical closeness and intimacy ; My trying to be more intimate or have consistent quality time with her, was percieved as too much of an imposition, though we both really enjoyed the time we did spend together.. though it seemed to me that this was almost always defined by her. I learned to give her a little more time and space than I preferred, and I think she probably learned to stay with me beyond her initial comfort limits. I eventually found myself wanting more agreement on this and hoping for more in the future, but could not get her agreement on this important issue. I think we will continue as friends, as we still both love and resect each other.

I think I learned a lot about respecting a partner's space, about listening, and about being honest about and asserting my needs, when necessary, etc.

Another perspective regarding having a healthy attachment to a person is to call it “joining” (some call it merging)
When we join with people, we are allowing them to have their own opinion, have their own set of values and their own truth - all without feeling the need to agree.

I don't think I quite agree that merging and being present with someone is always the same thing.. althought merging could be part of being present with another.. it's possible to merge in an unhealthy way, as in the phrase, "urge to merge"..

For instance it could be really cool during lovemaking, but if your teenager (If you had one) was engaged in unhealthy behavior, such as drinking and driving or unsafe sex, you would perhaps be able to identify or understand the behavior, but you would not be in a healthy relationship pattern if you merged with it..

There is a really good book that talks about something similar, but calls it "blending" .. it's a book on leadership, "The Leadership Dojo", based on Aikido practice. I think I mentioned it on this list before, in a different context;

Amazon.com: The Leadership Dojo: Build Your Foundation as an Exemplary Leader: Richard Strozzi-Heckler: Books (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1583942017?tag=trunordisyoua-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=1583942017&adid=1TTQQFN9R1NS9SY6Y3ZE&)

In blending, we become aware of the other and blend with the other, without giving up our own center.. very important.. I have to remind mysef of this, from timem to time. the book helped me with this tendency to give away my center, too easily.

We are able to mutually allow one another the freedom to “ be” with no judgment.
As a result, we do not end up feeling controlled by people we choose to join with, nor do we feel the need to control them.

For me, it's very important to respect others, allwong the freedom to be themselves and learn their own lessons, yet be clear on what my own needs and boundaries are.

Saying all this, I realize I have formed attachments to writing about attachment.

We can always learn from our experiences and move forward in a new way.. : ) love and blessings,
Scott.

[babaruss]

I'm not sure I'll ever fully understand the concept of 'attachment', but I can accept that anything I do which has a desired/preferred outcome is 'attachment'. This doesn't mean that I should not plan outcomes, or have goals. Perhaps it means I need become flexible, and learn to accept what is, as it is, when a desired change is not forth coming.

Oddly, and maybe only to my awkward way of seeing things, being a Buddhist is attachment (if only because the goal of non-attachment).
Where there is desire, there is grasping, and grasping is, if I understand this right, is attachment.
Letting go of grasping, with the goal of becoming non-grasping, is still attachment is it not ?
Our desired outcome is to become non-grasping. Any desire to attain, (enlightenment ?) or to become, is still grasping, and therefor attachment.

There is no real controlling of any aspect of life, but there is the illusion of control... which is a method we use to make ourselves feel safe, secure, which in turn makes us feel better, happier etc. So we here may be attached to what is not over accepting what is.

In a more practical sense I prefer to have a roof over my head, and food in my belly. If I lose everything I have, and am forced to scuffle for my survival needs as a homeless person, can I do such a thing while maintaining a peaceful, and serene, mind.
Do I need become frustrated, and resentful that my past standard of living is no longer available to me ?

I'm probably all over the board here, but that's pretty much the best I can ever do with today's limited understanding of the subject
Babaruss





How can you be committed, for years, without being attached?

Attachment puts your commitment on auto-pilot.

[hales]

it sounds to me like a good first step would be to relax about the whole thing, man.. ; ) (I'm no stranger to the need to have a mental explanation for everything..)

I don't think wanting to let go is necessarily attachment, but it is if we feel we need to have the perfect explanation for it. Just take a breath and relax.

Anyway, we all have to find our own "way"; something that makes us feel comfortable and at ease.
The whole explanation can get so tiring and stressful, doncha think?

blessings,

Scott.


I'm not sure I'll ever fully understand the concept of 'attachment', but I can accept that anything I do which has a desired/preferred outcome is 'attachment'. This doesn't mean that I should not plan outcomes, or have goals. Perhaps it means I need become flexible, and learn to accept what is, as it is, when a desired change is not forth coming.

Oddly, and maybe only to my awkward way of seeing things, being a Buddhist is attachment (if only because the goal of non-attachment).
Where there is desire, there is grasping, and grasping is, if I understand this right, is attachment.
Letting go of grasping, with the goal of becoming non-grasping, is still attachment is it not ?
Our desired outcome is to become non-grasping. Any desire to attain, (enlightenment ?) or to become, is still grasping, and therefor attachment.

There is no real controlling of any aspect of life, but there is the illusion of control... which is a method we use to make ourselves feel safe, secure, which in turn makes us feel better, happier etc. So we here may be attached to what is not over accepting what is.

In a more practical sense I prefer to have a roof over my head, and food in my belly. If I lose everything I have, and am forced to scuffle for my survival needs as a homeless person, can I do such a thing while maintaining a peaceful, and serene, mind.
Do I need become frustrated, and resentful that my past standard of living is no longer available to me ?

I'm probably all over the board here, but that's pretty much the best I can ever do with today's limited understanding of the subject
Babaruss

[babaruss]

To 'relax' would imply that I am somehow not completely at ease with where I am on this subject right now.
I am where I am because it's all I know, so what's there for me to be tense about ?
"letting go' works for me on a whole lot of fronts...not all mind you..but hey I ain't dead yet.
I absolutely agree that we all need find our own way.
I prefer to have no masters, gurus, priests, ministers, mullahs, or any of those beliefs that they represent.
For me,the more clutter I remove from my storage bank of feelings, beliefs, societal concepts etc., the sooner the natural, creative, function of the mind can be accessed (never been there, nor done that, so let me change that to 'might' be accessed.
I find that when I have a head full of stuff it helps to verbalize it.
Never know when some response may come my way which turns my whole way of thinking around.
thank's for your thoughts
Babaruss


it sounds to me like a good first step would be to relax about the whole thing, man.. ; ) (I'm no stranger to the need to have a mental explanation for everything..)

I don't think wanting to let go is necessarily attachment, but it is if we feel we need to have the perfect explanation for it. Just take a breath and relax.

Anyway, we all have to find our own "way"; something that makes us feel comfortable and at ease.
The whole explanation can get so tiring and stressful, doncha think?

blessings,

Scott.

[nurturetruth]

https://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii65/sealestial/attachment1.jpg (https://photobucket.com)


Let's not get attached to our attachments here

For then ,we would find ourselves getting attached to our beliefs around attachment!

I am personally one of those people that get so focused on non attachment that I become attached to non attachment .

YouTube - ATTACHMENT vs NON-ATTACHMENT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXX6KMOt4q4&feature=PlayList&p=905BD30C90EABA36&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=14)

:wink:

[Barry]

Let's not get attached to our attachments here

For then ,we would find ourselves getting attached to our believes around attachment!

I am personally one of those people that get so focused on non attachment that I become attached to non attachment . I find myself becoming attached to my beliefs about unattachment .

YouTube - ATTACHMENT vs NON-ATTACHMENT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXX6KMOt4q4&feature=PlayList&p=905BD30C90EABA36&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=14)


Thanks for the video Link, Kali! That was awesome! Puppetji Rocks!
:Mr.Natural: :Mr.Natural: :Mr.Natural:

[Barry]

How can you be committed, for years, without being attached?

Attachment puts your commitment on auto-pilot.
True! And by the syntax of your grammar, it is clear they are not the same.

X puts your Y on Z; X ≠ Y; Q.E.D. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q.E.D.)

[hales]

So does Mr. Natural, Barry.. are they perhaps related? ; )

Keep on Truckin'..
Scott.


Thanks for the video Link, Kali! That was awesome! Puppetji Rocks!
:Mr.Natural: :Mr.Natural: :Mr.Natural:

[Sara S]

It is not life and wealth and power that enslave men, but the cleaving to life and wealth and power. -Buddha (c. 563-483 BCE)



Let's not get attached to our attachments here

For then ,we would find ourselves getting attached to our believes around attachment!

I am personally one of those people that get so focused on non attachment that I become attached to non attachment . I find myself becoming attached to my beliefs about unattachment .

YouTube - ATTACHMENT vs NON-ATTACHMENT (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXX6KMOt4q4&feature=PlayList&p=905BD30C90EABA36&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=14)

[magenta]

I am not attached to being 'right', but I think the idea of non-attachment is about going with the flow.

The eastern philosophy of attachment, as I understand it, is about keeping from being attached to life, the physical/material plane, so as to break the cycle of reincarnation (if that's your cup o' tea), and thus not fearing the inevitable death.

Non- attachment is also about embracing life, whatever challenges it may bring without trying to control everything, without being too attached to the way things are, or the way one might want them to be, in other words: non-attachment from the past or future, and therefore being more present.

[someguy]

So get over it Barry. Let the attachment flow.

Maybe you'll start to enjoy it.

-Jeff
Flow? What flow? Attachment signifies static. There is not any flowing quality attached to the word attachment.

When you are attached to anything, you cease to be free.

[someguy]

Isn't attachment another form of greed?

[magenta]

Isn't attachment another form of greed?

Attachment is greed according to the Buddhist perspective, which is not the only perspective reflected by this community. :heart: I believe that it is more important for each of us to look at the ways that we are attached, maybe even greedy.

[babaruss]

A part of Krishnamurti's approach to awareness is that greed is still greed even when you are desiring to be non-greedy. Both are wanting, and desiring.
babaruss



Isn't attachment another form of greed?

[CSummer]

Karen Walant, a therapist and mother of three, wrote the book, Creating the Capacity for Attachment (do we do this by coating one side with a sticky substance? :wink: ). I prefer words like "connection" or "relationship" over "attachment," which for me doesn't convey the sense of fluidity and flexibility that I believe are essential parts of a healthy relationship.

The following are some quotes, some paraphrasing and some of my own thoughts from an interview with Karen Walant.
Fostering Healthy Attachment - The Natural Child Project (https://www.naturalchild.com/guest/karen_walant.html)
Gratitude to nurturetruth for bringing this to my attention!

In my words, she starts by saying in effect: We raise children to be autonomous and self-reliant and we don't make space or welcome their needs for nurturance, what may be called "dependency" needs (those that can only be met by close, caring contact with another person). This leads to addictive patterns as parents (and others) substitute pacifiers (and many other non-human objects - TV being a major one) for holding, stroking, etc. So the 'softer,' more "connectable" aspects of our beings tend not to be developed. We internalize a rather arid emotional environment and grow up with a sense of scarcity or lack, though this is generally well buried under adaptive - and distracting - beliefs and behaviors. There is not the sense or expectation of acceptance, concern and compassion from others, so we are inclined to keep our deeper needs and feelings hidden.

