Buddhist scriptures constantly talk about and stress the importance of non-attachment. But little is talked or adequately explained about meeting human needs while trying to understand and cultivate non-attachment in our modern age.

What are human needs? Are they just money, food, shelter and air? These are physical needs. There are emotional needs as well. Emotional needs refer to the general need for affection from different groups of people; be it from parents, friends, colleagues or even mere strangers. Expressions of affection can be in the form of hugs and praises, or listening patiently and sincerely to the outpour of feelings by others, etc.

I need affection and love from my parents, so is that considered as going against the cultivation of non-attachment to self? I need care and concern from friends and colleagues too, then is that being considered as being attached to self as well?

When our parents satisfy all our material needs but neglect our emotional needs, and thus partly contributing to our yearning or attachment in trying to get love from them, does this mean we are wrong? Does this mean we should stop yearning in order to stay non-attached? But this would be like repressing our true feelings, burying them deep inside; it’s a form of self-denial, no matter how you frame it.

Before any Buddhist practitioner truly achieves the ability of non-attachment to self, the whole process is fraught with dilemmas and fears of all sorts for them. This is a very sad thing that should not have to happen to anyone in the practice of non-attachment or believing in Buddhism.

But who will reach out to help such groups of people? Will quoting sutras and aphorisms from Venerables quench their need for love? I’m not sure. I don’t know, really…

When we say to fellow human beings that if we want love, we have to give love. But this begs the chicken and egg question: if we have not truly experienced what true love is like, how do we give love? Our love towards others, under such circumstances may be distorted in nature, lacking genuine warmth and understanding about the unique needs of every individual we come across.

The love that we can get from friends and others is conditional, we have to earn it. The love from parents, however, can be both unconditional and conditional. Unconditional in the sense that we are loved for simply existing as their flesh and blood. Conditional in the sense that they cannot continue to accept our inherent flaws all the time. We have to change in order to get them to respond affectionately to us again.

Something can be done. Non-attachment to self should be explained in layman terms, simple enough for even non-Buddhists to understand and rejoice in.

I will find my own way to achieve that, somehow.

Originally posted by Spnw07:

Buddhist scriptures constantly talk about and stress the importance of non-attachment. But little is talked or adequately explained about meeting human needs while trying to understand and cultivate non-attachment in our modern age.

What are human needs? Are they just money, food, shelter and air? These are physical needs. There are emotional needs as well. Emotional needs refer to the general need for affection from different groups of people; be it from parents, friends, colleagues or even mere strangers. Expressions of affection can be in the form of hugs and praises, or listening patiently and sincerely to the outpour of feelings by others, etc.

I need affection and love from my parents, so is that considered as going against the cultivation of non-attachment to self? I need care and concern from friends and colleagues too, then is that being considered as being attached to self as well?

When our parents satisfy all our material needs but neglect our emotional needs, and thus partly contributing to our yearning or attachment in trying to get love from them, does this mean we are wrong? Does this mean we should stop yearning in order to stay non-attached? But this would be like repressing our true feelings, burying them deep inside; it’s a form of self-denial, no matter how you frame it.

Before any Buddhist practitioner truly achieves the ability of non-attachment to self, the whole process is fraught with dilemmas and fears of all sorts for them. This is a very sad thing that should not have to happen to anyone in the practice of non-attachment or believing in Buddhism.

But who will reach out to help such groups of people? Will quoting sutras and aphorisms from Venerables quench their need for love? I’m not sure. I don’t know, really…

When we say to fellow human beings that if we want love, we have to give love. But this begs the chicken and egg question: if we have not truly experienced what true love is like, how do we give love? Our love towards others, under such circumstances may be distorted in nature, lacking genuine warmth and understanding about the unique needs of every individual we come across.

The love that we can get from friends and others is conditional, we have to earn it. The love from parents, however, can be both unconditional and conditional. Unconditional in the sense that we are loved for simply existing as their flesh and blood. Conditional in the sense that they cannot continue to accept our inherent flaws all the time. We have to change in order to get them to respond affectionately to us again.

Something can be done. Non-attachment to self should be explained in layman terms, simple enough for even non-Buddhists to understand and rejoice in.

