Jump to content
Dharmaling Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Guest Tomaž

Responsibility

Recommended Posts

Guest Tomaž

Good afternoon,

 

usually we have some criteria for children and another for adults. Adults are supposed to have better insight about the consequences of their actions, and thus they can take decisions with a responsibility that a child can not have.

 

The question is predictable: it seems that only a slight minority of adults behave as adults. In the attempt to appear as good persons in front of the others (and even more in front of themselves), many of them try to diminish or even deny their faults. The same people can feel very insecure, blaming others for their suffering. It is clear that on such basis one can not take the responsibility, change and grow.

 

Should one treat such people as children or as adults? I.e. should one point out what they are doing in order to help them (as one would do with a child) or shall one simply ignore it (supposing that they are able to find a valid basis and act responsibly but they do not wish to)?

 

Best regards, Tomaž

 

NB: I wouldn't go into the topic of having full insight and full responsibility of a Bodhisattva or Buddha, I'm talking in general terms of everyday life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning.

The other day one of my friends told me this: "I was cutting a parsley on a wooden plate, which I put on the edge of the table, because on the table there have been already many stuff on it. I knew deep inside that the wooden plate will fall down on the floor, because it was really on the very edge, yet I just continued to cut. And, of course, the wooden plate felt down together with the parsley and then I got angry at other members of family thinking why they have to put so many stuff on the table that I needed to put my wooden plate on the edge of it." Then he asked me what do I think about this "force" which is so hard to resist, i. e. knowing something won´t work it out, but still pushing in that direction. Well, I was thinking this is may be linked not to the unsuficient self-listening, because the friend actually did hear his "inner voice", then not to the unsuficient wisdom, because the friend did evaluate the consequences correctly and was aware of them. It just shows it is hard to resist the karma. If we find ourselves in the karmatic situation (and when we don´t?), we can change it only by re-arranging it. First, if we change at least one part or condition of the situation then the whole situation will take a different direction. But, if we won´t change anything then the consequences will take place in accordance with already arranged conditions (which sometimes could be the best choice) and what we will be able to do then, is only to watch and eventually get angry at the already arranged conditions and in this manner make the whole situation even worse.

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

Good morning,

 

I agree that most of us are sometimes acting childishly. My main concern was: does this save one from responsibility or not? Because this leads (me) to different attitude and reactions towards a person.

 

But you have exposed another very interesting point, the "inner voice". This is the tool of human mind that I rely the least on. Why? Because it is usually merged with ego-tricks. Most of our decisions are based on such polluted "inner voice". Where did it lead us?

 

I believe in this "inner voice", I would describe it as an "echo of clarity" or something like this, but still, I prefer to rely on logic, not on some dubious senses. Yet, finding a way to separate ego from "clarity" would change the situation. Do you have any idea how to differentiate both?

 

Best regards,

Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you have any idea how to differentiate both?
Good morning.

There is only one measure, I believe, how to differentiate "inner voice" from "ego voice". If getting more and more information, broader and deeper understanding of individual events, life, death and nevertheless karma itself, make us even more humble, make us respectful towards other sentient beings, make us more compassionate, more peaceful, then this goes on account of the "inner voice". If "knowing more" make us to show off, compete with the other sentient beings, feel more important, raise our pride, then this goes on account of "ego voice".

 

Best regards,

Simona

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

Good evening.

 

Thank you, it makes sense. :bow: I would turn it around and say: the condition to hear the "inner voice" is peace, humbleness, respect... and the ground for the "ego voice" is pride and self-centeredness.

But this still makes me believe that our "inner voice" or "intuition" or however you call it, is more or less polluted, most of the time unreliable.