What she calls "immersive moments" are experiences of deep, nurturing connection that convey to an infant or child that "I am okay:" I am safe, accepted, cared for, as well as valuable, desirable and lovable. This is what I believe enables us to resolve difficult experiences - those in which our needs were not met (for example, falling down and scraping a knee).

In her words: "Our baby falls apart in our arms, and we hold him, comfort him, quiet him."

This is when the baby feels that it is safe to experience all her/his true feeings and needs and that it is all okay and can be seen, heard and accepted with compassion. When we experience that - I am okay! - then we can see that we can let go of the difficult experiences. Without this, the mind tends to hold on to them as a way of protecting us from any more such experiences in the future. Then the mind seeks distraction as a cover over the difficult feelings, unmet needs and negative beliefs that are the left-overs from unresolved experiences.
Lacking such experiences with a parent, we end up feeling alone with our pain and less safe and okay as a person in the world. We are much less likely to be open to our true feelings and needs as they can seem too big and difficult for us to handle alone.

"In fact, I disagree with the widely-held notion that we are born alone, and we die alone, so therefore teach your kids to be alone. "

The truth is that we are connected, so the implication that we are alone and isolated is really false - an illusion that keeps us stuck in our pain and unhealthy patterns of self-distraction.

"A child cries for a reason - not to manipulate his mother, not to be mean, or nasty, or to be a "pain in the neck." "

All behavior arises from some real, valid need (including dropping the bottle repeatedly). If a child's behavior is a problem for a parent, the problem is almost always the parent's inability or unwillingness to respond in a positive way to the child's need(s). This is where the "behaviorist" model is NOT applicable to child rearing, if it leads parents to not respond positively to expressions of need or sadness such as crying (because they don't want to "reinforce" this "undesirable" behavior).

"When the baby cries and his mother responds, the child learns to have trust in the world around him and to have trust in himself."

When a baby's needs are met, she/he internalizes the sense that 'my needs are okay and can be met.' Such a view of self and the world seems much truer and healthier than what is internalized when needs are not met and these experiences go unresolved: which is that my needs are not okay and/or cannot be met.

"If the child has not been responded to, if he has not been attuned to or empathized with, he begins to feel more and more powerless, alienated, and detached."

This is the beginning of our psycho-emotional-relational wounding. All such experiences are resolvable, but for most of us, there is a lot that has not been resolved and that we carry with us through life. It is when we begin to form significant relationships that the pot gets stirred as specific happenings between us and another threaten to "open the can of worms" or bring to light the unmet needs, unexpressed feelings, unexamined beliefs and unquestioned perceptions - and a sense of powerlessness and aloneness - that are associated with these experiences.

In relationships, we try to create conditions in which these wounds can be healed - these experiences resolved, but because we're not aware of this or of what the unmet needs are, we generally do not succeed. Instead, we tend to create situations that open the old wounds and reinforce the negative beliefs. We may then turn to substances that help numb or change how we feel, or we might begin to develop physical symptoms and even disease as we cut off the energy flow (and hence awareness) to parts of our bodies.

"Society (at least in the Western World) has encouraged a number of parenting practices that I call "normative abuse." "Normative," because these are approaches that are sanctioned by society, therefore enacted without any moral discomfort."

The accepted norms of child rearing are in fact very depriving of real human needs, which could be categorized as a kind of passive abuse (if that makes any sense). These practices are passed on from parents to children both through observation and learning as well as due to the fact that it's difficult to give what we ourselves haven't received and so are craving on some unconscious inner level.

"In the psychoanalytic literature, for example, one writer even criticizes a mother who "allows" her baby to become "addicted" to her - can you imagine that? A baby should be "addicted" to his real mother, not to a substitute, plastic pacifier or even to his own thumb!"

Addiction is a substitute for that which will meet our real needs. They don't meet our needs, but just mask over them. We need the caring, compassionate, accepting, supportive attention of another - or other - human being(s) to meet these real human needs. Addictive patterns only keep us stuck where we are and help hold the wounding experiences buried and unresolved.

"Don't forget, we ourselves were parented in a detached manner, with normative abuse as well. So often, despite what we may intellectually know is best, we may still worry when our young children demand a closeness we never experienced in our own childhood. Despite what we know, we worry that he is "too clingy, too needy," and we become afraid that he will never want to become more independent. So, in spite of ourselves, we may push our children away, giving subtle messages that our children should learn to be independent of us. This is a Western worry - in other cultures, children are raised with the expectation that they will always remain near their parents, building a close-knit community rooted in the extended family."

Was this way of parenting encouraged because "independent" people fit in better to the institutional society than do those who are more family or community oriented (the old 'divide and conquer' approach!)? In truth, the more disconnected we feel, the more powerless we seem to be, and the more willing we are to give up our power to authority figures and institutions.

"Babies need to be held - as much as possible, as often as possible. Therefore, I consider the over-use of strollers, playpens, and even cribs to be normative abuse."

These are our real needs. I've read that in some indigenous cultures, infants are held - or in contact with another human - almost continually for the first 14 - 16 months of life.


"The concept of normative abuse implies that intimacy and connectedness are devalued and replaced with social expectations of a self-sufficiency way beyond the baby and young child's ability. When we are not empathic to our children, we create a rift or a separation inside this loving relationship."

When we internalize this lack of intimacy and empathy, we become alienated from ourselves - from parts of our own beings. We then approach life with low expectations for both ourselves and the world, and approach life and relationships from a place of powerlessness instead of from a sense of personal power and value.

"Some parents have the tendency to "overattach." By that I mean that they do not allow enough separateness inside the connectedness of their relationship with their children. In so doing, these parents are not attuning to the very important needs of their children to also have "separate time," or even "separate adventures" away from home."

Solitude for developing a relationship with one's self is also a human need that manifests especially when we feel other needs met. (This is quite different from self-isolation that might be a retreat from difficult relationships - those in which it seems like we cannot get our needs met).

"Healthy attachment allows for separateness as well as connectedness. Freud spoke of an "indissoluble bond," a bond in which we know that "we cannot fall out of this world."

This is what I think of as "internalized connectedness," in which we carry the nurturing, supportive environment within us. The more this is true, the more we can venture out into the world and still feel emotionally secure (I am okay!).

"Psychotherapy is a wonderful place for people to discover the joy of intimacy through putting their thoughts and feelings into words. But all too often, psychotherapists have fallen short of encouraging the attachment process - of encouraging just what it takes to heal someone from their wounds of detachment. The 12-Step programs, such as Alcoholics Anonymous, have done a much better job . . ."

Personally, having done considerable time as a client, I have difficulty imagining feeling a sense of "attachment" with a therapist. It doesn't seem like something I could experience with someone I'm paying to provide me their attention and support. It's much easier for me to imagine this happening in a peer relationship or group, and I have had some tastes of this. Not that I have any trust issues, you understand . . .:)

I would be interested to know if anyone has had "bonding" experiences with a therapist.

I would also be interested to know if anyone actually reads this whole thing! :wink:

[jitterbug]

Here's my :2cents: in this conversation.

Attachment means different things in different contexts. One interpretation is the Zen Buddhist concept of attachment (non-attachment.) That is different from child development attachment theory. Which one was the intention for the discussion of this thread?

Last summer I attended a conference and met Penny Davis from Riverside, CA. She works extensively with foster families, helping children to overcome attachment disorder. I learned why secure attachments with caregivers are the building blocks the precede all future learning. Initially, babies learn that the world is a secure and predictable place when they repeatedly communicate their needs (hungry, wet, tired, cold, etc.) and have a caregiver respond accordingly. When these signals are not attended to consistently, the child does not learn to trust that he/she has a voice in the world. The child shuts down and stops asking. This disrupts future development, ultimately manifesting behavioral and learning disorders.

The encouraging thing that I learned is that with skilled foster families who understand these concepts, children that did not form secure attachments in infancy and early childhood can and do recover.

Here's a link from Penny's web site about attachment (https://www.respectful-relationships2.com/attachment-in-children.html). And here's another about insecure attachment (https://www.respectful-relationships2.com/insecure-attachment.html).

[wings]

There seems to be a lot of attachment to being able to express oneself about attachment. There is even attachment to find approval about this attachment among peers.
Non-attachment seems to come in to play when we see people who don't agree as "other".

[hales]

Maybe for some of us, this is a valuable discussion about issues that we have struggled with.. the difference between spiritual non-attachement, with a sense of unmet needs stemming from early-life patterns, and what kinds of connection are really healthy; another question, for me, is, how does one change patterns after many years?

No one is obligated to read or participate in any thread.. ; )

Scott.


There seems to be a lot of attachment to being able to express oneself about attachment. There is even attachment to find approval about this attachment among peers.
Non-attachment seems to come in to play when we see people who don't agree as "other".

[Neshamah]

Buddhism generally does not claim to be for everyone. Attachments ultimately bring pain because the attachment is ultimately broken, by death if not before. The question is whether the joys those attachments bring in the meantime are worth the pain of loss in the end. The Buddhist approach is to detach now while it is a choice. Others may either deny the future pain, or decide the pain is a fair price for the benefits of the attachment.

Certainly, attachment to a beloved may not always be to the benefit of the beloved. Attachment can lead us to act selfishly rather than unselfishly. On the other hand, I'd be disappointed if someone who loved me was not attached or never put es interests over mine.

The ability to detach is a good skill to have. I have often felt my love for another was purest when I left me out of the equation. Yet, and maybe this is cheating, what lets me detach is the conviction the right mutual attachment is still in the future.

I also believe that the ultimate benefits of attachment cannot be had if the ability to detach is retained. I guess there are levels of attachment, and measured attachment is surely best in most instances, but being decidedly not Buddhist, I believe there is such a thing as healthy, mutual and irrevocable attachment. It just requires a lot of communication and commitment in advance, and the ability to distinguish between who we love and our own ideas about who we love. Attachment to the latter can wreak havoc with commitment to the former.

~ Jessica

[babaruss]

o.k. you got it..I read the whole thing
Babaruss


Karen Walant, a therapist and mother of three, wrote the book, Creating the Capacity for Attachment (do we do this by coating one side with a sticky substance? :wink: ). I prefer words like "connection" or "relationship" over "attachment," which for me doesn't convey the sense of fluidity and flexibility that I believe are essential parts of a healthy relationship.

The following are some quotes, some paraphrasing and some of my own thoughts from an interview with Karen Walant.
Fostering Healthy Attachment - The Natural Child Project (https://www.naturalchild.com/guest/karen_walant.html)
Gratitude to nurturetruth for bringing this to my attention!

