Have you really gotten to non-attachment?

9/12/2008 8:15:37 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
carlylyn Sylvan Beach, NY age: 62 online now!	Non-attachment is a passion of mine---oops; there's some attachment there... I have made it my path for years and am finally at the point where I give things away freely. I feel no 'ownership' or need for material items. As far as emotional non-attachment..a different story. People are not things, so the river runs deeper, but can still be naviagted. I am really on a pure path with this also and have done well this year. In 2006 my former partner and the father of my 2 older children committed suicide. We were still friends and close after 30+ years of being apart. He was a seeker and was respected and loved by many. In his death I learned that it only takes a second and a life is gone on this plane. I did not mourn his passing as I knew he still lived---in his gardens, his practice and his children...life never ends. It taught me to deepen my practice of non- attachemnt to people. This does not mean my feelings are shut down, they are deeper and more true. It means that I can have someone 'in my life' and let them go at the correct time for all concerned. The concept is alien to mothers, and others, difficult to grasp at first, but it the way---at least for me. Has anyone else gotten this far into non-attachment? I also understand that I am not expressing myself well at all; I hope you all can get some ot it...
9/12/2008 9:51:15 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
spectrre Shawnee, OK age: 37	non attachment is the foundation behind mindfulness,so yes it's a hard thing to practice,I don't carry this too far because the true non attachment is even becoming unattached to god,that is true Buddhism as taught by Ajahn Buddhadasa Bhikkhu.I like being attached to God and the universe but the material world is just transitory the mind and spirit are eternal.
9/13/2008 1:41:13 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
night_tangle Oak Harbor, WA age: 19	i dont think i could do non-attachment. i mean for matiral things i think thats a plus but some matiral things hold value to me b/c of what they mean to me. and idk if i could become that unatteched to people. b/c i mean.. death isnt that big of a deal but i will miss them sorely and thats what i mourn.
9/13/2008 6:16:42 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
voevode Seattle, WA age: 55	I really see very little value in non-attachment. I don't wish to be negative here, so I am also willing to listen and learn--even if I never get behind the concept myself, I still wish to fully have respect for beliefs other than my own. I see much of this as being part of the Eastern tendency toward destruction of the mind, the ego and the self. A lot of it sounds like the ritual of Kohlinar in the first Star Trek film. The Vulcans tried to purge every trace of emotion from themselves. Spock couldn't fully bring himself to do it. Deep down he valued his human friendship with Kirk. It was a thing too precious to destroy in the Kohlinar. I had a former girlfriend who died nearly three years ago. I would not be without those memories, and I rejoice even in the pain of my loss--it proves to me that I'm alive. There were two times she came close to death. Either of those times I could have been more passive and she would have been gone a lot earlier. I possibly kept her here the first time--through prayer. and the second time, definitely, by preventing her suicide attempt. Those were twenty good--crazy, but good years I had with her in my life--I wouldn't give them up for anything. To me, the concept of non-attachment is rooted in Buddhistic thought. Life is suffering and the way to avoid suffering is to desire nothing. Yes. If you can attain that, you won't suffer. BUT you will also have no joys. The two must be accepted together. the pain and the joy--the Agony and the Ecstasy--they are called...LIFE! Don't think I'm trying to 'proselytize' here. I say what I say because it's important to me. I do fully feel there is danger in certain ways of thinking, that I call passive. Nonetheless, having said it, I leave it where it is. I'm also developing a keener and keener desire to learn what others think, feel and value. I certainly can't say that I fully understand another's thoughts. Certainly it's easy to misunderstand, or to have insufficient information.
9/13/2008 7:46:35 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
carlylyn Sylvan Beach, NY age: 62 online now!	Oh, but I have lots of memories, but they are memories, not real today. I live in the moment and that is all we have. I have so much happiness and joy in my life. Everytime I look at my son, 32 yrs, who has Tourettes and accomplishes what he does, I am filled with joy at his determination. Non attachment just means carying as little baggage as possible and living in the moment...knowing we really possess nothing and so let it all go. Are we going to take things into the next life? That does not mean we cannot enjoy material things while we are here, just that they really don't matter. The Native Americans believed that no one owned the land, that is why they would sign treaties with the white man. They had no concept of ownership, they shared food, wives and homes.... nameste
9/13/2008 9:13:54 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
spectrre Shawnee, OK age: 37	Quote from voevode: I see much of this as being part of the Eastern tendency toward destruction of the mind, the ego and the self. A lot of it sounds like the ritual of Kohlinar in the first Star Trek film. The Vulcans tried to purge every trace of emotion from themselves. Spock couldn't fully bring himself to do it. Deep down he valued his human friendship with Kirk. It was a thing too precious to destroy in the Kohlinar. . holy cows ,this is exactly what I thought when I first started learning,Kohlinar haha great analogy of non attachment.
9/13/2008 11:17:14 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
nico420 Brookwood, AL age: 29	I see the benefit of not clinging to material possesions, but not to the point of an acsethic, only insofar as you are not a materialist, or enslaved to your belongings-this goes for everything, including people- to me, the difference concerning relationships and possessions, is love, and in that sense- the love should not be a selfish desire, as most relationships are based on, but rather an unselfish love- most relationships depend on each partner somehow stroking the other's ego, either by making them feel attractive, intelligent, or whatever area that specific person needs or feels inadequate in, this causes codependence- to have another person with you for the sheer enjoyment of companionship doesn't seem to be detrimental to me, but I have yet to achieve it- as it is way too easy to become dependant on that person for your happiness-
9/13/2008 3:01:12 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