 

Although, you seem to be talking from a certainty arising from experience, which made me think of another angles. Maybe you are used to listen to this inner voice and check its authenticity afterwards by the results. I am not used to rely on it and I would prefer to gain some certainty in advance, because I don't want to fool myself. You probably met people who are very convinced in what they are saying, while having no wish to abandon their personal view and broaden the horizon for large scale social structures and long-term consequences, surpassing one's life. Listening too much to oneself usually drags one deeper in the swamp of self-cherishing, doesn't it?

 

Though, your writing made me think that it could be useful to be more in contact with this pure type of reality in everyday situations. Whatever this is, whispering of the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas or one's innermost self, it surely opens a better perspective to one's life.

 

Best regards,

Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is clear that on such basis one can not take the responsibility, change and grow.
I know it is obvious, but nonetheless...when I hear people say I cannot take responsibility for this or that, it reminds me of shopping... kind of 'karma shopping'...I go to the supermarket and I take responsibility of this, it is nice, this one I do not take responsibility of, too expensive, I leave it for some rich kid, this one cheap, cool, I can take responsibility of it...there is no 'karma shop', you are responsible for it all... :(, I think...
NB: ...full responsibility of a Bodhisattva or Buddha, I'm talking in general terms of everyday life.
This comment I do not fully grasp...full responsibilty of a fish, a god or a translator...ok...but I am not sure there is anything I could discuss about the responsibility of a being no longer subject to the law of casue and effect with Boddhicitta on the top?
But this still makes me believe that our "inner voice" or "intuition" or however you call it, is more or less polluted, most of the time unreliable.
This inner voice, the 'intuition', funnily in our societies also known as the sixth sense, I have no idea where to find it, but for sure is (somewhere in) the mind(s), one way or the other, and for sure it tells me the direction I should take if I wish to 'do the right thing', to practice free will,...; unfortunately, personally, I am 100% sure of its existence and purity when I consciously disregard it, deciding to follow something rather unwholesome, pleasurable instead...while on occasions when there is not this split personality issue, the good and the bad within, when the inner voice is saying this is what you should do, and the ego says, yes, this is nice, then...I automatically jump to see what is wrong...I think we might have a similar attitude Tomaž :// , but this very attitude makes me 'rigid' sometimes; I think I often go in the direction of thinking that anything ego is ok with or does not react to, is another big ego trap...it might be...but if this were the truth and nothing but the truth, if I wanted to progress along the path, I would have to do all the things I do not really want or do not enjoy to do, to make sure the ego is not getting any of it...I think this would be a great great waste, big pity, because I was once reminded already the path is happiness, not sorrow, and plus I do things so much better when I enjoy what I do... :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Although, you seem to be talking from a certainty arising from experience, which made me think of another angles. Maybe you are used to listen to this inner voice and check its authenticity afterwards by the results. I am not used to rely on it and I would prefer to gain some certainty in advance, because I don't want to fool myself. You probably met people who are very convinced in what they are saying, while having no wish to abandon their personal view and broaden the horizon for large scale social structures and long-term consequences, surpassing one's life. Listening too much to oneself usually drags one deeper in the swamp of self-cherishing, doesn't it?
Thank you for writing this, excellent. I know this - 'knowing' that I am right - but in fact making a complete sherlock out of myself. Knowing in advance, oh I wish for that kind of knowledge.

I've read that the Kadampa geshes used to call self-cherishing 'the owl-headed augur of bad omens', bringing nothing but suffering... :(

 

Best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

Good evening.

 

I've read that the Kadampa geshes used to call self-cherishing 'the owl-headed augur of bad omens', bringing nothing but suffering... :(
Hahaha, what a perfect comparison! Thank you. ;)

 

when I hear people say I cannot take responsibility for this or that, it reminds me of shopping... kind of 'karma shopping'...
I like your quest for taking the whole responsibility upon one's shoulders. :bow: Yet, this picture looks a bit simplified to me. Responsibility stands for "ability to respond", I would add adequately. The adequacy of response depends on the depth of one's insight, right? This is the point where we differ, so the responsibility can't be equal.