In my words, she starts by saying in effect: We raise children to be autonomous and self-reliant and we don't make space or welcome their needs for nurturance, what may be called "dependency" needs (those that can only be met by close, caring contact with another person). This leads to addictive patterns as parents (and others) substitute pacifiers (and many other non-human objects - TV being a major one) for holding, stroking, etc. So the 'softer,' more "connectable" aspects of our beings tend not to be developed. We internalize a rather arid emotional environment and grow up with a sense of scarcity or lack, though this is generally well buried under adaptive - and distracting - beliefs and behaviors. There is not the sense or expectation of acceptance, concern and compassion from others, so we are inclined to keep our deeper needs and feelings hidden.

What she calls "immersive moments" are experiences of deep, nurturing connection that convey to an infant or child that "I am okay:" I am safe, accepted, cared for, as well as valuable, desirable and lovable. This is what I believe enables us to resolve difficult experiences - those in which our needs were not met (for example, falling down and scraping a knee).

In her words: "Our baby falls apart in our arms, and we hold him, comfort him, quiet him."

This is when the baby feels that it is safe to experience all her/his true feeings and needs and that it is all okay and can be seen, heard and accepted with compassion. When we experience that - I am okay! - then we can see that we can let go of the difficult experiences. Without this, the mind tends to hold on to them as a way of protecting us from any more such experiences in the future. Then the mind seeks distraction as a cover over the difficult feelings, unmet needs and negative beliefs that are the left-overs from unresolved experiences.
Lacking such experiences with a parent, we end up feeling alone with our pain and less safe and okay as a person in the world. We are much less likely to be open to our true feelings and needs as they can seem too big and difficult for us to handle alone.

"In fact, I disagree with the widely-held notion that we are born alone, and we die alone, so therefore teach your kids to be alone. "

The truth is that we are connected, so the implication that we are alone and isolated is really false - an illusion that keeps us stuck in our pain and unhealthy patterns of self-distraction.

"A child cries for a reason - not to manipulate his mother, not to be mean, or nasty, or to be a "pain in the neck." "

All behavior arises from some real, valid need (including dropping the bottle repeatedly). If a child's behavior is a problem for a parent, the problem is almost always the parent's inability or unwillingness to respond in a positive way to the child's need(s). This is where the "behaviorist" model is NOT applicable to child rearing, if it leads parents to not respond positively to expressions of need or sadness such as crying (because they don't want to "reinforce" this "undesirable" behavior).

"When the baby cries and his mother responds, the child learns to have trust in the world around him and to have trust in himself."

When a baby's needs are met, she/he internalizes the sense that 'my needs are okay and can be met.' Such a view of self and the world seems much truer and healthier than what is internalized when needs are not met and these experiences go unresolved: which is that my needs are not okay and/or cannot be met.

"If the child has not been responded to, if he has not been attuned to or empathized with, he begins to feel more and more powerless, alienated, and detached."

This is the beginning of our psycho-emotional-relational wounding. All such experiences are resolvable, but for most of us, there is a lot that has not been resolved and that we carry with us through life. It is when we begin to form significant relationships that the pot gets stirred as specific happenings between us and another threaten to "open the can of worms" or bring to light the unmet needs, unexpressed feelings, unexamined beliefs and unquestioned perceptions - and a sense of powerlessness and aloneness - that are associated with these experiences.

In relationships, we try to create conditions in which these wounds can be healed - these experiences resolved, but because we're not aware of this or of what the unmet needs are, we generally do not succeed. Instead, we tend to create situations that open the old wounds and reinforce the negative beliefs. We may then turn to substances that help numb or change how we feel, or we might begin to develop physical symptoms and even disease as we cut off the energy flow (and hence awareness) to parts of our bodies.

"Society (at least in the Western World) has encouraged a number of parenting practices that I call "normative abuse." "Normative," because these are approaches that are sanctioned by society, therefore enacted without any moral discomfort."

The accepted norms of child rearing are in fact very depriving of real human needs, which could be categorized as a kind of passive abuse (if that makes any sense). These practices are passed on from parents to children both through observation and learning as well as due to the fact that it's difficult to give what we ourselves haven't received and so are craving on some unconscious inner level.

"In the psychoanalytic literature, for example, one writer even criticizes a mother who "allows" her baby to become "addicted" to her - can you imagine that? A baby should be "addicted" to his real mother, not to a substitute, plastic pacifier or even to his own thumb!"

Addiction is a substitute for that which will meet our real needs. They don't meet our needs, but just mask over them. We need the caring, compassionate, accepting, supportive attention of another - or other - human being(s) to meet these real human needs. Addictive patterns only keep us stuck where we are and help hold the wounding experiences buried and unresolved.

"Don't forget, we ourselves were parented in a detached manner, with normative abuse as well. So often, despite what we may intellectually know is best, we may still worry when our young children demand a closeness we never experienced in our own childhood. Despite what we know, we worry that he is "too clingy, too needy," and we become afraid that he will never want to become more independent. So, in spite of ourselves, we may push our children away, giving subtle messages that our children should learn to be independent of us. This is a Western worry - in other cultures, children are raised with the expectation that they will always remain near their parents, building a close-knit community rooted in the extended family."

Was this way of parenting encouraged because "independent" people fit in better to the institutional society than do those who are more family or community oriented (the old 'divide and conquer' approach!)? In truth, the more disconnected we feel, the more powerless we seem to be, and the more willing we are to give up our power to authority figures and institutions.

"Babies need to be held - as much as possible, as often as possible. Therefore, I consider the over-use of strollers, playpens, and even cribs to be normative abuse."

These are our real needs. I've read that in some indigenous cultures, infants are held - or in contact with another human - almost continually for the first 14 - 16 months of life.


"The concept of normative abuse implies that intimacy and connectedness are devalued and replaced with social expectations of a self-sufficiency way beyond the baby and young child's ability. When we are not empathic to our children, we create a rift or a separation inside this loving relationship."

When we internalize this lack of intimacy and empathy, we become alienated from ourselves - from parts of our own beings. We then approach life with low expectations for both ourselves and the world, and approach life and relationships from a place of powerlessness instead of from a sense of personal power and value.

"Some parents have the tendency to "overattach." By that I mean that they do not allow enough separateness inside the connectedness of their relationship with their children. In so doing, these parents are not attuning to the very important needs of their children to also have "separate time," or even "separate adventures" away from home."

Solitude for developing a relationship with one's self is also a human need that manifests especially when we feel other needs met. (This is quite different from self-isolation that might be a retreat from difficult relationships - those in which it seems like we cannot get our needs met).

"Healthy attachment allows for separateness as well as connectedness. Freud spoke of an "indissoluble bond," a bond in which we know that "we cannot fall out of this world."

This is what I think of as "internalized connectedness," in which we carry the nurturing, supportive environment within us. The more this is true, the more we can venture out into the world and still feel emotionally secure (I am okay!).

"Psychotherapy is a wonderful place for people to discover the joy of intimacy through putting their thoughts and feelings into words. But all too often, psychotherapists have fallen short of encouraging the attachment process - of encouraging just what it takes to heal someone from their wounds of detachment. The 12-Step programs, such as Alcoholics Anonymous, have done a much better job . . ."

Personally, having done considerable time as a client, I have difficulty imagining feeling a sense of "attachment" with a therapist. It doesn't seem like something I could experience with someone I'm paying to provide me their attention and support. It's much easier for me to imagine this happening in a peer relationship or group, and I have had some tastes of this. Not that I have any trust issues, you understand . . .:)

I would be interested to know if anyone has had "bonding" experiences with a therapist.

I would also be interested to know if anyone actually reads this whole thing! :wink:

[babaruss]

This is of may be quite true, but if there was no 'attachment' to responding.... this would be one dead forum wouldn't it ?

The approval thing is not a fact..... it is just an assumption on your part.

Not agreeing is 'attachment' to your ideas over the other persons.
How can it be other ?

The last line of yours is 'attachment' in spades !!
Non-attachment is when we see people as 'us' as in 'I am that'.
But that may prove to be a whole different discussion
Babaruss


There seems to be a lot of attachment to being able to express oneself about attachment. There is even attachment to find approval about this attachment among peers.
Non-attachment seems to come in to play when we see people who don't agree as "other".

[babaruss]

I appreciate your comment here Scott, because (at least for me) this discussion is valuable.
Everything you mention here fits my 'need' to find healthier ways to be.
The thing about 'changing' patterns has plagued me for years.
Almost everything I tried (to bring about change) tended to reinforce, and strengthen that which I desired to eliminate.
When I started accepting, rather than rejecting (and doing battle with) myself, some of what was not acceptable to me began dropping away.
A combination of mindfulness, and the gentle reminder "I am that" may be what is making these things drop away.
Heavy emphasis here on word 'started', because I start and stop...rise and fall, remember and forget with an almost monotonous regularity.
But as someone out there recently reminded me..."it's all good".
babaruss



Maybe for some of us, this is a valuable discussion about issues that we have struggled with.. the difference between spiritual non-attachement, with a sense of unmet needs stemming from early-life patterns, and what kinds of connection are really healthy; another question, for me, is, how does one change patterns after many years?

No one is obligated to read or participate in any thread.. ; )

Scott.

[babaruss]

Great insights on love here.
I understand...(via teachings mind you, and not life experience) that one can only love when the self is not there.
All else is an exchange system for various forms of safety, or security.
babaruss




Buddhism generally does not claim to be for everyone. Attachments ultimately bring pain because the attachment is ultimately broken, by death if not before. The question is whether the joys those attachments bring in the meantime are worth the pain of loss in the end. The Buddhist approach is to detach now while it is a choice. Others may either deny the future pain, or decide the pain is a fair price for the benefits of the attachment.

Certainly, attachment to a beloved may not always be to the benefit of the beloved. Attachment can lead us to act selfishly rather than unselfishly. On the other hand, I'd be disappointed if someone who loved me was not attached or never put es interests over mine.

The ability to detach is a good skill to have. I have often felt my love for another was purest when I left me out of the equation. Yet, and maybe this is cheating, what lets me detach is the conviction the right mutual attachment is still in the future.

I also believe that the ultimate benefits of attachment cannot be had if the ability to detach is retained. I guess there are levels of attachment, and measured attachment is surely best in most instances, but being decidedly not Buddhist, I believe there is such a thing as healthy, mutual and irrevocable attachment. It just requires a lot of communication and commitment in advance, and the ability to distinguish between who we love and our own ideas about who we love. Attachment to the latter can wreak havoc with commitment to the former.

~ Jessica

[CSummer]

I respond with appreciation for Scott's words - and especially his question: "how does one change patterns after many years?"

I would like to believe patterns can change as a result of healing/resolving the unresolved experience(s) from which these patterns arise. I also believe (based on some personal experiences) that this is possible and is a natural function of the human mind/body that is activated when the conditions are right.