alicekathleen Fresno, CA age: 63	No. I am a member of the local Buddhist church, I understand the concept, but have I successfully put it into practice in my daily life? No, not yet! Difficult for a clinging vine like me.
9/14/2008 9:08:52 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
voevode Seattle, WA age: 55	Quote from nico420: I see the benefit of not clinging to material possesions, but not to the point of an acsethic, only insofar as you are not a materialist, or enslaved to your belongings-this goes for everything, including people- to me, the difference concerning relationships and possessions, is love, and in that sense- the love should not be a selfish desire, as most relationships are based on, but rather an unselfish love- most relationships depend on each partner somehow stroking the other's ego, either by making them feel attractive, intelligent, or whatever area that specific person needs or feels inadequate in, this causes codependence- to have another person with you for the sheer enjoyment of companionship doesn't seem to be detrimental to me, but I have yet to achieve it- as it is way too easy to become dependant on that person for your happiness- With all due respect, Nico [and I understand and agree with most of what you are saying--like about co-dependency] but there is no such thing as an unselfish love. We get starry eyed with ideals and wonder why these don't work out like they obviously should. If I love a lover, or a friend--I'm not loving them for their sake, but for my own. They give me happiness, sometimes simply by being in the same room with me, or by walking with me through the "vagrant forest". As you called it, I have them with me "for the sheer enjoyment of companionship". But I can not feel their enjoyment of me directly--I can only feel my own. For many different reasons, I value them. But it is "I" that do the valuing. "I" value them because of what they bring to "me". And with them, it is just the same. When our motives are known to each other, there is communication. The more I value them, the more I want to do for them--the more I want to give them happiness. And when they are happy--I am happy, as well. My looking out for their happiness doesn't depend on them making an equal return to me--I'm not caring for them in an attempt to buy their love. I love them, because I CHOOSE to love them. I love them because of what they do for me--what I get out of it. That joy they give me might be so great that I might give up everything for them. As Sonja Kristina, my favorite singer, once wrote, "I would begin again--willingly. If this were love. If this were love. Let go of everything that I own--if this were love. If this were love. Oh--if this were love." But make no mistake--it is purely selfish--and that is not a bad thing--quite the opposite! If someone said they loved me, but tried to tell me it was utterly unselfish, I wouldn't believe them, because love always has a self-oriented motivation--as it should. If there's no personal reason someone has to love me--how can I POSSIBLY trust them? Why are they loving me--because they feel like it? Because they're doing it on a whim? Then on a whim they might as easily turn away. If I don't inspire a personal reaction in another person, how can I possibly call it love? They're just doing it for me? No other reason? Then they'd do it for everybody--I'd be no different, there'd be nothing special about me to make me stand out to them. I'd consider such 'love' to be as genuine as the offers on the internet that promise a half-share of several million dollars, from people who have never seen me before, know nothing about me, and just picked my name off the net. We might even be talking about the same thing using different language and terms. I just feel that the reality of love gets buried under flawed ideals. "Real love is supposed to be altruistic. If you want something for somebody else--that's good. If you want something for yourself--that's bad." So people try to live up to these flawed, unnatural, unself-aware and inhuman ideals--because they've been told to all their lives; because it sounds right [just like the juicy worm concealing the fishhook looks right; because, in the end--THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO! But no one can, so they end up feeling bad, because they blame themselves for their frail human weaknesses. It's called being human. But we can't accept ourselves as we are. We spend our lives trying to find our way to THE MOUNTAIN OF PERFECT LOVE, the invisible mountain that rises a quarter of a million miles to the Moon. And when we fail at climbing it--at even finding it in the first place--we give up mountain climbing altogether--where if we hadn't let ourselves get so discouraged by impossibilities--we might possibly have reached Everest.
9/15/2008 6:03:05 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
carlylyn Sylvan Beach, NY age: 62 online now!	What a great post. You made the question and reality of 'love' completely clear. Love it----
9/17/2008 8:13:33 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
wimsygirl Campbellsville, KY age: 64	This subject is very interesting to me ...Any book suggestions to enlighten me ?
9/17/2008 12:50:20 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
alicekathleen Fresno, CA age: 63	Any Buddhist readings will deal with attachment. Since all things pass away, how foolish to become attached to them, whether material objects, feeling states, etc. That does not mean indifference or lack of caring, just that frantic, nervous energy that we tend to invest in our acquisitions and our thoughts. "I want to be happy!" "I want another piece of cake!" "I want you to always love me." "I have season tickets, goody goody for me!" Nothing is wrong with those thoughts, so long as we realize that they are wishes, and they will pass. It is like the Christian idea of "to everything there is a season". As I said, I am a failure at non-attachment, since I tend to be sentimental and clingy, but to be mindful of one's actions and thoughts is at least the first step!
9/17/2008 2:26:27 PM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
spectrre Shawnee, OK age: 37	Quote from wimsygirl: This subject is very interesting to me ...Any book suggestions to enlighten me ? Mindfulness with Breathing,great for beginners copy this big giant link to go right to a copy http://www.amazon.com/Mindfulness-Breathing-Manual-Serious-Beginners/dp/0861711114/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221686891&sr=8-1
9/18/2008 7:52:36 AM	Have you really gotten to non-attachment?
wimsygirl Campbellsville, KY age: 64	Quote from spectrre: Mindfulness with Breathing,great for beginners copy this big giant link to go right to a copy http://www.amazon.com/Mindfulness-Breathing-Manual-Serious-Beginners/dp/0861711114/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221686891&sr=8-1 Thank you much

nsa hookup app

megapersonals login