Pithy Pointers

Ona, yes, great points (no pun intended).
You wrote: "For if one has unconditional high regard for something, one certainly doesn't wish it were different, right?"
In terms of having unconditional high regard for other beings, I think it's OK to want them to be different. The questions is always - WHY? For example, I may practice unconditional high regard for a patient suffering from severe, recalcitrant OCD, in that whether she has OCD or not, I don't look down on her or devalue her as a human being. She still deserves all the care and respect that anyone else deserves, even if her behavior is harmful to herself or others. But, because of my high regard for her, of course I want her to change! The difference here, I think, is that my high regard isn't dependent on her ability to change, even if that's what I want to happen.
Just an example. I guess I'm afraid that "unconditional high regard" can quickly become "idiot compassion" if understood in a less complete way. Thoughts?

-awouldbehipster

I think that's a nice clarification. One's high regard for something is not dependent on it being different. But I think that is complicated to understand also. For most people if you say you want something to be different that implies a stressful dissatisfaction with current conditions, or even a frustration, unhappiness, even downright misery. This is a really interesting thing to tease out further. I'd love to hear more thoughts on this distinction.

Jackson, I often wonder how you combine your knowledge of the fluid nature of the self with your work with people's mental health issues. Since, I think, the entire work is about a "self" and, possibly, the problems might often stem from a person's fragmented personality and sense of self.


-michaelmonson

Some thoughts on that...

Jack Engler (Harvard Psychologist) said it best, in my opinion...

"You have to be somebody before you can be nobody."

That's not to say that transpersonal insights can't be had by those without a stable sense of self. But, integrating these insights in a way that leads to freedom and well being depends on a stable sense of self.

Also, I think it's possible to look at "self" and "not-self" as strategies (which has been discussed here in other threads). In that light, it's quite possible for anyone to apply these insights in ways that are helpful, regardless of where they are in terms of having a stable self, or regardless of mental illness. The trick is in determining what is skillful/helpful and unskillful/harmful.

In general, it's better to stick with healthy selfing techniques in psychotherapy, especially when dealing with actual diagnosable disorders. However, some existential issues lead to certain forms of anxiety and depression, and the insight route may actually be a good path for those who are otherwise integrated up to that level.

I think that's a nice clarification. One's high regard for something is not dependent on it being different. But I think that is complicated to understand also. For most people if you say you want something to be different that implies a stressful dissatisfaction with current conditions, or even a frustration, unhappiness, even downright misery. This is a really interesting thing to tease out further. I'd love to hear more thoughts on this distinction.


-ona

Yes, this can be a complicated topic.

In general, someone who displays high regard for others will have their interests at heart. This doesn't mean that the person with high regard doesn't also highly regard their own self as well. So, one of the possible dividing lines is whether or not a person actually cares about another person's well-being.

Let's say you're at a restaurant, and at the table next to you sits a young mother and her four year old autistic son. The son is throwing a tantrum, and not responding at all to the mother's queues to tone it down. The mother is noticeably distressed, at the end of her wits.

Without high regard, you might think: "God! I bet she wishes she had an abortion. I sure wish she would have. Can't she just fucking LEAVE! No one with a child like that should ever leave home. What's wrong with her?! I can't enjoy my meal."

With high regard, one may think: "Both mother and son are suffering, BIG TIME. As frustrating as this is for me to witness, I can't imagine how they both must feel right now."

In the latter case, one may rightly hope that the situation changes, for the benefit of all, including one's self. But the emphasis is not placed solely on "me". We may even attempt to help the mother, or to defend her if someone speaks out against her. We may speak to management to see if there's a room where the mother and child can go to reduce the amount of stimulation the child is receiving, as well as give the mother a chance to calm down.

It's really an attitudinal shift.

Was it Ram Dass who said, "The world is perfect just as it is, which includes my desire to change it."

Noted.

I'd agree with that I think. It seems to me that in fact having high regard for ones own self (in the common english sense of "self" for the moment) *helps* one have high regard for others that is *not* mostly driven by self-interest, and that includes a fairly wise and honest assessment of what the other person's best-interests are. Because more often than not what we think is in another person's best interests has a lot to do with our own self-interest. It can also be more subtle than the restaurant example you used, though that sums up the general process pretty well, and is something you actually see commonly enough on a daily basis. Heck, I've felt it, I've done it, in one variation or another.

I practice this all the time.
For me it is a kind of supplement, or tool, or overall attitude that helps me deal with whatever is going on anyway.
So, at the very best it always creates the possibly for more intimacy with people and events and things and increases the chances that I won't have anger, resentment, hate, fear, etc. about people and situations.
Next, if difficult people/settings/feelings arise, there is a better chance of being intimate with THAT, a better chance of gaining insight through the experience and a better chance that the difficulty will not escalate.
Then, if shit is really pissing me off (especially my own behavior) the point of view of high regard again gives the best chance for intimacy, learning, quicker relief, and a general honesty about what is really going on.
I have bosses who can just be AWFUL. Much of the time, though, I can kind of see what is going on (it's not really personal, they are super competitive people under a lot of pressure, my job is awesome because it pays well, is in a wonderful building in downtown SF, and is usual more than pleasant and often fascinating and a lot of people have horrible jobs or no jobs at all, etc) and just move on from unpleasant encounters.

