"Managing Attachments"

[Sunstone]

Do you not view friendship as a kind of attachment?

I suppose it is for many people, perhaps even most, but I don't think feelings of friendliness necessarily have anything to do with attachment.

 

[blackout]

I suppose it is for many people, perhaps even most, but I don't think feelings of friendliness necessarily have anything to do with attachment.

Yah. I prefer myself, to just "like stuff" and people...
rather than feel or be "attached" to them.

even Love given freely is not an attachment.
It's just love. :hearts:
I like it better that way.

 

[Panda]

I suppose it is for many people, perhaps even most, but I don't think feelings of friendliness necessarily have anything to do with attachment.

I feel the complete opposite, it has everything to do with attachment. I mean what is friendship or love but an emotional attachment to a person?

 

[blackout]

I feel the complete opposite, it has everything to do with attachment. I mean what is friendship or love but an emotional attachment to a person?

I suppose if a love/friendship attachment
doesn't come with an "expectations attachment"...... attached....
(beyond love itself that would be)

then that's fine.

Please! No attatchments on my attachments.
That's far more than I want to manage.

 

[Sunstone]

I feel the complete opposite, it has everything to do with attachment. I mean what is friendship or love but an emotional attachment to a person?

"Attachment" is usually a suitable word to use for the idea that's being expressed in the OP, but remember that "Attachment" is a translation of a more technical term used in Buddhism. The Buddhist word that can be translated as "Attachment" can also be translated as "Clinging-ness". If you think of "Attachment" as "overly clinging to something", then it can be easier to see the difference between a mere "emotional attachment" and an "Attachment" to someone.

 

[doppelganger]

"Attachment" is usually a suitable word to use for the idea that's being expressed in the OP, but remember that "Attachment" is a translation of a more technical term used in Buddhism. The Buddhist word that can be translated as "Attachment" can also be translated as "Clinging-ness". If you think of "Attachment" as "overly clinging to something", then it can be easier to see the difference between a mere "emotional attachment" and an "Attachment" to someone.

I think that really weakens the value of meditating on attachments. There are attachments that will not seem "overly clingy" that are still attachments because they habitually objectify others (even spouses and children) and create needs that actually interfere in those relationships.

Perhaps moving with the fluidity of the ever changing universe, both in a willingness to embrace uncertainty in one's own apparent "identity" and in the states of being we tend to habitually attach to others, will yield a greater mastery of fear, expand compassion and improve understanding.

 

[doppelganger]

It's like my Dad used to say when I was a kid: "If you love something, let it go. If it comes back to you, it's yours. If it doesn't . . . then hunt it down and destroy it so that nobody else can have it."

He was a very wise man . . . with a lot of restraining orders issued against him.

 

[Sunstone]

I think that really weakens the value of meditating on attachments. There are attachments that will not seem "overly clingy" that are still attachments because they habitually objectify others (even spouses and children) and create needs that actually interfere in those relationships.

Perhaps moving with the fluidity of the ever changing universe, both in a willingness to embrace uncertainty in one's own apparent "identity" and in the states of being we tend to habitually attach to others, will yield a greater mastery of fear, expand compassion and improve understanding.

What you say might be close enough to the truth, but could it be you're getting way ahead of the conversation here, Dopp? I'm pretty much taking things one step at a time this morning -- not just so Panda can more easily understand, but also because I am naturally gifted at tripping over myself.

By the way, it's good to see you this morning!

 

[doppelganger]

What you say might be close enough to the truth, but could it be you're getting way ahead of the conversation here, Dopp? I'm pretty much taking things one step at a time this morning -- not just so Panda can more easily understand, but also because I am naturally gifted at tripping over myself.

Oh, yeah. Sorry. Nevermind then.

By the way, it's good to see you this morning!

It's good to see you on any morning my friend.

 

[Sunstone]

Oh, yeah. Sorry. Nevermind then.

To be clear, what you said makes complete sense to me, and I got something valuable out of reading it. :yes:

 

[doppelganger]

To be clear, what you said makes complete sense to me, and I got something valuable out of reading it. :yes:

Thanks. But your point is a valid one.

 

[idea]

Society pushes so much for people to be independent – I think it is good to be attached to people – attached to the people themselves, NOT attached to what those people can do for you, not attached to thing, but attached to people is good. I mean you would be an uncaring cold loveless person if you refused to become attached to anyone. Can you really love without becoming attached? To keep yourself aloof and unattached from someone is not to love them… What keeps us from becoming attached to people? Pride – “I don’t need you”, or selfishness - refusal to give ourselves or our heart, or anything to another. Sure, anyone can live unattached, people pride themselves on being “independent”, but I think it is more honorable to be interdependent than independent. I mean there is no Meaning or Purpose in life if you refuse to become attached. What are you going to live for/with – only yourself?

