Love and Fear

[fig tree]

I also think culaavuso has made a good point here. My guess is that the writer referring to love and fear has the intention of implying that the whole spectrum of skillful mental qualities is essentially the same and using "love" in a sense that encompasses presumably things like "letting go", and similarly for unskillful and "fear" (although of course not using our terminology of "skillful" and "unskillful"). I think it has the potential to be misleading in just the way others have described. I've read it suggested for example that anger is always a kind of outgrowth of fear, but I'm not so fond any more of attempts to reduce one to the other. There are also a lot of more-or-less nice people around who are greedy but think that they aren't, because they don't see themselves as being obsessed with material wealth or with exploiting others, and don't realize that some of their "positive" feelings are misplaced.

All of this potential to mislead can be cleared up, but once we do, I think we see that there's not much left besides a pointing-out of the difference between skillful and unskillful.

When people try to measure personality, it seems they often wind up having an axis that correlates well with what they call "neuroticism". Neuroticism seems to be something like the axis between greedy and hating types as described in the Visuddhimagga. Nowadays in the U.S. there seems to be an emphasis on being positive or being low in neuroticism, which is something like recognizing fear and hostility as being unskillful without also recognizing greed and ignorance as being unskillful. I'm just speaking in terms of general trends here. I think the bias in this direction in my culture is strong enough that one should deliberately guard against it. Bearing in mind that all three of aversion, ignorance, and greed are unskillful (although they manifest with different emotions) and all three of the opposites are skillful even if sometimes not all equally exciting and fun.

Another way to look at it is that love usually brings to mind something like lovingkindness, but that when it does, it needs the other three brahmaviharas to balance it out.

Fig Tree

[Ben]

I also think culaavuso has made a good point here. My guess is that the writer referring to love and fear has the intention of implying that the whole spectrum of skillful mental qualities is essentially the same and using "love" in a sense that encompasses presumably things like "letting go", and similarly for unskillful and "fear" (although of course not using our terminology of "skillful" and "unskillful"). I think it has the potential to be misleading in just the way others have described. I've read it suggested for example that anger is always a kind of outgrowth of fear, but I'm not so fond any more of attempts to reduce one to the other. There are also a lot of more-or-less nice people around who are greedy but think that they aren't, because they don't see themselves as being obsessed with material wealth or with exploiting others, and don't realize that some of their "positive" feelings are misplaced.

All of this potential to mislead can be cleared up, but once we do, I think we see that there's not much left besides a pointing-out of the difference between skillful and unskillful.

When people try to measure personality, it seems they often wind up having an axis that correlates well with what they call "neuroticism". Neuroticism seems to be something like the axis between greedy and hating types as described in the Visuddhimagga. Nowadays in the U.S. there seems to be an emphasis on being positive or being low in neuroticism, which is something like recognizing fear and hostility as being unskillful without also recognizing greed and ignorance as being unskillful. I'm just speaking in terms of general trends here. I think the bias in this direction in my culture is strong enough that one should deliberately guard against it. Bearing in mind that all three of aversion, ignorance, and greed are unskillful (although they manifest with different emotions) and all three of the opposites are skillful even if sometimes not all equally exciting and fun.

Another way to look at it is that love usually brings to mind something like lovingkindness, but that when it does, it needs the other three brahmaviharas to balance it out.

Fig Tree

Well said, fig tree.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings,

Here is an example of a love-based teaching that I encountered yesterday that seems to be consistent with the sutta references provided previously by culaavuso... (though I am curious about precisely where in SN this quotation comes from, so I could check alternative translations).

Train yourself

This itself is the whole of the journey, opening your heart to that which is lovely.
Because of their feeling for the lovely, beings who are afraid of birth and death, aging and decaying, are freed from their fear.
This is the way you must train yourself: I will become your friend and an intimate of the lovely.
To do this I must closely observe and embrace all states of mind that are good.
- Samyutta Nikaya

Positive thinking is the power to choose to see the lovely, the divine, rather than the opposite. Why do we give power to negative expressions of life? Why do we often give power to past memories or grief? Why do we choose those things when we always have the choice to see the positive and lovely things happening here and now? Observe and embrace all states of mind that are good and also those which are not so good. Watch your thoughts in order to choose. Ask yourself: Do I really want to have this not-so-good thought? What are my options?