I believe that in all of our relationships, we are seeking to create those conditions that can enable the process of healing and move us toward inner wholeness. Unfortunately, this generally doesn't happen because we're unconscious of the unmet needs we carry with us or of what we need in order to resolve these issues. We also don't know a positive way of creating with another or others that supportive environment, one that makes it more likely we can be deeply and fully present with our selves - with all that is true for us.

What I believe we need is simply to be able to experience the unmet needs being met, e.g., if it's a need for safety, to be able to feel safe. When this happens, the mind can relax, let down it's guards and turn more deeply inward to explore and discover a larger truth. We can co-create an environment that maximizes the likelihood of our being able to experience these needs being met by coming together with the intention of offering what we seek, which is a place of safety, respect, acceptance, genuine caring and compassion, openness and honesty, permission and encouragement (i.e., a place where any of our emotional or relational needs can be met).

I'm reminded of a principle that I read about in a book on Australian aboriginal teachings, the principle of "becoming what you seek." This seems to be how it works in relationships and groups: that we create a place of trust by being open and honest, an accepting atmosphere with an attitude of acceptance, and a sense of mutual respect by dropping our judgments, projections and categorizations and being open to truly seeing and knowing another as who they are.

A few of us may be starting to meet in Sebastopol soon to explore and learn how to create an environment that can support us in our journey to greater self-awareness, acceptance, compassion and understanding. Watch for an announcement under Events . . .

I am attached in an unhealthy way when I'm trying to get a certain outcome or result from what I do and imagine that my happiness depends on getting it, rather than "loving what is" (to use Byron Katie's words). When I'm carrying significant unmet needs - either conscious or unconscious - it is much more challenging for me to release that attachment. When I can experience these needs being met, I can open myself to life and relationships in a more accepting, peaceful way and not feel the need for anything or anyone to be other than as they are.

May we find our way - together!
Clint


Maybe for some of us, this is a valuable discussion about issues that we have struggled with.. the difference between spiritual non-attachement, with a sense of unmet needs stemming from early-life patterns, and what kinds of connection are really healthy; another question, for me, is, how does one change patterns after many years?

No one is obligated to read or participate in any thread.. ; )

Scott.

[wings]

Maybe for some of us, this is a valuable discussion about issues that we have struggled with.. the difference between spiritual non-attachement, with a sense of unmet needs stemming from early-life patterns, and what kinds of connection are really healthy; another question, for me, is, how does one change patterns after many years?

No one is obligated to read or participate in any thread.. ; )

Scott.
Well said, but it seems that people are more attached to Who is saying something as opposed to What is being said .

[jitterbug]

nicely said.



When I started accepting, rather than rejecting (and doing battle with) myself, some of what was not acceptable to me began dropping away.
A combination of mindfulness, and the gentle reminder "I am that" may be what is making these things drop away. ..."it's all good".
babaruss

[hales]

Hi, and thanks, Baba.. was it me who said "It's all good"? ; )

If you haven't heard the new bob dylan album, check out the best song on the album:

YouTube - It's All Good - Bob Dylan (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQgBHIuTCXU)

( I found a live performance the other day, but can't find it now.. wonder if they took the video down for some reason? )

This phrase is stuck in my mind, in Bob Dylans voice, of course .. : )

"It's all good.. "

Scott.


I appreciate your comment here Scott, because (at least for me) this discussion is valuable.
Everything you mention here fits my 'need' to find healthier ways to be.
The thing about 'changing' patterns has plagued me for years.
Almost everything I tried (to bring about change) tended to reinforce, and strengthen that which I desired to eliminate.

Yeah, I can relate!

When I started accepting, rather than rejecting (and doing battle with) myself, some of what was not acceptable to me began dropping away.

Yeah..

A combination of mindfulness, and the gentle reminder "I am that" may be what is making these things drop away.
Heavy emphasis here on word 'started', because I start and stop...rise and fall, remember and forget with an almost monotonous regularity.

Sounds like life, all right.. imagine how god feels.. ; )

But as someone out there recently reminded me..."it's all good".
babaruss

[hales]

>Hi, Clint..


I respond with appreciation for Scott's words - and especially his question: "how does one change patterns after many years?"

I would like to believe patterns can change as a result of healing/resolving the unresolved experience(s) from which these patterns arise. I also believe (based on some personal experiences) that this is possible and is a natural function of the human mind/body that is activated when the conditions are right.

> Me too.. what do you think are the right conditions? Is it possible to create them, or do we just have to wait? ; )

I believe that in all of our relationships, we are seeking to create those conditions that can enable the process of healing and move us toward inner wholeness. Unfortunately, this generally doesn't happen because we're unconscious of the unmet needs we carry with us or of what we need in order to resolve these issues. We also don't know a positive way of creating with another or others that supportive environment, one that makes it more likely we can be deeply and fully present with our selves - with all that is true for us.

>Oh, I see. I do think that once you "ask the correct question", ie: know what you are looking for, you can perhaps find or create the proper environment. It's a choice and it requires continued attention to the goal of a non-violent, loving, nurturing supportive atmosphere, a "space", if you will. Fortunately for us, Sebastopol is a great place for it... unless your belief system prevents you from seeing the bounty before you!

What I believe we need is simply to be able to experience the unmet needs being met, e.g., if it's a need for safety, to be able to feel safe. When this happens, the mind can relax, let down it's guards and turn more deeply inward to explore and discover a larger truth. We can co-create an environment that maximizes the likelihood of our being able to experience these needs being met by coming together with the intention of offering what we seek, which is a place of safety, respect, acceptance, genuine caring and compassion, openness and honesty, permission and encouragement (i.e., a place where any of our emotional or relational needs can be met).

>Yeah.. that's simple enough, isn't it? I experienced that, today at my dance community/class. Then with some good new and old friends afterward. I think a lot of it is in the attitude of appreciation and the intention to create and maintain such an attitude, space, and healing experience as you describe.

I'm reminded of a principle that I read about in a book on Australian aboriginal teachings, the principle of "becoming what you seek." This seems to be how it works in relationships and groups: that we create a place of trust by being open and honest, an accepting atmosphere with an attitude of acceptance, and a sense of mutual respect by dropping our judgments, projections and categorizations and being open to truly seeing and knowing another as who they are.

yeah, or as John Lennon once said, "you can radiate everything you are"

I dig a pony
Well you can celebrate anything you want
Yes you can celebrate anything you want
Oh

I do a road hog
Well you can penetrate any place you go
Yes you can penetrate any place you go
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...

I pick a moon dog
Well you can radiate everything you are
Yes you can radiate everything you are"..

Oh now
I roll a stoney
Well you can imitate everyone you know
Yes you can imitate everyone you know
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...

Ooh now
I feel the wind blow
Well you can indicate everything you see
Yes you can indicate everything you see

Oh now
I dug a pony
Well you can syndicate any boat you row
Yeah you can syndicate any boat you row
I told you so, all I want is you
Everything has got to be just like you want it to
Because...


A few of us may be starting to meet in Sebastopol soon to explore and learn how to create an environment that can support us in our journey to greater self-awareness, acceptance, compassion and understanding. Watch for an announcement under Events . . .

>Cool, I'd like to know more about that.

I am attached in an unhealthy way when I'm trying to get a certain outcome or result from what I do and imagine that my happiness depends on getting it, rather than "loving what is" (to use Byron Katie's words). When I'm carrying significant unmet needs - either conscious or unconscious - it is much more challenging for me to release that attachment. When I can experience these needs being met, I can open myself to life and relationships in a more accepting, peaceful way and not feel the need for anything or anyone to be other than as they are.

> Do you think a first step might be noticing the feeling of not feeling met?
I guess loving what is must include what is happening and how I am feeling, huh. But, I think the truth is sometimes I have to be with my feeling of neediness or frustration, then I can get to a point of love and acceptance, but not before I actually recognise what is true at this moment.

May we find our way - together!

>sounds good, brother.

Clint

>Scott.

[hales]

I hope no one minds that I'm in a musical state of mind.. I had a rich weekned of music and dance.. sort of got my endorphins pumpin'.. : )

Scott.

Cosmic Dancer/ T-Rex

<!--Artist: T-Rex--> <!--Song: Cosmic Dancer--> I was dancing when I was twelve
I was dancing when I was aaah
I danced myself right out the womb
Is it strange to dance so soon
I danced myself right out the womb

I was dancing when I was eight
Is it strange to dance so late
I danced myself into the tomb
Is it strange to dance so soon
I danced myself into the tomb

Is it wrong to understand
The fear that dwells inside a man
What's it like to be a loon
I liken it to a balloon

I danced myself out of the womb
Is it strange to dance so soon
I danced myself into the tomb
But when again once more

I danced myself out of the womb
Is it strange to dance so soon
I danced myself out of the womb.

[babaruss]

Yep, it was you who said "it's all good".
And I did go to the site and listen.
Rarity for me as I prefer silence to song.
Baba


Hi, and thanks, Baba.. was it me who said "It's all good"? ; )

If you haven't heard the new bob dylan album, check out the best song on the album:

YouTube - It's All Good - Bob Dylan (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQgBHIuTCXU)

( I found a live performance the other day, but can't find it now.. wonder if they took the video down for some reason? )

This phrase is stuck in my mind, in Bob Dylans voice, of course .. : )

"It's all good.. "

Scott.

[salimazm]

Thank you so much for this post.
Yes, we are born in and into relationship. The ancients have always known this! It goes far beyond the words attachment and the theories of the object relations theorists of the 1900's in Europe. In ancient villages the music of the heart and soul sang out as a baby was born into the village of grandmothers and grand fathers. The baby welcomed to earth, water, fire, nature, mineral, hearth home, and mother's arms. the baby went with her or a family member everywhere and was carried close, participating in all activities, whether dancing or working. This welcoming and nurturing came naturally in every non-industrialized culture. It was only needed to be rediscovered when we lost the natural ways.

How is it found again? It is found when we rediscover our connections to nature and to our human roots, our feelings, our dreams and our longings.

It can be rediscovered in therapy. In a relationship that fosters our rediscovery of our deepest relationship with ourselves. We change the patterns of relationship when we change the pattern of relationship to our innermost self and the stories or patterns we have internalized and live by day to day.

A guide, or therapist can be helpful in this journey because they can see with us into ourselves with a different set of eyes and hold the light while we walk the path into and out of self and back into the world of our relations once more. Just another light who can hold a safe space for self discovery.

This is not an advertisement..but if you want to look me up please do.

Salima Zimmerman, Psy.D.
PSB 32629
Supervised by Ralph Ames, PhD.
PSY. 21809

707-889-8028

[CSummer]

Hi Scott and all,

One thing I left out of my last post has to do with how we make use of a supportive environment to heal or resolve what is unresolved within us. The first use we make of it is to shift our attention from the usual thoughts and activities that the mind uses to keep us distracted to what we are experiencing within us right here, right now. We use it as an opportunity to tune in to what is true for us on deeper levels, starting with what we're feeling (sensations, emotions) in our bodies. We seek to be as present with ourselves as possible, which is quite different from how most of us spend most of our time.

