The Practice of Forbearance

18 Guests, 0 Users

They say that God is everywhere, and yet we always think of Him as somewhat of a recluse. ~ Emily Dickinson

Advanced search

Dilber MulticolorMarley TPSMF Default Theme -

[Michael]

A dear friend sent this to me this morning:


Talk given by Thich Nhat Hanh
on July 23, 1996 in Plum Village, France.
Be Like the Earth
The Practice of Forbearance

    quote: In that Dharma talk, the Buddha advised Rahula to practice being the earth, the great earth. The Buddha said, "Rahula, practice so that you'll be like the earth." People might throw on the earth things like perfume, excrement, urine, all the dirty things, but the earth always receives all of that without anger. No matter whether it is the perfume or jewels or gold or silver or flowers or garbage or dirt or excrement or urine, the earth receives all of that without any resentment, any anger, because the earth is great, is large. The earth has the power to transform all these. You have a dead mouse in your kitchen. You want to get rid of it-where do you put it? You throw it to the earth. In no time at all, the earth transforms the dead mouse into something that you can accept. The earth has a great power of transformation, because the earth is great. So practice so that your heart becomes as great as the earth. You suffer only if you are small, if your heart is small. But when your heart is expanded you don't have to suffer. You don't need to make an effort to bear the suffering.

    The other day I started with the image of a water container. It can contain something like fifty liters and if you throw something dirty into that container then you cannot drink that water any more-you have to throw the whole thing away. But if you throw that dirt on a big river, the river is immense, and the river water is still drinkable. In no time at all, the river with all the water and the mud transforms the dirt you throw into it, and everything will be perfect again. And the whole city continues to drink the water from the river. It's not that the river has to bear. We're talking about forbearance, endurance-as a boat to carry you to the other shore-shanti-paramita, "crossing to the other shore," the shore of happiness, joy, and liberation by the boat of forbearance.

    If you make your heart as large as the earth then you can accept anything people do to you and say to you, without suffering. But if your heart is small, you suffer a lot. So Rahula practiced to be like the earth. That is the practice of love called the Four Immeasurable Minds. Because with the practice, your heart is growing and growing and growing, larger and larger all the time. And your heart will embrace everything, everyone-no enemy at all, there's no enemy. Every time we praise the Buddha, we say, "Dear Buddha, your heart is so big and you embrace every living being with your heart, your compassion encircles the whole of the cosmos." Whether you call them friend or enemy, it's the same when your heart is big, you embrace them all, you love them all-whether they are cruel or less cruel, they are equally the object of your compassion.

    So if you are a student of the Buddha try to practice so that your heart grows larger every day, and you won't have to suffer. Even if they say very mean and very cruel things to you, if they do cruel things to you, even if they try to suppress you and to kill you. How can you kill a river? How can you kill the earth? It is so huge. Some dirt cannot destroy the river because the river is so big. "Rahula, practice so that you will be like the water. Whether people throw into the water flowers, fragrance, food, milk, or urine or excrement or dead bodies of animals, the water will receive all without rancor, without resentment, without hatred; because the water has the capacity of washing everything. You can wash the bowl of the Buddha with the water, but you can wash also the dirty cloth, someone full of blood, the water receives everything and the water can wash everything, transform everything. So Rahula, please practice so that your heart will become something like water, you can receive everything without resentment and rancor.

    "Rahula, practice like fire. Whether you throw into fire cloth or paper or flowers or dirty things, the fire accepts all and burns all. Whether it is fragrant or whether it stinks the fire accepts all and the fire reduces everything to ash and smoke. Because fire has the power to transform. Rahula, practice being like air. Whether you throw into the air something fragrant or something smelling bad, whether you burn incense or whether you burn rubber, the air accepts all because the air has the power to transform, because air is huge." The Buddha was instructing the young monk Rahula. But Shariputra, the tutor of Rahula, was standing there and absorbing every word of the Buddha and he was practicing that teaching for many, many years.

[marianthi]

Nice to see you here again MichaelD 

Riiiight: Forbearance.  A great teaching in the words quoted by your friend but...is it complete without a comment about the OUTER answer needed?  Yes, to be too big, too expanded, to be polluted by whatever evil comes our way, I agree.  But some people need an outer confrontation.  I might have compassion for my neighbour who is too dim to know that throwing his garbage over to my side of the fence is stupid but if that is repeated after a clear non-violent discussion with him, you bet I?d let my dogs loose on his property. Or pull the plug of my septic treatment plant in his direction.