But I agree with you that karma doesn't make differences: even the most ignorant person experiences the consequences of his actions, and nobody else but him can be blamed for them.

Because of this ambiguous position of a person who is not aware of her repetitive ego tricks I asked about her responsibility.

 

I am not sure there is anything I could discuss about the responsibility of a being no longer subject to the law of casue and effect with Boddhicitta on the top?
A matter of words, I would say. Change "responsibility" for "care for sentient beings" and you'll get what I meant.

 

for sure it tells me the direction I should take if I wish to 'do the right thing', to practice free will,...
It seems that we are talking about different things when referring to inner voice. Although, it looks like everybody is hearing voices. :D Just joking. Seriously: what you described could be a result of many things: a memory about Ethics or a habit of ethical behaviour that you have learned in the past lives, an inspiration from an invisible Bodhisattva, ripening of good karma that results as a spiritual recognition or opportunity... or inner voice.

By the way, how would you define inner voice? Is it just a vague name covering the above and more possibilities? Is it a wish to have special abilities, to be right in your view? Is it a siddhi, like clairvoyance? Is it personal or transpersonal?

 

I think I often go in the direction of thinking that anything ego is ok with or does not react to, is another big ego trap...it might be...
I didn't think that pleasurable equals to egoistic. Just because anything - pleasurable or painful - can be either ego's game or an opened path, I think it is not so easy to differentiate both. Can you say that you can clearly see all the layers of your motivation? I can't. Every selfish action can be labelled as altruistic. My concern is how to recognize my own ego tricks, especially when being confronted to impulses with no rational ground.

 

Again, I have absolutely nothing against this inner voice, I just don't want to follow the usual line of idealizing it or attributing it clarity in advance.

 

Thank you for your answers, it's good to talk to you.

 

Best regards,

Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Felix

Good morning.

 

Maybe it should leave it to the wiser of me, but I like the topic, so I'll join the caravan, maybe it will lead us to clearer view. ;)

 

As far as I understand, our ego is merged with every aspect of our life like milk with water. Unless you are Bodhisattvas.

 

In defining the inner voice, I hesitate between the two options that Tomaž mentioned: the inspiration of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, or an echo of our innermost nature. Maybe this is the kairos of the old Greeks, a significant moment of clarity, highly charged with meaning, having far reaching effect.

 

How to differ "inner voice" and "ego voice"? I don't know, I have no wisdom. But I believe that the condition is peace. (And sometimes past karma, but it's shadow doesn't last long). I even believe that this clarity comes naturally, as a side effect of the Path, when we pacify our mind enough to hear the subtleties that can not be heard within the roaring storms of our desires and fears. I guess it starts by recognizing our ego's tricks and renouncing from its empty promises, firmly turning to the safe direction. But, having no realisation myself, my views might be mistaken.

 

Because of this ambiguous position of a person who is not aware of her repetitive ego tricks I asked about her responsibility.
I would tend to believe that one is only responsible for one's own Path, not so much for the others', until one gains the insight and the abilities needed to guide the others.

 

Respectfully,

Felix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning dear All,

I would tend to believe that one is only responsible for one's own Path, not so much for the others', until one gains the insight and the abilities needed to guide the others.
this has me now wishing to close myself in a cave and come out when I have the insight and the abilities...

Not having yet created such wonderful karma, I live alongside many beings and my actions of body, speech and mind, many times are perceived, voluntarily or not, and might influence others...so somehow, at this point I think best to let go :ssst: ...and always rely on advice of the one with the insight and the abilities...

 

What do you think about that? Would it be correct to stop thinking and taking decisions for ourselves? Take just one decision: until I have the insight and the abilities, I always ask and do only what the ones who have insight and abilities tell me to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Learning Universal Responsibility

By His Holiness the Dalai Lama

 

I believe that our every act has a universal dimension. Because of this, ethical discipline, wholesome conduct, and careful discernment are crucial ingredients for a meaningful, happy life. But let us now consider this proposition in relation to the wider community.