So this is much different than getting together to hang out with friends. We do want to get to know each other on deeper levels than is commonly possible as part of the process of building a safe, supportive environment. More importantly, we want to get to know ourselves and to reconnect with and reclaim all the "selves" that make up our inner "community." What this requires is spending time together with no distractions, topics or activities other than what is true for you and for me and what needs to be expressed to deepen our connection with our selves and each other.

If there are more than two of us meeting, then most of our time will be spent offering quality attention to others. As we're doing this, we continue to monitor what is happening within - what sensations we might feel, what emotions or needs might be arising, what might need to be expressed when it's our turn to receive attention. Ideally, we do this with an attitude of total self-acceptance, permission and compassion, knowing that all of our needs and feelings are okay and can be expressed.

When we are receiving the groups attention, we make use of that to support us in bringing as much of our awareness within as possible - as an opportunity to go more deeply into ourselves than we may have ever gone. I find it really helps to stay attuned to my body and what it feels like doing - alert to any preferences that may become evident. As I follow my inner sensations and energy, I can even go into a trance state that can enable me to find and follow my inner guide. This has led me to major shifts in self-awareness and understanding as I revisited the early parts of my life (even pre-birth) and was able to see a larger, more complete picture of some core experiences.

So, like meditation, it is a highly focused way of being together. Unlike meditation, there is the added dimension of an extraordinary co-created environment that can both bring up our deeper needs and feelings and make it more likely that we can experience those needs being met. This opens the possibility of awareness expanding into those areas of consciousness that we're formerly considered strictly off limits - that were kept well hidden (out of sight and out of mind). Also unlike most meditative practices, movement is encouraged as we follow our body's inner signals.

(My songs: Oh lord, please don't let me be misunderstood . . .
followed by - Let it be, let it be . . . )




>Hi, Clint..

>Scott.

[Braggi]

It is not life and wealth and power that enslave men, but the cleaving to life and wealth and power. -Buddha (c. 563-483 BCE)

Gods, what nonsense. From a man that supposedly abandoned his wife and children.

Is it the Buddha's wisdom that we should just die so we may become free? Suicide as the ultimate in practicing non-attachment?

I'll take life and family over avoiding responsibility.

You've been busy, my friends. Lots of discussion here. Anybody seen the wisdom in attachment and the failures of attempting non-attachment?

Puppet Ji takes the cake so far in the sharing of wisdom. I bow to His compassionate teachings. Thanks for sharing the URL attachment Kali.

Back to reading posts! This one I was just too attached to answering before going on.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

Flow? What flow? Attachment signifies static. There is not any flowing quality attached to the word attachment.

When you are attached to anything, you cease to be free.

My attachment to my snow skis allows me a flowing quality nobody could understand without having had the experience.

My metaphorical attachment to life allows me to quickly shift with minimal effort when reality changes in such a way that I must move in order to protect myself or another, or in order to take best advantage of any situation.

I could sit in bliss and non-attachment as a tree falls on my head and kills me. I would rather grab my life, which I'm quite attached to, and step out of the way. Then I will have building materials and firewood to warm my new home as well as mulch for the garden.

My attachments allow me to surf reality without needing to control every aspect of it. My experience and my training allow me to experience the bliss of living fully in the moment while building a future based on lessons of the past and visions of a better world for myself, my family and for all.

I am probably one of the most "free" people you would ever meet. I'm just being honest about my attachments and am doing my best to honor them fully.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

Isn't attachment another form of greed?

And isn't projection a wonderful thing?

Perhaps some self reflection is in order.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

A part of Krishnamurti's approach to awareness is that greed is still greed even when you are desiring to be non-greedy. Both are wanting, and desiring.
babaruss

Another useless non-teaching. This is why I'm always suspicious of "teachers" until I've gotten a few good "teachings" in a row from them.

I haven't got time to spin my wheels in this way.

Oh well.

-Jeff

[someguy]

My attachment to my snow skis allows me a flowing quality nobody could understand without having had the experience.

My metaphorical attachment to life allows me to quickly shift with minimal effort when reality changes in such a way that I must move in order to protect myself or another, or in order to take best advantage of any situation.

I could sit in bliss and non-attachment as a tree falls on my head and kills me. I would rather grab my life, which I'm quite attached to, and step out of the way. Then I will have building materials and firewood to warm my new home as well as mulch for the garden.

My attachments allow me to surf reality without needing to control every aspect of it. My experience and my training allow me to experience the bliss of living fully in the moment while building a future based on lessons of the past and visions of a better world for myself, my family and for all.

I am probably one of the most "free" people you would ever meet. I'm just being honest about my attachments and am doing my best to honor them fully.

-Jeff

theres a big difference between caring for something and being attached to it.

[someguy]

And isn't projection a wonderful thing?

Perhaps some self reflection is in order.

-Jeff
SO how am i projecting greed?

[someguy]

Another useless non-teaching. This is why I'm always suspicious of "teachers" until I've gotten a few good "teachings" in a row from them.

I haven't got time to spin my wheels in this way.

Oh well.

-Jeff
I would do a little research on krishnamurti before saying things like this.

[Braggi]

... "Healthy attachment allows for separateness as well as connectedness. Freud spoke of an "indissoluble bond," a bond in which we know that "we cannot fall out of this world."
... The more this is true, the more we can venture out into the world and still feel emotionally secure (I am okay!). ...

Good post. I like the notion of awareness of our bonds and the fact that healthy bonds make for a fruitful life. This awareness is the essence of feeling grounded, and by extension, the basis of good mental heath.


... "Psychotherapy is a wonderful place for people to discover the joy of intimacy through putting their thoughts and feelings into words. But all too often, psychotherapists have fallen short of encouraging the attachment process - of encouraging just what it takes to heal someone from their wounds of detachment. The 12-Step programs, such as Alcoholics Anonymous, have done a much better job . . ."

Wow, uh, AA certainly fosters attachment ... to AA. I don't think that's a very healthy attachment. A healthy theraputic relationship is quite different from AA.


... I would be interested to know if anyone has had "bonding" experiences with a therapist. ...

My wife is a therapist and I can assure you a whole lot of people become attached; occasionally even in a healthy way. The vast majority of therapists we are aware of have their own attachment issues, sometimes around attachment to fees for service, and are risky people to learn healthy attachment patterns from. When someone tells you they've been in therapy once a week for five years with the same therapist a huge red flag should go up. Now that person needs a new therapist to help them break the unhealthy attachment with the old therapist. The old therapist should ask themselves why they were unable to impart their wisdom to their patient in five stinking years. A therapist should be able to prepare their patient for life in the real world in a reasonable amount of time, assuming the patient will ever be able to live "on their own."


... I would also be interested to know if anyone actually reads this whole thing! :wink:

Yeah, but now I need a cup of coffee.

-Jeff

[babaruss]

Wow Jeff, while I'm struggling to grasp the concept "I am that",
you seem to be saying 'I am all that and more !!
Is there any hope that someone who posts here will live up
to your most excellent way of being.
Grateful to see you hold yourself in such high esteem, but I would
like to see you throw a few crumbs to us lesser folk every now
and again.
baba



Another useless non-teaching. This is why I'm always suspicious of "teachers" until I've gotten a few good "teachings" in a row from them.

I haven't got time to spin my wheels in this way.

Oh well.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

SO how am i projecting greed?

Here's your quote:

Isn't attachment another form of greed?

Is that how you see it? Is that what other people are doing? (In your mind.) Why do you feel this way?

The answer for me is: no. I don't think so. Perhaps from time to time, but generally no. I'm not a real greedy person. I can afford that partly because I'm pretty well blessed in this life. Assuming someone who revels in their attachments (a well cared for newborn?) is greedy assumes something about the assumer.

-Jeff

[someguy]

Here's your quote:


Is that how you see it? Is that what other people are doing? (In your mind.) Why do you feel this way?

The answer for me is: no. I don't think so. Perhaps from time to time, but generally no. I'm not a real greedy person. I can afford that partly because I'm pretty well blessed in this life. Assuming someone who revels in their attachments (a well cared for newborn?) is greedy assumes something about the assumer.

-Jeff

attachment is greed. when you are attached to a person, idea, or thing, you will do anything to feel secure in that attachment. right? so you become ambitious, always striving to maintain your attachments and sense of security. often the attached person does things that are harmful to themselves or others while striving to maintain that attachment. which is all very greedy behavior.

since your description of attachment seems to only be addressing healthy relationships id like to ask you what you would call it when someone becomes attached in the way that i described above?

up to some point its a healthy thing for a child to be attached to a mother for nourishment and to have their needs met. but we are all still attached to nourishment, are we not? at least our bodies are. But when the human mind is cognitive of its emotional attachments, or attachment to ideaologies, or even relationships, it can either remain attached to those things and continue on the path of all human kind(which is chaotic), or it can put aside its attachments and live free of conditioned thought.

[Braggi]

Wow Jeff, while I'm struggling to grasp the concept "I am that",
you seem to be saying 'I am all that and more !!
Is there any hope that someone who posts here will live up
to your most excellent way of being.
Grateful to see you hold yourself in such high esteem, but I would
like to see you throw a few crumbs to us lesser folk every now
and again.
baba

That's funny baba. Not sure what you're reading or reading into it, but my comment on the Krishnamurti quote just means I don't have the time to spend hours, days or a lifetime contemplating the sound of one hand clapping.

I'm clapping with both hands.

-Jeff

[someguy]

The answer for me is: no. I don't think so. Perhaps from time to time, but generally no. I'm not a real greedy person. I can afford that partly because I'm pretty well blessed in this life.

-Jeff
So its all up to who can afford to be greedy or not with you? It seems to me that you take every opportunity to brag about how great your life is. Humility is a great to characteristic have, especially when you can afford it.

[babaruss]

My children usually clapped both hands after going 'poop' and then I'd tell them what a good boy, or girl, they were.
And what a good boy you are too Jeff !!
Baba


That's funny baba. Not sure what you're reading or reading into it, but my comment on the Krishnamurti quote just means I don't have the time to spend hours, days or a lifetime contemplating the sound of one hand clapping.

I'm clapping with both hands.

-Jeff

[babaruss]

Got a private email from a fan of yours who thinks I'm talking dirty to you and about you.
Since she wrote privately I'll have to give her a pass.

Still I'll go back over what I wrote in response to what appeared to be your dismissive approach to everyone who attempted to discuss attachment.

My feelings are simple...why make a stink with those of us who care to discuss the issue of attachment (by poo poo-ing the thoughts of everyone with whom you disagree) ?

We all have lives to live Jeff, yet some of us also follow teachings, or spiritual ideas which bring us pleasure/enlightenment/growth. For us it may be much like the enjoyment/pleasure you derive from being well off, having a loving wife, a new baby, and all else you mentioned.
I think that your life (as you described it) is wonderful, and am delighted to hear you expressing such enjoyment with that life.