That will be my thought for the day, to cleave, unite, become one.
8 Cleave unto the LORD your God
(Old Testament | Joshua 23:8)

5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?
6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
(New Testament | Matthew 19:5 - 6)

9 Let love be without dissimulation. Abhor that which is evil; cleave to that which is good.
(New Testament | Romans 12:9)

11 Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.
(New Testament | John 17:11)

10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.
(New Testament | 1 Corinthians 1:10)

27 I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine.
(Doctrine and Covenants | Section 38:27)

18 And the Lord called his people ZION, because they were of one heart and one mind, and dwelt in righteousness; and there was no poor among them.
(Pearl of Great Price | Moses 7:18)

1 BEHOLD, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!
2 It is like the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down upon the beard, even Aaron's beard: that went down to the skirts of his garments;
3 As the dew of Hermon, and as the dew that descended upon the mountains of Zion: for there the LORD commanded the blessing, even life for evermore.
(Old Testament | Psalms 133:1 - 3)

 

[Sunstone]

Society pushes so much for people to be independent – I think it is good to be attached to people – attached to the people themselves, NOT attached to what those people can do for you, not attached to thing, but attached to people is good. I mean you would be an uncaring cold loveless person if you refused to become attached to anyone. Can you really love without becoming attached? To keep yourself aloof and unattached from someone is not to love them… What keeps us from becoming attached to people? Pride – “I don’t need you”, or selfishness - refusal to give ourselves or our heart, or anything to another. Sure, anyone can live unattached, people pride themselves on being “independent”, but I think it is more honorable to be interdependent than independent. I mean there is no Meaning or Purpose in life if you refuse to become attached. What are you going to live for/with – only yourself?

Very interesting, Idea, but I suspect you might be both misunderstanding and over-intellectualizing what attachment means.

 

[Buttercup]

Discussing whether attachments benefit or disadvantage others is, in a way, a bit like discussing whether gravity benefits or disadvantages people.

Hmm. I'll try to not take that as an insult to my intelligence.

Let's say you've lived a life largely free of attaching yourself to any humanitarian cause. One day an opportunity comes your way to greatly help others but you know it will mean sacrificing your time and sanity to help. Of course you're going to weigh the benefits your choice could have on others. You may save a life. You may discover a new antibiotic or cure for a disease. You may succeed in getting a civil rights ammendment passed. The endeavor may also weigh heavily on your spiritual balance. If a person has any sense of projected introspection, they'll realize the toll this cause to help others might have on themselves spirtually. Of course it's of value to reflect upon. And, the cause will become an attachment. I guarantee that.

I also wonder whether or not you are assuming here that attachment is the only possible motive a person would have for acting? Is that the case? Could a person, free of attachment, act out of compassion, for instance?

Of course. In fact, a desire to act out of compassion could be the initial motivator.

First, I think striving to have no attachments might be counter-productive. Would not striving to have no attachments itself be an attachment -- at least, in practice?

Yes. This is what I was getting at in an earlier post where I think you missed my point.

Second, I am unsure how you could in practice pick and choose which attachments to carry. Are you, in effect, saying you can pick and choose which illusions you will pretend to believe even though you have clearly seen they are illusions? That's the only sense I can make of your question, and yet, I don't think that's what you meant.

See three paragraphs above.

Last, if all attachments are causing you suffering -- if that is what you see -- then why would you only be concerned to ameliorate some of the suffering caused by attachments and not all of the unnecessary suffering?

I didn't say "all attachments" cause suffering. I'm merely saying that perhaps some attachments are good for mankind and I think most of us are happy to carry them....at least for awhile.

 

[Sunstone]

Hmm. I'll try to not take that as an insult to my intelligence.

I don't think you and I communicate well enough to discuss this subject any further with each other. We simply don't understand each other. So, let's leave it at that.

 

[Buttercup]

I don't think you and I communicate well enough to discuss this subject any further with each other. We simply don't understand each other. So, let's leave it at that.

Oh good grief.

 

[tomspug]

Attachments are something we latch onto for self-justification.

 

[Ozzie]

Sometimes when I click on the "Who's Online" feature, I see someone listed as "managing attachments." Isn't that what all of us are doing all of the time - managing attachments?

Can spiritual practices end the process of managing attachments, or do they just make for new attachments to manage?

What do managers do? They manage something, either to reduce risk, or mitigate exposure. Attachments cannot be managed in that sense without strengthening them, though managing attachments might not result in "new" attachments to manage.

 

[zenzero]

Friends,
Once again shall repeat what Mystic Ramakrishna of India had said:

*Live a life like a lotus leaf.*

Those who have seen lotus plants ,; they grow in water. The beauty of those leaves is that as soon as you take them out of water, all the water falls off with no water sticking to it.

He was trying to state that though we live amongst other being not only humans but plants, animals etc our life should be such that though we are immersed in it totally but we remain in a constant state of unattachment.
Unattachment does not mean that one does not love rather his love is deeper than others as that is constant and without strings attached and it has become Compassion.

Love & rgds

 

[Smoke]

I have attachments, I would never want to let go of them.

Why would anyone ever want to?

Because it's inevitable. Your grip isn't powerful enough to hold on. Your family and friends will die, or drift away. Your youth passes, if you're lucky, and then the whole span of your life. Your descendants will die out; your planet will die; you will be forgotten with all your achievements.

Believing that you can hold on causes unnecessary pain to yourself and others.

To me they seem entirely counter-productive to my goal in life, which is to just enjoy it.

I think you enjoy life more when you realize how transitory it is. When you think of how short your time with your loved ones is, it makes it all the more precious.