 

In the past, families and small communities could exist more or less independently of one another. If they took into account their neighbors' well-being, so much the better. Yet they could survive quite well without this kind of perspective. Such is no longer the case. Today's reality is so complex and, on the material level at least, so clearly interconnected, that a different outlook is needed.

 

Modern economics is a case in point. A stockmarket crash on one side of the globe can have a direct effect on the economies of countries on the other. Similarly, our technological achievements are now such that our activities have an unambiguous effect on the natural environment. And the very size of our population means that we cannot any longer afford to ignore others' interests. Indeed, we find that these are often so intertwined that serving our own interests benefits others, even though this may not be our explicit intention. For example, when two families share a single water source, ensuring that it is not polluted benefits both.

 

In view of this, I am convinced that it is essential that we cultivate a sense of what I call Universal Responsibility. This may not be an exact translation of the Tibetan term I have in mind, chi sem, which means, literally, universal (chi) consciousness (sem). Although the notion of responsibility is implied rather than explicit in the Tibetan, it is definitely there. When I say that on the basis of concern for others' well-being we can, and should, develop a sense of universal responsibility, I do not, however, mean to suggest that each individual has a direct responsibility for the existence of, for example, wars and famines in different parts of the world. Clearly certain things, such as the poverty of a single village 10,000 miles away are completely beyond the scope of the individual. What is entailed, however, is not an admission of guilt, but, again, a reorientation of our heart and mind away from self and toward others. To develop a sense of universal responsibility&emdash;of the universal dimension of our every act and of the equal right of all others to happiness and not to suffer--is to develop an attitude of mind whereby, when we see an opportunity to benefit others, we will take it in preference to merely looking after our own narrow interests. Of course we care about what is beyond our scope--we accept it as part of nature and concern ourselves with doing what we can.

 

An important benefit of developing such a sense of universal responsibility is that it helps us become sensitive to all others--not just those closest to us. We come to see the need to care especially for those members of the human family who suffer most. We recognize the need to avoid causing divisiveness among our fellow human beings. And we become aware of the overwhelming importance of contentment.

 

More here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you think about that? Would it be correct to stop thinking and taking decisions for ourselves? Take just one decision: until I have the insight and the abilities, I always ask and do only what the ones who have insight and abilities tell me to do?
Here I come to an interesting question. What decisions are made by us and what decisions are made by the one with insight and abilities. I am noticing that some decisions I need to make by myself. Which are these? I am still in a bit of a puzzle. Maybe worldly decisions, yet some of worldly decisions have far reaching results. Some worldly decisions are actually having as a result a spiritual condition. Maybe after some time also such decisions will be made by our personal Teacher.

 

I do not really know the exact answer. I guess it is individual to every practitioner, every karma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Felix

Good afternon.

 

What do you think about that? Would it be correct to stop thinking and taking decisions for ourselves? Take just one decision: until I have the insight and the abilities, I always ask and do only what the ones who have insight and abilities tell me to do?
This is the riddle I can't solve. Any time I come across the topic of free will, it makes me wonder what is its function or the essence. I can just speculate, believing that your replies will reveal a deeper level of understanding, as they did so many times before.

 

Western mentality is goal oriented. If a part doesn't support the totality, it is replaced or corrected or tolerated, but regarded as dysfunctional. Even religious institutions maintain their structures this way. If Buddhism was the same, all we needed to do, is to follow instructions passively. But this is not the case.

Fortunately. If you look at the examples of highly structured religious institutions, you can notice that this approach kills something in an adherent, it drains one's curiosity, one's initiatives, one's inner strength, one's ability to contact unknown, it steals shine from a person.

 

Buddhism strongly emphasises free will. As strongly as self-discipline and the impact of taking vows and keeping them pure. They seem to supplement each other: discipline enables one to shape his mind according to his will, for example to switch off one emotion when becoming aware of it and to switch on another one. Free will is more tricky, because it is usually deeply permeated with ego. When one talks about "free will", this often means one's "will to do things as one wants". True free will is not possible until one's ego is alive and kicking.