There were various martial sects of monks in the old days.  Tibet fell to the Chinese.  What did the Buddhist monks do? Yes, they suffered, many were killed, many fled. Martyrs.  Had I been among them I?d have carried a sackfull of severed Red Chinese heads of the guys attacking the temples, as an offering to the Divine realms as I rose to them . In my view, stupid non-violence condones violence.   Rightly applied violence can stop stupid violence.  The Bagavad Gita features a long conversation on this topic between Krishna and Arjuna too. 


 

Marianthi.

[Michael]

Ah yes.  The nonviolence thing...

Hmmm.  I've been musing off and on about the meaning of this metaphor...and was wondering if anyone would see fit to call it on its defects.  The teaching, as such, is obviously outdated, and is hardly a comprehensive strategy for dealing with all manor of assholes and suchlike.  I was just drawn to the basic principle of receptive expansion underlying the flawed metaphor, which was particularly made alive for me by my endless fascination with the natural regenerative qualities of the earth in time.

I'm reminded of such disaster areas as Yellowstone park in the states, where slow motion geologic distasters are healed and transformed as some of the most breathtaking beauty spots on earth.  The earth has this amazing quality of slowly transforming ugliness and waste and disaster into pure beauty and vibrancy.

Are we not of this earth?  Are we not direct manifestations of the same processes at work?  The main difference in my view, and the reason we seem so far removed from those basic transformative process is TIME.  We operate on such micro-scales compared to the more evident geological macro-scales.

[marianthi]

True, Michael,  earth has such regenerative qualities.  By them, as you say :
geologic distasters are healed and transformed as some of the most breathtaking beauty spots on earth.  The earth has this amazing quality of slowly transforming ugliness and waste and disaster into pure beauty and vibrancy.
But reduce your size to microbian dimensions and walk into this regeneration and you might shriek at the violence and gore going on for all that supports the eventual beauty.  Acids, alkalis, bacteria, micro-organisms, insects,  busy like there was no to-morrow, eat away, decompose, excrete trough existing soil, vegetation, animals (dead or alive) with alarming speed and delight (well, I add the ?delight? factor given how bugs mite and bacteria can gorge themselves)  .  Ah, and if there were volume to the inaudible orchestration of all that destruction, secretion, decomposition we?d probably press the mute button.

So, earth?s  non-violence? forbearance?  What an illusion, my friend, what an illusion.

 

Marianthi.

[Michael]

Hi Marianthi,  nice to be back in action again, and am as always enjoying your company...

But reduce your size to microbian dimensions and walk into this regeneration and you might shriek at the violence and gore going on for all that supports the eventual beauty. 

I suppose the same might be said of entering those dimensional micro-scales within the human organism.  Lucky us!  We get to hover above it all (to some extent), designing and inhabiting our beautiful aircastles in the ego and trans-ego realms, enjoying the sights and sounds from these rarified altitudes... 

[Lawrence]

… Okay, since you have chosen to tak on the advocacy of ‘an eye for an eye,’ in the spirit of fair and balanced reporting, I will take the contrarian point of view…  

But some people need an outer confrontation.

…‘An eye for an eye, a tooth fer a tooth’ (or thereabouts)… Ah yes, truly a timeless classic… Who gets to decide who these ‘some people’ are? You? Me? The neighbor? A neutral third party? According to the short example you provide, for this particular, theoretical scenario, it appears that you get to decide. Fair enough. In a world filled with choices, somebody has to make some decisions around here!…

I might have compassion for my neighbor who is too dim to know that throwing his garbage over to my side of the fence is stupid but if that is repeated after a clear non-violent discussion with him, you bet I’d let my dogs loose on his property. Or pull the plug of my septic treatment plant in his direction.

… When your neighbor throws garbage over to your side of the fence, and reasonable dialogue only seems to increase the frequency thereof, is responding in kind really the only other alternative? Because we’ve all seen this little drama played out before. And it always leads to he same, sad, conclusion. Are we to think that the whole formula will somehow be any more justified in its inevitable tragic ending, because it is you, or I, who have now taken charge of these dastardly imbeciles? History shows otherwise. We have a world filled with hatred, conflict, and righteous indignation, all integrally tied together by a unifying concept known as ‘good and evil’. It is timeless classic indeed, and its dramatic ending is as predictable as the rotating planets…
… We have never run out of justifications for the continuing confrontation with the dim, the stupid, and all those we would deem,  ‘need an outer confrontation’… We may feel a whole new need for the ‘idiot compassion’ movement to finally wake up and smell the coffee, as we compel them to start filling their sacks with dim-witted heads, less righteous than your own, but I would venture to guess that these less violent adherents are already well aware of the ‘rightly applied violence’ that we would champion, and are rather leaning, none-the-less, towards that long held tradition that would profess to buck the timeless trend, of known as ‘more of the same’…

