Love and Hate

from JoeUser Forums

Note: I sent this post out this morning o my Zen Living list, local Zen list, and Yahoo 360 blog. Peace be with you.


With palms together,
Good Morning All,

There is a lingering coolnesss, fresh and crisp, in the air this morning at my window as I type. Although the desert sun is rising and quickly warming the air, it is still a delicious taste of spring. It is important to experience directly. Feel the air. Smell the plants. Taste the interior of your mouth in the morning. It is important to do so without commenting mentally about the experiences. It is the commentary that takes us away from the truth. Within split seconds we are in the mental world of ideas, likes, dislikes; the world of labels and categories. While this world has its place and its function, it is a world that separates us from ourselves, internally and externally.

The Buddha taught that hate produces hate. He taught that love produces love. He also taught, more deeply, that both hate anmd love are part of the same thing, that we and the world, the entire universe are one. In this teaching if we attain it, we see that to hate another is to hate ourselves. To love another is to love ourselves.We see in this that every moment, every gesture, is a universal one.

Living in a dualistic world, we create groups of assumptions in our mind/body. We gather experiences, words, feelings, sensations and store them in our consciousness. This store becomes a toxic filter through which we push our each experience through. This is like that, we say, and respond accordingly. What is missed in this process is the fact that this is not that, this is this! Itself.

In our response, we gather steam, we justify ourselves, well these people act like this, they speak such and such, they must be this or that. The response re-enforces the initial belief and that re-enforcement is stored in our consciousness.

On a particular blog I have been engaging in a set of discussions that have demonstrated this and drove the point home to me in no uncertain terms. The people on this blog site see me as critical, hateful, and unpriestly. I agree. I have spoken within my store of experience, allowing it to distort my perception and not see them for themselves, but rather my creation of them. This creation and my response to it has been poisonous. Polarization is easy, understanding is challenging. Hate is easy, love is challenging. It is very easy to live in a thought world, a world of preconception, distortion, prejudice. It is a whole other matter to reliquish the baggage, as Tanzan, (in my blog note yesterday) and stand directly and openly, doing what the situation actually calls for.

May we each work hard to live directly and with deep compassion for our neighbors and for the strangers among us. We are all we have, you know. It would be wise to nurture this most precious resource.

Be well.
religion
1,349 views 4 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top

You are different.  Definitely spice to JU.

But I will accept your acknowledgement of shortcomings for what they are.  I am not Buddhist, nor thinking of becoming one.  But I like your style, and your magnimity in admitting when you have angered others, and accept your appology for doing so.

I hope you keep posting.  I have not been offended, but then it takes a lot to offend me.  But I do enjoy your take on things.  If we all agreed, there would be no need for more than one of us, now would there?

Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
"The people on this blog site see me as critical, hateful, and unpriestly. I agree. I have spoken within my store of experience, allowing it to distort my perception and not see them for themselves, but rather my creation of them."

I am impressed by this. It is far too easy to impose false impressions when dealing in the impersonal realm of the internet. That is why I felt the need to comment before of the impression I was getting from you. I appreciate this acknowledgement and look forward to reading your future posts.
Fences - Organize your desktop icons today!
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
You can't really box with people unless you accept their rules, and strap on the gear of their contest. The problem is, and I know it seems unfair, but the gear and rules we use are the same things your philosophy rejects. It will always put you at a disadvantage. It's like the amish entering into a boxing match.

I respect what you've said here. I can't imagine the difficulty one would have being socially motivated and yet having to relinquish conflict and trust that all will be well in the end. Not a happy ending, mind you, but simply that all will be well. For someone of a progressive bent that must be torture. I couldn't do it, and I don't really fault you for your opinions, just that you pose them in such a way that makes it tacky to return your animosity.

I would make an awful buddhist. The concept of impermanence is intolerably difficult for me. I think, if I may be so bold, that it is for you, too. Not because I judge you harshly, but because you seem to react to things in the same way I do. When I see people saying things that annoy me, I can't not challenge them on it. In terms of impermanence, though, they are just words.

In the next five minutes that may not be the same person you are talking to now. Perhaps something huge will happen and make it all meaningless anyway. In the scope of Buddhism, if again I may be so bold, arguing politics is like arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. It's 99% facade even if you don't accept the impermanence of reality.

I know you think I don't know much about Buddhism, and perhaps I don't. I do believe, though, that in order to become so attached to these issues that they provoke anguish, you have to have, possibly, lost the ability to see the impermanence of them. Suffering is what its all about, and ending suffering isn't about ridding the world of it. You will never do that. It's about how we perceive our own suffering and the suffering of others.

I salute your compassion, and please believe that no one respects the vehemence of your views more than me. My issue has always been that it doesn't really synch up with the philosophy you espouse, and the conflict leaves you not believably promoting Buddhism, nor credibly advocating your political and social views.

I don't have my stuff together any more than you do, I just aspire to less. It is admirable that you aspire to more, it just leaves you at a disadvantage when you try to play our games.

Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top

"The people on this blog site see me as critical, hateful, and unpriestly. I agree. I have spoken within my store of experience, allowing it to distort my perception and not see them for themselves, but rather my creation of them."


I know I may have started out this way. I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY!!!!!!!! I know that Baker, MM, and Dr. Guy have really opened up my eyes and now I have upmost respect for you guys. Especially you Dr. all warm and fuzzy . ha ha

I know that in times past Sodaiho I probably wouldn't have read your posts but I find that in somethings we agree very similarily eventhough we differ alot too. Judgement is one thing but condemnation is another. I know I am guilty of this one even if I haven't posted it so.