I decided to draw an indelible image for you with hopes you'd get the idea
that a dismissive approach to what other may cherish was creating a stink.
Baba


That's funny baba. Not sure what you're reading or reading into it, but my comment on the Krishnamurti quote just means I don't have the time to spend hours, days or a lifetime contemplating the sound of one hand clapping.

I'm clapping with both hands.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

attachment is greed. when you are attached to a person, idea, or thing, you will do anything to feel secure in that attachment. right? so you become ambitious, always striving to maintain your attachments and sense of security. often the attached person does things that are harmful to themselves or others while striving to maintain that attachment. which is all very greedy behavior. ...

That's how some people operate at some times, but not everybody and not always. Getting back to the psychological notion of "projection," if you have a weakness in yourself that you don't like, you are likely to clearly see that weakness in other people or even to think that other people have that weakness even if they don't, because you can't imagine people being any other way.

We're all different. We all think in different ways. We all take in teachings and experiences and these color our interface with other people and the rest of the world. None of us operates without filters and assumptions.

There is something in the paragraph above that displays a teaching that you bought into that I think is insidious. It's best if this kind of thinking is brought into conscious awareness. If you can see your projection as it arises you can question it yourself, before you offend someone who is innocent, or who is at a different level of awareness than you are.

Everybody doesn't think like I do, that's pretty clear. I do try to examine my own thought process when I think ill of another. It took me a long time to understand the concept of projection. It's one of the most valuable lessons of my life.


... since your description of attachment seems to only be addressing healthy relationships id like to ask you what you would call it when someone becomes attached in the way that i described above? ...

I'm saying attachments can be healthy, and that good mental health is based on healthy attachments. What you described above is aberrant behavior, not "normal" and certainly not healthy. Conscious awareness goes a long way toward achieving healthy, balanced attachments.


... when the human mind is cognitive of its emotional attachments, or attachment to ideaologies, or even relationships, it can either remain attached to those things and continue on the path of all human kind(which is chaotic), or it can put aside its attachments and live free of conditioned thought.

You've taken a leap right off the map. The path of all human kind is chaotic? Is this your projection or is this based on some erroneous teaching? Human kind has become, if anything, homogenous and regimented. We could use a whole lot more chaos in some people's thinking.

Are you telling me that giving up relationships and emotions will make you free? ... of conditioned thought? Please explain. What is it that makes you feel so trapped? I think conditioned thought is something to be aware of but notions of freedom are quite individual. Your definition might be a whole lot different from someone else's.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

So its all up to who can afford to be greedy or not with you? It seems to me that you take every opportunity to brag about how great your life is. Humility is a great to characteristic have, especially when you can afford it.

someguy, I doubt you'd want to exchange the traumas I've experienced in my life for your traumas. I've been through some intense shit. So intense I'd never wish them on anyone, and I do mean anyone.

One of the ways I've maintained my sanity and a decent quality of life is through counting my blessings. I do it every day. Sometimes I do it all day long. That's an important part of my spiritual path.

Perhaps that's one good reason I'm as pleased with my life as I am. In fact, I'm happy enough, I like to share my happiness with other people. That's the main reason I'm writing in this thread. I'd like to share my happiness with you.

If you can learn anything about why I'm happy, won't that be a benefit to you? Maybe. I hope so. I'm also here to learn what makes other people happy, and I have learned a lot here. That's one more blessing I'm grateful for.

Thanks,

-Jeff

[Braggi]

... I decided to draw an indelible image for you with hopes you'd get the idea
that a dismissive approach to what other may cherish was creating a stink.
Baba

So Baba, why are you so attached to this stink?

Not everyone can smell it.

-Jeff

[someguy]

someguy, I doubt you'd want to exchange the traumas I've experienced in my life for your traumas. I've been through some intense shit. So intense I'd never wish them on anyone, and I do mean anyone.

One of the ways I've maintained my sanity and a decent quality of life is through counting my blessings. I do it every day. Sometimes I do it all day long. That's an important part of my spiritual path.

Perhaps that's one good reason I'm as pleased with my life as I am. In fact, I'm happy enough, I like to share my happiness with other people. That's the main reason I'm writing in this thread. I'd like to share my happiness with you.

If you can learn anything about why I'm happy, won't that be a benefit to you? Maybe. I hope so. I'm also here to learn what makes other people happy, and I have learned a lot here. That's one more blessing I'm grateful for.

Thanks,

-Jeff
Well Jeff, youre a dissmissive a-hole, you talk down to people, you gloat about your happiness, and you think because you are happy and have it all figured out, you must be right. So if these are the characteristics that make you a proud Jeff, be proud, Jeff, but your not fooling me.

You think that when someone brings up a point about something you disagree with, that you can turn it around on them and say that theyre just projecting their own deep seated emotional problems. I dont think that is a very logical thought process to just assume that im projecting things. Maybe youre the one projecting, and so you see me as being the one projecting...WE could go in circles with this sh#t all day long! WHy are we wasting our time on this nonsense!?! This issue is transparent, and so are you. You'll never change being the above description. Chao.

[Braggi]

... Still I'll go back over what I wrote in response to what appeared to be your dismissive approach to everyone who attempted to discuss attachment. ...

My feelings are simple...why make a stink with those of us who care to discuss the issue of attachment (by poo poo-ing the thoughts of everyone with whom you disagree) ? ...

Baba, I was dismissive of a quote from Krishnamurti that was a damned if you do damned if you don't statement. So what? It was well worth dismissing. A dismissive approach? Maybe. If guilty, mea culpa. But this thread is about sharing our different perspectives on attachment. Yes?

I've made a challenge in public to a teaching that doesn't work for me. I'm seeing if anyone can defend the notion that non-attachment is somehow superior to attachment, define them how you will. I've made some statements that more clearly define my attachments and how they work for me; not against me. My comments were dismissed with no logical support, and I was called names for my efforts.

I've expressed what's true for me here, pretty openly and freely. I knew it was a risk when I took it. Some here are pretty attached to their non-attachment, that's clear.

Guess we can't talk about it.

-Jeff

[magenta]

This is my attempt to continue this discussion on attachment:

The spiritual meaning of 'attachment', implies that the goal is to transcend the physical form (body&mindstuff), and while not being attached to the idea of non-attachment, use this perspective to come to a deeper understanding.

As it has been expressed, 'attachment' in the context of relationships is not necessarily unhealthy, rather that the concept of attachment/non-attachment isn't limited to interpersonal relationships.:heart:

[Barry]

...
I've expressed what's true for me here, pretty openly and freely. I knew it was a risk when I took it. Some here are pretty attached to their non-attachment, that's clear.

Guess we can't talk about it.


You seem pretty attached to your attachment, Jeff!

Well, at least you are consistent! :wink:

And, if I may, I think it shows one of the dark sides of being attached to a certain something, is that it can make you less open to other things, POV's, values, whatever...

Thanks for the clear demonstration!

[babaruss]

I can not/will not ever tell you what it was that you meant for us to hear by what you wrote. To even attempt would be sheer folly.
I can only tell you how I interpreted it....which I did.

I did not see 'a damned if you do or damned if you don't' situation in the Krishnamurtie statement, nor did there have to be one.
There are many ways in which to respond to an issue of discussion (which do not disparage another persons point of view).
The point shared regarding 'greed' (a word Krishnamurtie once used to explain attachment/non-attachment could not have been any kind of a threat to the kind of attachment you shared in regards to how you feel about your family, job, life style, etc.

You are right on about sharing different perspectives. I had thought that was what was in process when we seemed to have strayed off course.
Sharing different perspectives is what I enjoy most about being a part of Wacco B.B.

There was not, as far as I could tell, a 'challenge to a teaching' so much as a dismissal of 'someguy's' point of view....again..this was what I interpreted
as a result of reading your comments.

Saying 'so what' followed by 'mea culpa'...left me wondering which you really meant.
Your concepts/ideas/views were (as far as I am concerned) never dismissed.
If anything you added a dimension to the discussion of 'attachment' which had not crossed my mind.
I'm not sure who called you names, but I did try to get playful (and at your expense).

I did not resist the sound of two hands clapping remark which was shot across my bow, (and of course paid for that bit of foolishness by getting a nasty email from one of your fans ).
I apologize for those remarks.

I hope I don't become so attached to an issue which surfaces on this forum that I deny another person his/her point of view.
So let's continue with this discussion, and see if there is some 'fun and profit' in it (as I suggested the first time out).
I'm profiting from the mistakes I make here...so there's the 'profit' aspect.
I'm way short on the 'fun' aspect though....hopefully that will come pretty soon.
Baba





Baba, I was dismissive of a quote from Krishnamurti that was a damned if you do damned if you don't statement. So what? It was well worth dismissing. A dismissive approach? Maybe. If guilty, mea culpa. But this thread is about sharing our different perspectives on attachment. Yes?

I've made a challenge in public to a teaching that doesn't work for me. I'm seeing if anyone can defend the notion that non-attachment is somehow superior to attachment, define them how you will. I've made some statements that more clearly define my attachments and how they work for me; not against me. My comments were dismissed with no logical support, and I was called names for my efforts.

I've expressed what's true for me here, pretty openly and freely. I knew it was a risk when I took it. Some here are pretty attached to their non-attachment, that's clear.

Guess we can't talk about it.

-Jeff

[Braggi]

... And, if I may, I think it show's one of the dark sides of being h attached to a certain something, is that it can make you less open to other things, POV's, values, whatever...

Thanks for the clear demonstration!

Wait, Barry, I don't think I've been offered anything to be open to. Perhaps I missed it, but I just saw a lot of negative stuff and nonsense. What POV? What values? Where are the positives? Why should a person choose a path of non-attachment? Who came up with this idea and why? Who is served by this idea? Who is empowered and at what cost?

I hoped for better.

-Jeff

[CSummer]

I appreciate a lot the first part of your post, Salima. It seems like a beautiful description of life as it could be, that we can dream of and seek to re-create.

You wrote:

> A guide, or therapist can be helpful in this journey because they can see with us into ourselves with a different set of eyes and hold the light while we walk the path into and out of self and back into the world of our relations once more. Just another light who can hold a safe space for self discovery.

I don't want to rain on your parade, but my experience is that no one can accompany me on the inner journey that seems so vitally necessary for restoring my inner wholeness. Another could - as you say - hold a safe space for that exploration, but they could also interfere with the process that needs to happen by "trying" to be helpful. Sometimes I think this is the problem with professional psychotherapy: that the therapist thinks they have to do something to earn their (often rather high) fee. And then their efforts to be helpful may not be helpful at all!