… If there is one unifying principle with which all religious teachings, both east and west, have in common, it is the simple recognition that ‘there is much more to physical life than meets the eye’… If we cannot find it within ourselves to take the illogical, idiot compassion stance of the ascetic, maybe we can better embrace the logical concepts of the evolutionary psychologist, as he or she ‘confirms’ with science, that ‘yes indeed, there really is much more to life than meets the eye’… Eastern ascetics have been holding fast to such an unconventional perspective, based primarily on centuries of both theoretical faith, and time tested conviction, through more practical ‘experiential experience’… In the west, we’re still far more stuck in not only what our eyes tell us, but what our very limited ‘rationalizations’ of what we ‘perceive’ our eyes are telling us, with that age old concept we all know and love, called ‘good and evil’… Good and evil, where both the dim and the stupid get their just reward, and where thinking beyond much more than an eye for an eye, will only lead to death, despair, and surrender…
… It is no accident that the Holy Roman warriors who came to the new world over five hundred years ago, with this same old, tried and true western mantra of good and evil, were also known as ‘the Conquerors’…
… You can bet ‘they’ would not have lost Tibet! No, in fact, it was their very brethren who actually ‘took’ Tibet!… Ah yes, the circle is complete… Who needs the struggle of dealing with dim-witted neighbors, when we have ‘the sword’ and a sturdy bag for collecting heads to ease the troubled mind…

In my view, stupid non-violence condones violence.   Rightly applied violence can stop stupid violence.

… Is non-violence really so stupid? Although it does not have the history of violence, per se, it still has quite a history none-the-less. And with adherents like Jesus and Sidartha, and many more, it is an inspiring history indeed… Do you think they came to this non-violent conviction in a vacuum? If you think we live in a violent world today, imagine how many peace rally’s these individuals had the opportunity to attend, if they felt the need for a little mutual fellowship? Not many, I’m sure. And yet despite this world they lived in, they still found much more than simple curiosity in maintaining a peaceful vigilance in the face of overwhelming violence. They made it into a movement… We have to assume, I would think, that the whole concept of violence was surly considered, contemplated, examined, explored, and studied? You know it was… We can call it idiot, or stupid, or even naive, but to be so quick to take on the mantle of righteousness, shows you we neither honor their wisdom, nor their sacrifice… And it is quite the sacrifice indeed, for a man to give up his very life, in order to make his very life itself, a literal offering to humanity, as the ultimate conviction which  finally break the chain of never ending violence, for whatever reasons we have rationalized as simple necessity…

… As far as Arjuna goes, why do we find it easier to accept the supposed justification for violence from this historical narrative, and yet we cannot find equal conviction in the long, historical chain of non-violence?… I’m not pointing the finger here, I think we all do this. I think we all seem to find it far easier to imagine, or project, mankind as easily exercising the most egregious acts conceivable, as a matter of being human –and those more sublime qualities as much harder to envision… Why does this seem to be the case? Because the model of good and evil that we are all almost, seemingly ‘programmed’ to emulate, makes an alternative point of view all but incomprehensible, and unfathomable… When an ascetic comes along –or a group of ascetics comes along- we can only define their parameters with the only model we are aware of… And that model is a poor instrument indeed, if one is to go anywhere beyond the simple concept of good and evil…
… Without this basic understanding, Arjuna may as well become ‘one’ with the violence he is about to engage in. Besides, with all those swords, spears, and pikes out and about, the chances of exploring the possibility of ‘non-violence’ would seem to be more than a little mute, wouldn’t you think? Why worry his purtty little head over a thing like right and wrong at a time like this, right? What good would it do now?… Sometimes a timeless narrative doesn’t have to be contemplated and examined for a deeper, more esoteric significance. Sometimes a timeless, common-sensical narrative, is just a timeless common-sensical narrative…  

[marianthi]

Thank you for granting us the sight of those beautiful springs, Michael.  Where are they?

Lawrence, how sad it would be if our interactions with this world popped out of consistent formulas and dictates!  I?d use ?an eye for an eye?, only for those who might understand nothing else.  And might even stretch it to ?a head for an eye? if I see that their violence can only be stopped with even meaner violence.  But, of course,  I?d go for a smooth dusting of consensus if I can sit and sieve viewpoints with any opponent. 