 

So, why is free will still emphasised, if one is aware about its close relations with the ego's will? I don't know. But if I speculate further, I would say it could be connected to one's ability to learn, to connect and to evolve.

An example: if you want a child to show respect to his new school friend who might be socially, physically or mentally different from the majority, you can set behavioural rules and prohibit him to make fun of the new classmate. The child might obey it, at least when the adults are near. But this does not lead to inner respect. On the other hand you can teach the child about his school friend's culture, sickness or whatever difference distinguishes him, and help him make a step in developing equanimity. This is incomparably harder way, it demands patience, it depends on waiting for favourable circumstances or creating them, it can go against the stream (of the child's will or the influence of his other school friends, for example)... But it should end up in harmonious relationship that is rooted within the child.

 

Realisations can not be given. They can be only evoked from inside, as I understand. It seems that the spiritual progression is not possible without both, our engagement (free will) and our discipline (willingness to give up our ego's will). Following the Teachers compassionate supervision, of course. :prostate:

 

Respectfully,

Felix

 

Disclaimer: As I said, I believe that I will be able to comprehend the free will topic only when being without ego.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening and thank you for very prescious contributions!

Western mentality is goal oriented. If a part doesn't support the totality, it is replaced or corrected or tolerated, but regarded as dysfunctional. Even religious institutions maintain their structures this way. If Buddhism was the same, all we needed to do, is to follow instructions passively. But this is not the case.

Fortunately. If you look at the examples of highly structured religious institutions, you can notice that this approach kills something in an adherent, it drains one's curiosity, one's initiatives, one's inner strength, one's ability to contact unknown, it steals shine from a person.

In Buddhism this is quite different also becasue there seems not be a rigid structure dictating the rules. There is the Master-to-Disciple relationship, and the 'rules and conditions' laid down are, the way I understand, subject to one-on-one relationship, subject to change along the path, fully adapted to the mind of a practitioner...so...I cannot quite find a good excuse not follow the instructions closely...?

I might be a bit naïve, but I'd hope a Master :bow: would use the skilful means not to drain but rather encourage my curiosity, initiatives, inner strength, ability to contact unknown,...??

 

I asked that question before also because a thought arose...if I speculate...if I were to realize Bodhicitta, but not yet Emptiness, I think most naturally and automatically, without a shade of a doubt, I would have sought and followed the advice of a fully realised being...? Wouldn't I? :ssst:

 

So, why something good enough for a Mahayana practitioner is not good enough for a beginner like me? :angel: Why the less I know, the more independence I have, the more you develop the more guidance you seem to get, as if the world was up-side-down?

I only came up with the explanation that the only way to make sure I&my lovely ego do not look for reasons and causes outside of myself, is to make sure I take all decisions by myself... :verysad: ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just because anything - pleasurable or painful - can be either ego's game or an opened path, I think it is not so easy to differentiate both. Can you say that you can clearly see all the layers of your motivation? I can't. Every selfish action can be labelled as altruistic. My concern is how to recognize my own ego tricks, especially when being confronted to impulses with no rational ground.
I find this very useful. I think this is the essential problem right there. To see clearly what the mind is in fact pursuing, trying to achieve, without our knowing, and labeling it as something virtuous. We have knowledge of bodhicitta, but actually it can happen (i guess it does all the time) that the mind is pushing itself towards some kind of gratification, feeling good about itself. We have ideas of how the Path should be, and that we are maybe walking on it well, but is it really so? To please our own constructs (about anything) isn't that difficult, is it? How much loving-kindness do we really have? We can do something very beneficial for others, but if i do it with a mind lacking any joyous effort - how much is it really worth?