So, stuff is going to happen all the time (the waves keep coming no matter what) and I can never know how I or the rest of life will react but if I'm approaching things with as much open love as I can -- it's better.

Edit: It's interesting -- I'm remembering all my early years as a constant Church goer (from birth to about 14-15) to mostly Baptist (southern and American) or Mennonite congregations and this attitude is something that is consciously taught in those Churches. It really is a "Sermon on the Mount"- type value as well as Buddhist, of course. And I distinctly remember as an immature kid getting upset and angry at the Church and Jesus and God and all the Christians I'd been around because it seemed like being a "Christian" was a bunch of BS because no one was really doing it (Like I guess I thought I was) and it seem to be a very bad strategy for actually having fun in the world.
Later in life though I can see that I have slowly come back around. Though you probably wouldn't think so if you knew me.

Interesting note about your Christian experiences, Mike. I've noticed that for some Christians I've known who had a very deep and healthy sort of faith there is a real surrender to not knowing, for example. The idea that your life is really in God's hands, and whatever twists and turns it may take, God has a plan that you may not understand, but is what is necessary in your life for some reason or other. People I've known who have that kind of faith tend to be able to weather the bumps of life quite well, with a deep sense of trust and faith.

Similarly those same people (I'm thinking of half a dozen specific people when I write this) tend to have a great deal of compassion and patience with other people, even people who are struggling, angry, mean and so on. Depending on their perspective they may say things like Jesus loves you even when you are messing up your life or failing, each person has their own crosses to bear, and so on.

Of course not everyone lives it that way. You can make any religion fit your own desires or prejudices if you want to.

Ona, I agree. It's a shame that for so many "Christian" these days conjures up the image of intolerance and right wing poliltics and a bizarre adherence to the idea that the "Bible" is the unerring work of God, when the truth is that so many real Christians are exactly as you described them and their lives are beautiful things to watch.

Time to revive this thread again!

I came across this old gem from Huang Po the other night, and it's been running through my mind ever since:

"Above, below and around you, all is simultaneously existing, for there is nowhere which is oustide the Buddha-Mind."

Think maybe this popped up in response to your exploration of aloneness/togetherness?

"all is simultaneous, for there is nowhere which is outside"--?

Kate, it was actually the reverse! My reflection on aloneness/togetherness just popped up today on my ride to work. I just sort of remembered. The Huang Po saying jumped out at me two nights ago.



Interesting though, isn't it? It's possible that the experiential reconcilliation pointed to by Huang Po stirred something in me, which brought pre-Buddhist history back to mind. Whatever the case, it's lovely to hold both and see what happens

Poetry is full of them, of course;
maybe that's why my path began there:

More great poetic pointers:

T.S. Eliot-- " We shall not
cease from exploration

And the end of all our exploring

Will be to arrive where we started

And know the place for the first time."

and Wallace Stevens-- "... for the listener,

who
listens in the snow,

And, nothing
himself, beholds

Nothing that is
not that is not there,

and the nothing
that is."



and --"
After the final no there comes a yes

And on that yes the future world
depends.

No was the night. Yes is this
present sun."

And,
for the hard times, William Carlos Williams—“ The descent beckons

as the ascent
beckoned.

Memory
is a kind

of accomplishment,

a sort of
renewal

even

an initiation, since the spaces
it opens are new places

inhabited by
hordes

heretofore
unrealized,

of
new kinds—“

to note: cut-and-paste, plus being in 'edit post' mode is screwing with spacing. Above seems as good as I can get.

Some that have come to me at aha moments or caused the same:

It is as it is. (No need to change anything.)

This just is. (Same idea.)

The still point around which everything revolves (from T.S Eliot)

jack

Here is something from A Course in Miracles: Whenever you meet anyone, remember it as an holy encounter. As you see him you will see yourself. As you treat him you will treat yourself. As you think of him you will think of yourself...Give him his place in the Kingdom and you will have yours.

Carl Jung: No concept is a carrier of life.

Isn't it strange that we prefer the quicksand of somethingness to the firm ground of emptiness. (Don't know where I heard this one.)

Others from the Course in Miracles: I do not understand anything I see....I have given everything I see all the meaning it has for me...(And my favorite) Perception is a mirror not a fact.

Cherokee Poem: It is when the warrier is empty of hunger that prey crosses his path. (I remembered this one yesterday when I realized one of my meditations was polluted by wanting something different to happen.)

jack

I like that Cherokee poem, Jack. It reminds me of the concept of "narrowing of attention". When we are in craving-mode, our focus is constricted, and our options are thus limited. When the hunger is gone, our attention is much more expansive. With so much more available to awareness, a warrier might just notice the prey that's been their all along, right under his nose.