I've read that peer counseling can be about as effective as professional, and I tend to believe it's true, having experienced both. For those who cannot offer what they're seeking, e.g., a caring, compassionate, supportive presence, paying someone for that probably makes sense. For the rest of us, it seems silly that we don't just come together and be there with each other, co-creating that place of safety, respect and mutual support that welcomes all of who we are back into awareness - and into the dance of life.

I don't mean to be promoting my way, but . . . :wink: . . .stay tuned!



Thank you so much for this post.
Yes, we are born in and into relationship. The ancients have always known this! It goes far beyond the words attachment and the theories of the object relations theorists of the 1900's in Europe. In ancient villages the music of the heart and soul sang out as a baby was born into the village of grandmothers and grand fathers. The baby welcomed to earth, water, fire, nature, mineral, hearth home, and mother's arms. the baby went with her or a family member everywhere and was carried close, participating in all activities, whether dancing or working. This welcoming and nurturing came naturally in every non-industrialized culture. It was only needed to be rediscovered when we lost the natural ways.

How is it found again? It is found when we rediscover our connections to nature and to our human roots, our feelings, our dreams and our longings.

It can be rediscovered in therapy. In a relationship that fosters our rediscovery of our deepest relationship with ourselves. We change the patterns of relationship when we change the pattern of relationship to our innermost self and the stories or patterns we have internalized and live by day to day.

A guide, or therapist can be helpful in this journey because they can see with us into ourselves with a different set of eyes and hold the light while we walk the path into and out of self and back into the world of our relations once more. Just another light who can hold a safe space for self discovery.

This is not an advertisement..but if you want to look me up please do.

Salima Zimmerman, Psy.D.
PSB 32629
Supervised by Ralph Ames, PhD.
PSY. 21809

707-889-8028

[CSummer]

Reading this (below), I feel both appreciation and exasperation. I wonder, where is the compassion in labeling attachment that is unhealthy "greed." To me, this seems the same as labeling it "bad," and is just a way of distancing ourselves from what is true for us. I totally agree that there are forms of attachment that are quite unhealthy, especially those that lead us to abandon ourselves or in any way not be true to ourselves.

> But when the human mind is cognitive of its emotional attachments, or attachment to ideaologies, or even relationships, it can either remain attached to those things and continue on the path of all human kind(which is chaotic), or it can put aside its attachments and live free of conditioned thought.

Yes, when we are aware that we are emotionally attached in an unhealthy way, then we have a choice - we have options. When we're not aware of this, then we don't. Will it help to label ourselves "greedy," or will this just distance us from the needy, wounded parts of ourselves from which our compulsive or addictive behavior arises? My sense is that we need to be with ourselves with total acceptance, compassion and allow ourselves to be as we are, without judgments or condemning ourselves if we seek greater self-awareness and understanding that can lead to releasing unhealthy attachments.

I'm aware of some feeling of sadness as I think of how we keep ourselves stuck with negative self-judgments, by telling ourselves we "should" be other than as we are. Here I sit, f*cked up as can be, and I don't see how, right now, I can be any other way! Yet I do have the option of telling myself that I'm okay, just as I am, and caring for myself - even with all my wounds.


attachment is greed. when you are attached to a person, idea, or thing, you will do anything to feel secure in that attachment. right? so you become ambitious, always striving to maintain your attachments and sense of security. often the attached person does things that are harmful to themselves or others while striving to maintain that attachment. which is all very greedy behavior.

since your description of attachment seems to only be addressing healthy relationships id like to ask you what you would call it when someone becomes attached in the way that i described above?

up to some point its a healthy thing for a child to be attached to a mother for nourishment and to have their needs met. but we are all still attached to nourishment, are we not? at least our bodies are. But when the human mind is cognitive of its emotional attachments, or attachment to ideaologies, or even relationships, it can either remain attached to those things and continue on the path of all human kind(which is chaotic), or it can put aside its attachments and live free of conditioned thought.

[gotbliss]

Hi,
I'm new here. Judging by the length of the thread, I guess its safe to say we are attached to viewpoints and verbiage. To be non-attached is not to exist. I'm attached to bliss - it can become addicting. Check out my modest website at ourgreatbliss.org
Free the bliss!

[magenta]

ok, so I am attached to contemplation, perhaps over-intellectualizing, discovering/creating my own truth, and to the process of growth, to name a few. :): If that means being attached to a topic - so be it.
yet, I also now see Braggi's point about how 'non-attachment' isn't necessarily any more beneficial than 'attachment', or the 'attachment of being non-attached '(whew, I'm dizzy). wouldn't that be like saying one path is better than the other?

[Braggi]

... wouldn't that be like saying one path is better than the other?

In a word: yes. Thanks for saying so. If someone thinks I'm wrong, I'm willing to engage in social intercourse, right here in front of Goddess and everybody, to support my opinion.

I do not believe all spiritual paths are created equal nor do I believe they all lead to the same place.

A path of conscious attachment makes a lot of sense to me. One of the things I'm attached to is learning and growing (oops, two things), so I'm interested in other perspectives as well.

-Jeff

[magenta]

I do not believe all spiritual paths are created equal nor do I believe they all lead to the same place. -Jeff

am I interpreting this the way you intended? if paths are not equal, and one is better than the other...well, what, in your opinion is the better path?

what resonates with me is "paths are many, truth is one".
truth is not a 'place', but if you mean destination, what other destination is there besides truth? or am I getting way off topic here?:heart:

[Braggi]

... what resonates with me is "paths are many, truth is one".
truth is not a 'place', but if you mean destination, what other destination is there besides truth? or am I getting way off topic here?:heart:

I think you're close enough.

If a path is built of lies, or misunderstandings (a generous description of some religions), you will have trouble taking it to "truth."

If the dogma of a group describes everyone else as an enemy, it is unlikely to lead to peace.

I think that living in truth, if enough people do it, or even strive to do it, will bring us to peace.

We're far from peace, and truth, because so many are on paths that divide us.

-Jeff

[someguy]

About paths... How have any of you created your own path? Your all very quick to dismiss or even to accept what is being said. You never stop to think critically about what is being said. So right there you are completly cut off from truth. And it is your attachments what cause you to accept or reject these ideas. If you can not see this concept intellectually we are stuck and must examine it further. I will walk anyone through it if they so please.

You cant just say that you think living in truth will bring us peace, Braggi. How do you know that? Have you ever stopped to really examine that idea without latching on to it and believing or (on the other hand) just dismissing it without investigation?

And i say to Braggi, why is it when I said earlier that the world is in chaos and you said gosh golly no! but now you say "were far from peace and truth". Whats further from peace and truth than chaos???? And I also like how you know why the world is far from peace and truth. Drop all your assumptions for a bit and really examine critically with all your energy into what you say, and why. Also, when we are talking about truth, its best to leave words like "believe" at the door.

[Braggi]

About paths... How have any of you created your own path? ...

I would like to answer this but it will be a very long post. I have a feeling I'm a lot older than you are (I don't know that). I've been building my path consciously for a very long time.


... And i say to Braggi, why is it when I said earlier that the world is in chaos and you said gosh golly no! but now you say "were far from peace and truth". Whats further from peace and truth than chaos???? ...

And here again I wonder how old you are. You seem to not know history. The most organized, regimented society in history was World War II Germany. That wasn't very peaceful, now was it? It isn't organization that brings peace, but truth. The Woodstock concert featured 350,000 people with no security guards, no organization to speak of, some would have called it near chaos. And there wasn't a single bloody nose reported to the medical tent which was busy helping people that took too many drugs and a couple of women giving birth. Yes, chaos can be peaceful and order can be a precursor to war.

The difference is that The Third Reich was built on a pyramid of lies and the people at Woodstock understood they were all brothers and sisters with shared interests, which was the truth.

There's more to say about your post but I gotta run.

Thanks for the more even tone in your post.

I'm really not trying to piss you off.

-Jeff

[babaruss]

I'm in complete agreement with this.
baba


;...(major snip here)...when we are talking about truth, its best to leave words like "believe" at the door.

[someguy]

I would like to answer this but it will be a very long post. I have a feeling I'm a lot older than you are (I don't know that). I've been building my path consciously for a very long time.



And here again I wonder how old you are. You seem to not know history. The most organized, regimented society in history was World War II Germany. That wasn't very peaceful, now was it? It isn't organization that brings peace, but truth. The Woodstock concert featured 350,000 people with no security guards, no organization to speak of, some would have called it near chaos. And there wasn't a single bloody nose reported to the medical tent which was busy helping people that took too many drugs and a couple of women giving birth. Yes, chaos can be peaceful and order can be a precursor to war.

The difference is that The Third Reich was built on a pyramid of lies and the people at Woodstock understood they were all brothers and sisters with shared interests, which was the truth.

There's more to say about your post but I gotta run.

Thanks for the more even tone in your post.

I'm really not trying to piss you off.

-Jeff

I never said organization equals peace, first of all. I dont know where in the world that theory came from. So you say chaos arose from woodstock, and hey, that aint all that bad, those guys were peaceful. Sure they didnt break out into extreme violence like those nazis. But what did they do? They celebrated life by dancing and taking drugs etc... Does that mean that woodstocks mentality is the truth and path towards peace? Is that the positive chaos that makes up great societies, and a peaceful world?

Although there are no current accidents on the freeway and at glance it doesnt seem chaotic but rather peaceful, 'some guy' is drunk and talking on his cell phone. And 'some girl' is driving for the first time and shes nervous and starts swerving. maybe some kids are throwing rocks at passing cars. Maybe I just flipped some motorcyclist off. What im trying to say is that although on the surface things may seem peaceful or just non chaotic, there is lots of chaos and confusion going on all the time. Like woodstock, Im sure on the surface it seemed great, no injuries blah blah blah.... but in the crowd im sure there were greedy people pushing their way through just to stand next to the amp... and so on...... I mean Braggi already said that the nazis were so organized on the surface but truly brought about chaos. Thats because the individuals involved were in mental states of chaos... etc.... When people are in these chaotic states, which Im saying they are all the time, they attach themselves (not just physically) to people, ideas, etc.. because they are scared of the chaos. And they are in chaos because they are cut off from reality... They believe in god, or a country, or a president, and attach themselves to that president. Then that president can do no wrong in their eyes, and then the truth is missed in another person because the president disagrees. Or your god says no. etc.

You see, ultimately when we are talking about attachment we are talking about tradition. The holding onto the past. The holding onto of ideas (of the past), is all tradtion and attachment (which is division). I like that you brought up division Jeff, and then divide up chaos into positive and negatives. Chaos is chaos. Its not good nor bad, but its definitly not a sustainable or even a progressive environment. If we are to continue on this path of chaos then we are going nowhere. We are still the same petty, sometimes happy people who live in confusion our whole lives. Some claim to know god or truth, but what good have they brought the world? Are we not still clearly in chaos? Is it clear yet? maybe not, we cant even understand each other when we post. This is not progress.

Oh and Im 23 years old. Isnt it sexy?