 

Thank you

best regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

I completely agree with you, Khyenrab, thank you! :bow:

 

I'd hope a Master would use the skilful means not to drain but rather encourage my curiosity, initiatives, inner strength, ability to contact unknown,...??
I'm sure about it! Institution should support its members, not the other way round! I believe in Buddhism this is quite clear.

 

So, why something good enough for a Mahayana practitioner is not good enough for a beginner like me? Why the less I know, the more independence I have, the more you develop the more guidance you seem to get, as if the world was up-side-down?
I was wondering about it too. I don't know if it changes anything for you, but it seems that all processes of growth have this feature. Before a little seed becomes a huge tree, it has to "conquer" an enormous amount of earth, but then it gets direct help of the sun and the rain...

It seems that our first support is faith or inspiration, only later the first results can start to support us, and by better integration also the outer conditions start to offer support... until everything becomes a spiritual path and everybody a teacher. :))

 

I only came up with the explanation that the only way to make sure I&my lovely ego do not look for reasons and causes outside of myself, is to make sure I take all decisions by myself... ?
Hmmm. What about interconnectivity of everything, and Buddhas and Bodhisattvas? Maybe the final word is yours, :bow: as everything arises from our mind, but I can not connect these two aspects.

 

Best regards,

Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

Good afternoon,

 

what does it mean that there is no duality, that everything is connected? The notion of interconnectivity can lead us to conclusion that we are responsible for everything and everyone, being ignorant or not, because our thoughts and other actions influence everything and everyone. So where is, if there is, a borderline to one's responsibility?

 

Bye, Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The notion of interconnectivity can lead us to conclusion that we are responsible for everything and everyone, being ignorant or not, because our thoughts and other actions influence everything and everyone. So where is, if there is, a borderline to one's responsibility?
Everything and everyone - I am not sure...how am I influencing some hell being right now, if none of us is aware of the existence of the other? I can pray or make wishes or dedications for that being, but somehow, I feel these to be more of a practice for myself, that might take me closer to the goal, which once achieved, maybe I can actually come in contact with all beings and factually influence them in some way, unfortunately, even once attained the state of a Buddha, I would only be able to do for others what they create the causes for:-(...?

 

I am slow on this issue, but as far as the borderlines of responsibility go for the beings I do come in contact with: for sure I cannot take on me nor directly change the karma of others, and also, I cannot take decisions instead of others...but nonetheless, I do have the potential to influence these two indirectly,...so in a way, my responsibility only stops at the final result...in a way...does it make sense?

For me this much makes sense, because without these borderlines, I am no longer taking responsibility, but rather guilt or praise for what others do...

 

...this responsibility question has been bothering me the whole year around...I would be really grateful to hear others' viewpoints on it...

 

btw: where have all the smileys gone? who is responsible for this?...;-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Tomaž,

what does it mean that there is no duality, that everything is connected? The notion of interconnectivity can lead us to conclusion that we are responsible for everything and everyone, being ignorant or not, because our thoughts and other actions influence everything and everyone. So where is, if there is, a borderline to one's responsibility?

it seems that we have come to this starting off point where you expressed as NB: "I wouldn't go into the topic of having full insight and full responsibility of a Bodhisattva or Buddha, I'm talking in general terms of everyday life". For me too is indeed difficult to define the borderline between being responsible and taking action and not feeling responsible and let it be. Once I asked about it and if i understood correctly it is up to me how far do i want to go in this; the limits are where i set them to be. This of course does not mean in being responsible for how others are at the moment in terms of what they have created for themselves to experience, but how they can be in the future. But even here there are limits; i feel them very much; from the part of my capabilities and again from the part of the karma of the other.

?? I am just thinking out loud :) with you and the rest of us from the forum :)

best regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž

Thank you for the replies.

 

I am not sure...how am I influencing some hell being right now, if none of us is aware of the existence of the other?
You can throw a stone from a mountain and scare a bird, although no one is aware of each other.