I?m a pacifist when I can be and a fighter when given no other choise.  I might not be here writing this if I had not been one when I was mugged  with intent to robbery (twice) or if I had not practically scratched out the eyes of a man who tried to rape me.   Lucky stars and a sharp informed instinct helped my case then.  Negotiation at those moments was not possible.  Nor was I as detached from my actions as a dear ascetic would be.  I was furious. While I wait for my soul to develop an admirable stance of non-attachment, my life goes on and I must live it and defend it.

Right action is my choise. And ?Right? I define by many more factors than those woven in blanket formulas of pacifism or violence.

 

Marianthi.

 

[Lawrence]

Thank you for granting us the sight of those beautiful springs, Michael.  Where are they?

Lawrence, how sad it would be if our interactions with this world popped out of consistent formulas and dictates! 
 

? Indeed. However, in our twenty first century world -which proposes an endless war on terror- what could be a more consistent formula, or dictate, than this timeless classic that demands we answer increasing violence, with ever-increasing violence? If there were ever an argument that has rarely been taken seriously, it is the ?turn the other cheek? paradigm. Certainly not a part of the ?consistent formulas and dictates? philosophy?

   I?d use ?an eye for an eye?, only for those who might understand nothing else.  And might even stretch it to ?a head for an eye? if I see that their violence can only be stopped with even meaner violence. 

? If we find that the only solution that we seem to be cable of engaging in, is simply ?more? reciprocal violence ?than at the very least, the last thing we should champion is to become even ?more violent? than the protagonists we wish to stop? It seems to me that the very first step in the eventual elimination ?or at least reduction- of violence, is that for ?cooler heads? to prevail, and to ultimately stop reinforcing the social acceptance of ever more violence. Even at ?and especially at- the expense of more violence?
? One of the chief benefits of being the biggest, and meanest sucker in the valley, is that you don?t have to go around proving it over and over again every single day. Everybody knows it. If we were to apply this same reality to governments, and police forces, the same should apply as well. Governments and police forces the world over can afford to be less violent in their own response to violence because of the already immense power they wield, and yet more often than not, they too answer violence with equal, and even greater violence, because we as a society continue to give them permission to do so. And yet it is no secret that wherever police departments are staffed with female officers (and who are less likely to answer violent confrontations with more violence), the incidence of violent encounters with police officers is noticeably reduced?
? If our collective cultures, with our various media and educational institutions, would spend a fraction of the time in espousing the virtues of non-violence ?as much as they spend in continuously scaring the shit out of us- male aggression, and its constant companion ?violence,?  could eventually become as pass? as the spirit of kindness is now looked upon as, today?

  But, of course,  I?d go for a smooth dusting of consensus if I can sit and sieve viewpoints with any opponent.

? Well, if there is any consensus at all in this dog eat dog world of ours, it has to be the ever agreeable, and ever continuing consensus of  more and more violence? 

  I?m a pacifist when I can be and a fighter when given no other choise.

? I?m probably the same way, but I also know that when I do stoop to violence as a response to violence, then all previous years of non-violent responses are all thrown out the window, and I am right back to square one, all over again? Which is to say, if I?m going to go down this road, number one; get ready for some experiential backsliding ?and number two; there is no way in hell you?re going to see me joining the lecture circuit and book signing tour, as a champion of answering violence with violence? If it seems that we are forced into such actions ?as a society, or as an individual- the least we can do, at the end of the day, is admit our own transgression into the darkness, and vow even greater vigilance the next time around, instead of back-slapping each other, and handing out medals of heroism for our bravado, which is probably as common in your culture, as it is in my own?

   I might not be here writing this if I had not been not one when I was mugged  with intent to robbery (twice) or if I had not practically scratched out the eyes of a man who tried to rape me.   Lucky stars and a sharp informed instinct helped my case then. 

? I am glad for your success, and had I been present, I would have joined you in your attack ?or defense. However, what act would guarantee a more long-term certainty as to the elimination of such deeds? A thorough thrashing of the hate-filled protagonist, or a daily reminder to a receptive population, of a whole new metaphor for life? Certainly this is ?or should be- the whole purpose for religions, or philosophy, or even humanity, no? First, do no harm? I?m not saying that taking a non-violent approach to life is easy, especially in such a highly volatile, and violent world of ours. But it should not be so quickly dismissed either, especially in such a highly volatile, and violent world of ours?