[CSummer]

Someguy wrote: " If we are to continue on this path of chaos then we are going nowhere."

Absolutely! And for anyone who's read M. Scott Peck's book, The Different Drum, Community Making and Peace or attended a "Community Building Workshop" (described in the book), you would recognize the current conversation as exemplifying "chaos" as Peck defined it. It is that phase people in groups (or even pairs) tend to go through as they try to convert or straighten each other out - show others The Truth, enlighten them. There can be lots of judgments and criticisms and power struggles as all of our patterns of resisting being really seen and known on a deeper, more vulnerable level come out.

We can get stuck there if we fail to move to the next stage: "emptiness." That's where we come to the realization that this isn't working if we want to come together into a deeper sense of connectedness. Coming from our heads will never do that. It's just playing it safe - not exposing our real, vulnerable feelings that are there below the anger, criticism, judgments and trying to fix each other. It will keep us "safe" - safe and separate, but it seems to me to be a rather sad, heartless, desolate place to end up.

In case you're curious, the stages I've mentioned are the second and third of four stages, the first being "pseudo-community," where people are being their usual nice, polite selves. The final stage - if a group actually makes it through the first three - is called true community. It's when there's a noticeable silence that pervades the room, and when someone speaks, it is to share from a deeper, more heartfelt or soulful place. People begin to take the risk of sharing their more vulnerable feelings - grief, sadness, hope, despair, joy - and the real human needs we all have in common. And when one person takes that risk, the space becomes suddenly safer for others to open themselves on a deeper level.

So true community happens when we drop our arguments and defenses, move out of our heads into our hearts and souls and connect on that deeper, more authentic level. Here we have an opportunity to learn another way of relating, a way that could enable us to find our way together into real community that offers a potential of healing - of restoring wholeness to consciousness and empowering us to live in harmony with ourselves, each other and the natural world. The mind is very resistant, though, to having our "shameful" selves revealed, and will do everything to prevent that. But when we take the risk of allowing others to see into us, what we discover is that we're not alone, that - as Carl Rogers said - what is most personal is most general. It is on the level of our emotional wounding - and healing - that we can find true common ground, and real connection with our fellow humans.

May we find our way - together!

Clint



I never said organization equals peace, first of all. I dont know where in the world that theory came from. So you say chaos arose from woodstock, and hey, that aint all that bad, those guys were peaceful. Sure they didnt break out into extreme violence like those nazis. But what did they do? They celebrated life by dancing and taking drugs etc... Does that mean that woodstocks mentality is the truth and path towards peace? Is that the positive chaos that makes up great societies, and a peaceful world?

Although there are no current accidents on the freeway and at glance it doesnt seem chaotic but rather peaceful, 'some guy' is drunk and talking on his cell phone. And 'some girl' is driving for the first time and shes nervous and starts swerving. maybe some kids are throwing rocks at passing cars. Maybe I just flipped some motorcyclist off. What im trying to say is that although on the surface things may seem peaceful or just non chaotic, there is lots of chaos and confusion going on all the time. Like woodstock, Im sure on the surface it seemed great, no injuries blah blah blah.... but in the crowd im sure there were greedy people pushing their way through just to stand next to the amp... and so on...... I mean Braggi already said that the nazis were so organized on the surface but truly brought about chaos. Thats because the individuals involved were in mental states of chaos... etc.... When people are in these chaotic states, which Im saying they are all the time, they attach themselves (not just physically) to people, ideas, etc.. because they are scared of the chaos. And they are in chaos because they are cut off from reality... They believe in god, or a country, or a president, and attach themselves to that president. Then that president can do no wrong in their eyes, and then the truth is missed in another person because the president disagrees. Or your god says no. etc.

You see, ultimately when we are talking about attachment we are talking about tradition. The holding onto the past. The holding onto of ideas (of the past), is all tradtion and attachment (which is division). I like that you brought up division Jeff, and then divide up chaos into positive and negatives. Chaos is chaos. Its not good nor bad, but its definitly not a sustainable or even a progressive environment. If we are to continue on this path of chaos then we are going nowhere. We are still the same petty, sometimes happy people who live in confusion our whole lives. Some claim to know god or truth, but what good have they brought the world? Are we not still clearly in chaos? Is it clear yet? maybe not, we cant even understand each other when we post. This is not progress.

Oh and Im 23 years old. Isnt it sexy?

[alanora]

Didn't Krishnamurti tell his followers to forget everything he had said previously at some point, preferring to encourage self's experience to following another?


I would do a little research on krishnamurti before saying things like this.

[someguy]

Didn't Krishnamurti tell his followers to forget everything he had said previously at some point, preferring to encourage self's experience to following another?
Im not really sure if he said that or not. But hes always said that everyone needs to find out for themselves, and to never follow another. Obviously his teachings meant something to him, and he must have thought it to be of importance for others as well, because he continued teaching the same principals until he was in his 90's.

[hales]

There are videos of him speaking, on Youtube if you are interested.. he surprised me as I had a particular feeling and image of him from reading his books, and about him, years ago.. check it out and see what you think..

youtube krishnamurti - Google Videos (https://video.google.com/videosearch?q=youtube%20krishnamurti&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wv#)


Im not really sure if he said that or not. But hes always said that everyone needs to find out for themselves, and to never follow another. Obviously his teachings meant something to him, and he must have thought it to be of importance for others as well, because he continued teaching the same principals until he was in his 90's.

[hales]

Krishnamurti was really a wrecking-ball of spirituality.. ; ) Check out this video contrasting/comparing K., with Eckart Tolle.. I think it is very apropos of this discussion.

Eckhart Tolle & Krishnamurti - Instances of Now (https://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5898375271662409422&ei=6k0xSstWkKCuA7607PID&q=youtube+krishnamurti&hl=en&client=firefox-a)


Im not really sure if he said that or not. But hes always said that everyone needs to find out for themselves, and to never follow another. Obviously his teachings meant something to him, and he must have thought it to be of importance for others as well, because he continued teaching the same principals until he was in his 90's.

[CSummer]

One last(?) post as I release my attachment to this thread :wink: . . .

When I was a young adult first out on my own, I was dimly aware of feeling
a sense of some serious lack and imagined that what I needed was to be with
a woman, and then I would be (or at least feel) okay. I had no awareness of
the deep emotional needs I carried in me from infancy and early childhood and
that there was little chance any given woman would be able to meet those
needs for me. (To be honest, some part of me still probably holds that belief
or wish!) Eventually, I met a woman and after two years of "courting," we got
married, despite strong misgivings that I had around being ready for marriage.

For the first year, it seemed to be working. I felt a sense of inner relaxation
and my creative juices were flowing. It was as if something within me felt
taken care of as a result of being married. Sometime in the second year,
things seemed to go downhill as it became evident that we had different
interests, and conflicts arose around how to spend our free time. Now I see
this as different ways we had of keeping ourselves distracted from the needs
that were not being met and the parts of ourselves that were not being
acknowledged or brought into the relationship and our lives. In the third year,
we moved more and more apart and finally decided to separate. Being
relatively free of the usual "attachments" - children and property - made this
easier.

It may be somewhat of a simplification to say that we tried an experiment
and it failed, and yet it has some validity. The question is: what failed? The
marriage? Then I thought that was the case. Now I think it wasn't. The
marriage was the laboratory; what failed was our experimental approach: our
way of being together - and even what we might have believed (if we'd
thought about it) was our purpose in being together. Presumably this was to
help each other feel okay and happy, even if that meant simply supporting
each other in our patterns of self-distraction.

Sadly, we were totally lacking in the awareness, understanding and tools
(esp. communication tools) that could have enabled us to see more clearly
what wasn't working. We felt powerless to make it work and probably even to
have a clear sense of what a working relationship was. We were unable to
stop and say - this isn't working well - and consider why it wasn't and what
options we might have. So we hung up our lab coats and left the laboratory,
and I was unable or unwilling even to acknowledge the sense of failure.

Now I believe it was that sense of failure and powerlessness that I most
wanted to avoid. In the beginning, I was probably quite attached to having
the marriage "work," whatever that meant or required of me. As it began to
feel more and more difficult, I became attached to leaving the relationship
behind as a way of avoiding experiencing feelings of failure and helplessness.
This is especially understandable given that I was so much at a loss to know
how to re-create the relationship to meet my - or our - needs (even if we
had known what our true needs were!).

Buddhists and others tell us that it's desirable to strive for non-attachment.
To me, nonattachment has to do with releasing attachment to outcome - to
things being a certain way. It is what might be called the "true scientific
approach" to life: viewing our experiences as experiments that either succeed
or fail to achieve a certain effect or goal. Such an attitude - as I see it - is
one that is open to whatever results from what we do and is seeing all
experiences as opportunities for learning and growth. As Byron Katie
(see The Official Site for The Work of Byron Katie (https://www.thework.com/index.asp) ) would put it, this is "loving what is"
rather than needing things - or people - to be other than as they are. That
includes needing me to be other than as I am. So if I do something that I
thought would have a positive outcome and end up feeling disappointed,
frustrated or sad, I accept myself and my feelings with compassion and an
openness to seeing and understanding how this came about. I am more willing
to own the experience, to say: I did X, hoping Y would happen, and instead Z
happened, which brought up difficult feelings for me. What is there for me to
learn from this?

I think we lose the "scientific attitude" and become strongly attached to
outcomes when we feel powerless, when we are unaware of options for
making something work or for getting our needs met. If I go to the
refrigerator and open the door, how I feel about what I find or don't find
depends a lot on what needs are driving me. If all I want is to make a
shopping list, then I can be pretty unattached to finding any particular item.
But if I'm feeling really hungry and I can't find the food I've been imagining
eating or any suitable alternative, then I might feel rather frustrated,
disappointed or even angry. Some of these feelings may be connected to
needs other than hunger - needs that go way back to childhood even. If the
needs are strong and I feel powerless to meet them (lacking positive options),
it may become - at least momentarily - rather difficult for me to be
"unattached to outcome" or to "love what is."

Given enough willingness to care for myself, I will do what I need to do to
get my needs met. Then perhaps I can take a more objective view of what
happened. I can reflect on the experience and how I got into such an
unhappy state of mind. If I do this with an attitude of complete self-
acceptance and compassion, it will be easier for me to resolve these feelings
and see how in the future I can avoid such experiences. I will be able to see
the options that I didn't see before - including things I could have done
before this experience ever occurred that would have prevented it. I could
even imagine holding the young part of me that may have had fears of
abandonment come up when those hunger needs couldn't be immediately met.
I can commit to taking better care of myself in the future. Having the
supportive presence of others could help me a lot in this endeavor.

I don't think it works very well to "try" to be nonattached when I'm feeling
strong unmet needs - physical or emotional. What does work is to do the best
I can to meet the needs I can meet myself or with the help of others. If my
grief and any other feelings I have around my failure can be discharged
(authentically expressed), then I can feel ready to move on.