Once I heard somebody say: "People create their karma themselves so it's their responsibility, it has nothing to do with me". If I strictly followed this logic, I would conclude that there is no responsibility at all: if the others are experiencing the results of their karma regardless to my standpoint, then we are like two unrelated universes. Consequently, there is no recipient of my actions, which makes the idea of karma brittle and efforts to benefit futile. Not to mention that this negates the possibility to overcome dualistic thinking.

There is more slippery ground which reflects a correlation between our mind and the world around us: telepathy, synchronicity, or simply changing your attitude towards the person you are talking to, accompanied by the adequate response of the person. This type of things makes me think of the interconnectivity that goes further than I can perceive with my limited obscured senses. Like a butterfly effect.

 

but nonetheless, I do have the potential to influence these two indirectly,...
I completely agree, Dani. Maybe the responsibility for the others means enabling, creating and nourishing the conditions that help them generate the causes for growth. Starting by mastering one's own mind, to find out what helps and what hinders. However, if we are influencing the others each single moment, there must be some indirect responsibility as well.

 

For me too is indeed difficult to define the borderline between being responsible and taking action and not feeling responsible and let it be. Once I asked about it and if i understood correctly it is up to me how far do i want to go in this; the limits are where i set them to be.
Thank you for the answer, interesting point.

 

This of course does not mean in being responsible for how others are at the moment in terms of what they have created for themselves to experience, but how they can be in the future.
?

Do I understand you right: when we set the limits of our responsibility, we define the future experiences of the others? Doesn't one's future experiences depend on one's response to the present experiences?

 

Best regards, T

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Tomaž,

Doesn't one's future experiences depend on one's response to the present experiences?

I see this in the the framework of others being as much a part of our world as we are a part of theirs. Even though each one individual is creator of one's own karma, we still can make a decision to try to help someone and open up to that. I also see it in the framework of what you have also expressed above: "Maybe the responsibility for the others means enabling, creating and nourishing the conditions that help them generate the causes for growth. Starting by mastering one's own mind, to find out what helps and what hinders. However, if we are influencing the others each single moment, there must be some indirect responsibility as well", because what we mirror in others can also be our choice; of course, (unfortunatelly) much in connection with our spiritual development (pacified mind, clear view and probably much much more of it).

?

pamo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž
because what we mirror in others can also be our choice; of course, (unfortunatelly) much in connection with our spiritual development (pacified mind, clear view and probably much much more of it).
Good point. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You can throw a stone from a mountain and scare a bird, although no one is aware of each other.
Walking in the mountains, a little stone slips under my feet, without me even perceiving it, falls from a height, and makes a sound I do not hear, but an animal nearer to it does, and gets scared for a second...I think I am conventionally not really creating anything, because if I am creating anything, then I would expect the results of it to be equally unnoticeable for me, as the little stone which I never saw, but it slipped and fell because of the movement of my feet, interconnected with the ripening of the birdie's karma, whom also I did not perceive...

I know I am saying in a way that what I do not know about, doesn't exist; do not jump - I know it is not really true, but withouth pretence, this is the reality of my little world (for now! :D)

There is more slippery ground which reflects a correlation between our mind and the world around us: telepathy, synchronicity, or simply changing your attitude towards the person you are talking to, accompanied by the adequate response of the person. This type of things makes me think of the interconnectivity that goes further than I can perceive with my limited obscured senses. Like a butterfly effect.
I fully agree with you on the interconnectivity issue- I have no doubt at all about interconnectivity, yet having not really got the true taste of it, I was hoping someone with a taste would share some thoughts with us on it...

 

But...what I have heard several times, and loved much, is that we are like a drop in the ocean, part of the whole, and yet a drop, and what we've created around ourselves is a glass...so we mistakenly believe in the existence of this glass...if we only let go of the glass...we would become part of the ocean, though forever remaining a drop in it.