Be attentive as a constant witness to yourself as much as you can. Remember that you are already doing your best. Give your power to that which makes you love, share and be loved. Watch the negative aspects of your mind, but do not give them your power.

You have a choice - to be love, to see love, to feel love and to live through the power of Love.

Metta,
Retro.

[waterchan]

The proactive cultivation of love is advocated by a few teachers, notably including Ajahn Brahm who often says things like "love your sufferings", "have compassion towards yourself", "the cure for depression is to give yourself a hug", and "give yourself a hug before bed". Once, a novice monk at his monastery broke a precept by making himself a sandwich after midday. When the novice confessed to Ajahn Brahm, the novice wasn't willing to forgive himself without a punishment, so Ajahn Brahm gave him the punishment of finding a cat in the monastery and stroking it 50 times. There are teddy bears at his meditation center, and meditators with a lot of ill will are encouraged to meditate with a teddy bear in the lap.

I've always felt that this kind of teaching goes beyond the suttas, not that it's a bad thing at all. The suttas actively encourage refraining from causing harm, they fall short of encouraging the proactive cultivation of good will, love and compassion towards others. Some will point out Right Effort, but to me that one is rather vague and doesn't quite cut it.

[culaavuso]

Train yourself

This itself is the whole of the journey, opening your heart to that which is lovely.
Because of their feeling for the lovely, beings who are afraid of birth and death, aging and decaying, are freed from their fear.
This is the way you must train yourself: I will become your friend and an intimate of the lovely.
To do this I must closely observe and embrace all states of mind that are good.
- Samyutta Nikaya

This translation appears to be attributed to Anne Bancroft from her book The Buddha Speaks (page 14).

This seems like it could be a heavily paraphrased version of the quote from SN 45.2 which Bhikkhu Bodhi translated as:

By the following method too, Ananda, it may be understood how the entire holy life is good friendship, good companionship, good comradeship: by relying upon me as a good friend, Ananda, beings subject to birth are freed from birth; beings subject to aging are freed from aging; beings subject to death are freed from death; beings subject to sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair are freed from sorrow, lamentation, pain, displeasure, and despair. By this method, Ananda, it may be understood how the entire holy life is good friendship, good companionship, good comradeship.

The translations of Anne Bancroft are discussed in multiple posts on Fake Buddha Quotes, for example:

And this turns out to be from Anne Bancroft’s “rendering” of the Dhammapada.
...
If you look at Buddharakkhita’s translation you can see Bancroft’s rendition is a wild paraphrase
...
I suspect that from time to time certain authors, for some reason, “translate” texts without knowing the languages in question. I And I suspect that Bancroft is one of those authors, and that Thomas Byrom (another “translator” of the Dhammapada) is too. In Bancroft’s version she’s credited not as “translator” but as “editor” and in Byrom’s version he’s described as the “renderer.”

Bancroft takes samadhi to mean "truth" when actually it means meditative concentration. In later Buddhism it can mean "wisdom" but this is the Dhamapada and not later Buddhism.
...
This also comes from Anne Bancroft’s Dhammapada, which now looks to be less a translation and more of an improvisation loosely based on a theme by the Buddha.
...
I don’t really know much about Bancroft. Incidentally she’s not the film actress, although the two have often been confused. She’s edited or written many books, and her "Zen: Direct Pointing at Reality" was one of the first Buddhist books I bought. Her understanding of Pali, frankly, seems non-existent.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings culaavuso,

Yes, the sutta "translation" seemed a little shady upon initial inspection, but I think you've probably identified the "source" - nice work!



I am a little disappointed however that it contained no reference to subha - I was hoping that's what "the lovely" was pointing to!

Metta,
Retro.