? Religions and philosophies on the surface are quite childish and na?ve to those who can only engage in physical life at the very outer edges of its experience. To those who can peer slightly deeper below the surface, more depth can be revealed. It does no good for anyone, when those who can peer through the depths only come back to the surface to report to their brothers; ?keep doing what your doing, there?s nothing to see down here??

  Negotiation at those moments was not possible. 

? I couldn?t agree more. Just like Arjuna?

Nor was I as detached from my actions as a dear ascetic would be. 

 

? Personally, I question the value, or even the purpose, of living in a physical world, ?detached? from enjoying the fruits thereof. But that?s another story?

   I was furious. While I wait for my soul to develop an admirable stance of non-attachment, my life goes on and I must live it and defend it.

? ?Non-attachment? might show us how to ?accept? our fate, but it certainly doesn?t seem to do anything for various ?outcomes,? does it??

  Right action is my choise. And ?Right? I define by many more factors than those woven in blanket formulas of pacifism or violence.

 

Marianthi.
 

? Well, I would hope that I have not reduced the potential depths and nuances that might be mined from the study of religions, philosophies, and even pacifism, to nothing more than blanket formulas! I hope that I have at least drawn a few parallels between answering violence with more violence, while simply suggesting at another alternative ?albeit difficult- to one of the most insidious problems plaguing our societies the world over? I will confess however, to acknowledging the blanket formula that is violence, since it covers our entire planet like the itchy, wool, blanket that it is? Give me a soft, Down comforter any day!? 

[jimtzu]

not to interupt this conversation, but rented a movie tonite that i'd never seen that speaks to these issues.  made it 1999, Instinct, well worth checking out.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0128278/

carry on
 

[Lawrence]

not to interupt this conversation, but rented a movie tonite that i'd never seen that speaks to these issues.  made it 1999, Instinct, well worth checking out.

http://imdb.com/title/tt0128278/

carry on
 

... Thanks for the heads up, and the link! I immediately went to the link you provided, which only left me with more questions than answers as to what this movie was really all about. So, I googled, and found an Amazon site with 99 separate customer reviews! That gave me a much better idea of what it was you might have been recommending... Thanks again! I'm sure I'll enjoy it!...

http://www.amazon.com/Instinct-Anthony-Hopkins/dp/B00001U0DU

[marshall]

Ya Know, Instinct was based on Daniel Quinn's Ishmael.

So nice to see your words again, brother Lawrence, stew loves you.

[Daniel]

I'll second Marshall, thank you Lawrence and Jimtzu. I'll check out the movie for sure 

 Another recommendation that helps highlight this discussion. This one is a gem, Sophie Scholl-The Final Days. 

Dan


http://www.sophieschollmovie.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Sophie-Scholl-Final-Julia-Jentsch/dp/B000H5V8H2/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-3833647-7124720?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1175455455&sr=8-1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Rose

[Jana]

Perhaps forbearance is cessation...
G:?Since we operate from an individuality that for better or worse engages its life in a series of choices, chosen as a means of enjoying that life.......
Why are we rarely completely happy? Why is everything like pulling teeth to get something accomplished? Or more importantly, for those who do get what they want......Why do we not want what we get when we get what we want??

If you read some of John Perkins work (Confessions of an Economic Hitman) he observed that Third World peoples were generally a lot happier and content with their lives because they were ignorant of what they didn?t have. Ie: their expectations and demands were lower, and they had greater acceptance of their family, conditions and limitations. The value system in the West is set toward the attainment of power, money, position and property?so that if we are to ?accept? our situation, we have to become transcendent of basing our own sense of self-worth on worldly signifiers, and also be transcendent of the opinion of others as to our worth also.

Thus self-esteem needs to be shifted into the spiritual domain to become Self-esteem in order to be happy and at peace with the way things are. When we are happy and at peace with the way things are, then we begin to live a truly unique life that is all our own, not driven around by external forces in an attempt to satisfy one deprivation after another.

You might say that Third Worlders? have a prepersonal level of equanimity and acceptance due to ignorance. We in the West are more in danger of losing our souls through the externalization of self-worth?However this really merely provides us with the opportunity to actually find ourselves ?within? the material wasteland. For the tension provided by externalization actually presents to us the absence within, which we can then fill with the power of Presence and mindfulness. 

If we stop complaining for a second, we can see that wherever we are is perfect for the next stage of our growth?we cannot go back to the satiety of naivety. Instead we must plow forward to find the depths within the shallowness of present Western life. This is our test and our task, to find meaning through and in Flatland. And thus live in enchantment once more.