(my memory is lousy, so these are far from being exactly the words I've heard, it is just how I understood it; please correct me);

(is conventional reality merely mirror-imaging the state of our glass-polluted ocean of minds?)

 

So the picture of my imagination...since my mind is a drop and yours is a drop, and we are both carried round the ocean in a glass, each one of his/her own, our interconnectivity is more gross, louder; when we meet, the two glasses bang at each other, I see you, but only through the double glass of my and your glass, and if some seaweed gets stuck on it, maybe I will not see you at all...

what makes me curious is if I really have to get a PhD in oceanology, glass science,..., and other complex issues, before to go for a swim? Couldn't maybe a Master smash that glass and teach me simply how to swim?

But maybe this is a whole other topic...sorry, everything is so interconnected,...

 

A nice day to all!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tomaž
I think I am conventionally not really creating anything, because if I am creating anything, then I would expect the results of it to be equally unnoticeable for me, as the little stone which I never saw, but it slipped and fell because of the movement of my feet, interconnected with the ripening of the birdie's karma, whom also I did not perceive...
What about the exponential growth of karma? (Maybe an example of stepping on an ant and killing it without being aware of it could offer us a bit clearer example of the consequences and the responsibility.)

 

is conventional reality merely mirror-imaging the state of our glass-polluted ocean of minds?
I don't know what mirror-imaging means. It reminds me of the process that starts from a heart-felt belief in the most sacred in a person, continues by discovering its many aspects and layers, and ends in... it depends how far do I let myself go, how far I have mastered my mind by discipline, how flexible I am to the ever-changing conditions. Unfortunately, most of the time I don't perceive people this way. I have to decide for it consciously, as I decide to start a less comfortable work. To my experience it doesn't matter if a person is my "enemy" or a "friend", the process is the same and the result depends most of all on my ability to focus on the process without personal interest.

But I would be more interested in your view to the mirror-imaging? :bow:

 

Couldn't maybe a Master smash that glass and teach me simply how to swim?
Maybe, if you have created the conditions for it. :-//

 

Good night, Tomaž

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What about the exponential growth of karma? (Maybe an example of stepping on an ant and killing it without being aware of it could offer us a bit clearer example of the consequences and the responsibility.)

I agree killing an ant is a better example...

Because killing an ant you are actually creating karma, which has the power to potentiate...

But in the birdie case, I am more inclined to think the karma I create is à¢-Ëœneutral' - in à¢-Ëœexponential function terms' I would say its value is 1; or even if it has to grow, I would expect it to grow in quantity, not in quality; therefore, remaining à¢-Ëœneutral'...one stone maybe leading to a path of stones in the woods I'd walk in a couple of lifetimes, but not a black plague, or a hungry-ghost rebirth in a couple of eons...I don't know...but this much would make sense, even if I am not aware of all the factors, which indeed are countless, and it is all too complex for me, as Felix also says.

 

I don't know what mirror-imaging means.

Giving a reflection, like the one you see when you look at yourself in the mirror - your mirror-image ;-)

(it was actually not very deep as symbolism:-)...it came to my mind because I had just seen the à¢-ËœHappy Feet'- that penguin animated film, that tackles also the question of ocean pollution...thus, the glass-polluted ocean)

But on the second thought, since I do not have direct insight into the true nature of my mind, I could say that whatever I perceive is a mirror-image of my current state of mind, no? Observing it, I am observing the nature of my mind, and by learning about the nature of my mind, I am learning about your, or Felix's or Pamo's or anyone elses mind, becasue they are of the same nature...'drops':-)...and we're back at interconnectedness... :laugh:

 

It reminds me of the process that starts from a heart-felt belief in the most sacred in a person, ...
Could you tell us what you mean by à¢-Ëœthe most sacred thing in a person'? What would that be?

 

Maybe, if you have created the conditions for it. :-//
Aaa, yes - thank you! How do I do that? :D

 

All the best to everyone :bow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...