[binocular]

Train yourself

This itself is the whole of the journey, opening your heart to that which is lovely.
Because of their feeling for the lovely, beings who are afraid of birth and death, aging and decaying, are freed from their fear.
This is the way you must train yourself: I will become your friend and an intimate of the lovely.
To do this I must closely observe and embrace all states of mind that are good.
- Samyutta Nikaya

Positive thinking is the power to choose to see the lovely, the divine, rather than the opposite. Why do we give power to negative expressions of life? Why do we often give power to past memories or grief? Why do we choose those things when we always have the choice to see the positive and lovely things happening here and now? Observe and embrace all states of mind that are good and also those which are not so good. Watch your thoughts in order to choose. Ask yourself: Do I really want to have this not-so-good thought? What are my options?

Be attentive as a constant witness to yourself as much as you can. Remember that you are already doing your best. Give your power to that which makes you love, share and be loved. Watch the negative aspects of your mind, but do not give them your power.

You have a choice - to be love, to see love, to feel love and to live through the power of Love.

Compare to Philippians 4:8:

Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable--if anything is excellent or praiseworthy--think about such things.

and in context of the 4th chapter:

Closing Appeal for Steadfastness and Unity

1Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord in this way, dear friends!

2I plead with Euodia and I plead with Syntyche to be of the same mind in the Lord. 3Yes, and I ask you, my true companion, help these women since they have contended at my side in the cause of the gospel, along with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are in the book of life.

Final Exhortations

4Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! 5Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. 6Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

8Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. 9Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.

Thanks for Their Gifts

10I rejoiced greatly in the Lord that at last you renewed your concern for me. Indeed, you were concerned, but you had no opportunity to show it. 11I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. 12I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. 13I can do all this through him who gives me strength.

14Yet it was good of you to share in my troubles. 15Moreover, as you Philippians know, in the early days of your acquaintance with the gospel, when I set out from Macedonia, not one church shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you only; 16for even when I was in Thessalonica, you sent me aid more than once when I was in need. 17Not that I desire your gifts; what I desire is that more be credited to your account. 18I have received full payment and have more than enough. I am amply supplied, now that I have received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent. They are a fragrant offering, an acceptable sacrifice, pleasing to God. 19And my God will meet all your needs according to the riches of his glory in Christ Jesus.

20To our God and Father be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
http://biblehub.com/niv/philippians/4.htm

Sounds quite similar.

[binocular]

I've always felt that this kind of teaching goes beyond the suttas, not that it's a bad thing at all. The suttas actively encourage refraining from causing harm, they fall short of encouraging the proactive cultivation of good will, love and compassion towards others.

/.../
The true practice of Buddhism, though, has always been counter-cultural, even in nominally Buddhist societies. Society's main aim, no matter where, is its own perpetuation. Its cultural values are designed to keep its members useful and productive — either directly or indirectly — in the on-going economy. Most religions allow themselves to become domesticated to these values by stressing altruism as the highest religious impulse, and mainstream Buddhism is no different. Wherever it has spread, it has become domesticated to the extent that the vast majority of monastics as well as lay followers devote themselves to social services of one form or another, measuring their personal spiritual worth in terms of how well they have loved and served others.

However, the actual practice enjoined by the Buddha does not place such a high value on altruism at all. In fact, he gave higher praise to those who work exclusively for their own spiritual welfare than to those who sacrifice their spiritual welfare for the welfare of others (Anguttara Nikaya, Book of Fours, Sutta 95) — a teaching that the mainstream, especially in Mahayana traditions, has tended to suppress. The true path of practice pursues happiness through social withdrawal, the goal being an undying happiness found exclusively within, totally transcending the world, and not necessarily expressed in any social function. People who have attained the goal may teach the path of practice to others, or they may not. Those who do are considered superior to those who don't, but those who don't are in turn said to be superior to those who teach without having attained the goal themselves. Thus individual attainment, rather than social function, is the true measure of a person's worth.
/.../
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/thai ... namic.html

Altruism is sometimes listed as an ego defense mechanism (!).