I will find my own way to achieve that, somehow.

as u dun come skype how am i suppose to discuss with you

just come and drop by

thanks .

Originally posted by bohiruci:

as u dun come skype how am i suppose to discuss with you

just come and drop by

thanks .

You can just type it out like AEN. I want all to be able to learn in their own way from any of our discussions.

Originally posted by Spnw07:

You can just type it out like AEN. I want all to be able to learn in their own way from any of our discussions.

thats copy and paste buddhism . I dun know if u have understand the teachin or

oh ,the forum is always there for me to see

I dun wish to engage lengthy discussion

Dharma is abt everyday life , not abt terms and length explanation

get it ?

Originally posted by bohiruci:

thats copy and paste buddhism . I dun know if u have understand the teachin or

oh ,the forum is always there for me to see

I dun wish to engage lengthy discussion

Dharma is abt everyday life , not abt terms and length explanation

get it ?

Hi Bohiruci, I think there is no need to keep insisting on others, inviting him one or a few times is enough... you yourself have said that its one's choice whether to join the skype, so I don't see the need for persuasion

Originally posted by Spnw07:

You can just type it out like AEN. I want all to be able to learn in their own way from any of our discussions.

your "I want all " is trying to command us

to have teachings , u must be humble to request ,Buddhism is not a religion to be demanded

Buddha have said , "those who humble themselve to request for the Holy Dharma will have the teaching , not being forced to accept things as they dun like

I have no time to reply in length now... but basically Buddhist practice is not about becoming cold and unfeeling.

Bodhisattva means 'jue, you qing'... sentient beings have feelings, emotions, 'you qing', but they are completely lost in outward seeking and completely addicted and attached to those feelings. Bodhisattva also have feelings, but they are awakened and aware... 'jue'.

When moment to moment we are aware of our thoughts, our feelings, then whatever feelings arise we will not become attached... nevertheless, there is still love and compassion for others. It is just that we do not become attached and become addicted to outward seeking.

When there is awareness, wisdom arise and we will know how to deal with emotions/feelings.. you have to practice and see for yourself. We will then also be able to discern what kind of love/relationship we should develope.. and what kind of relationship are harmful... or what kind of emotions are caused by our addiction/craving and afflictions that should be dropped. We will not be easily misled unknowingly by our feelings into bondage... not completely lost in our thoughts.

Anyway my understanding is it is difficult for ordinary beings like us to be detached to emotional needs... but if we practice we will eventually become contented and 'independent' of 'needs'.. if people care for us that is good but if we lost them, we also do not need to suffer as a result. He lives in a state of utter contentment and uninterrupted bliss... not 'needing' anything. There may be things he continue to look for, but it does not ultimately affect him negatively much. But if one becomes addicted or 'dependent' to someone or something, then there is a problem, and we should always be mindful that when death approaches there is nothing and no one we can bring forward to the next life.

just my 2 cents.



~ Fa Yin Xuan Liu (3), Ven Shen Kai

rather than blabering all

Maybe lets take a look at the topics

Non-attachment

We know as a young baby who is born , loves the warm condition of the foetus and when the body comes into contact with the cold wind outside , the baby cry

We can have human needs , and we dun have to be attached ,thats the beautiful part on Buddhism

Everyone can have the right to earn more $ and become millionaires ,
but the issue is

when the times comes ,in your deathbed ,so are u willing to let go ?

i think most people will not be willing to let go ,thats my feeling about it

what riches and fame and glory is just a passing cloud or shower, once it passes ,it will disappear

not hampering on the past , no stuck at the present and not wishful thinking about the future is a Great teachings under Diamond Sutra

I can use Diamond Sutra to explain all your posting in the forums ,

All Conditioned Pheonomenon
Like dreams,illusions , bubbles or shadow
like the dews or lightning
thus should one reflect

reading and understand Diamond Sutra will tell us how not to feel "stress burnout " in the midst of fighting all our way in the corporate ladder and personal salesmanship

If this simple theory one also fail to fathom , then we dun even need to talk about more higher teaching like Flower Adornment or Lotus Sutra

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

I have no time to reply in length now... but basically Buddhist practice is not about becoming cold and unfeeling.

Bodhisattva means 'jue, you qing'... sentient beings have feelings, emotions, 'you qing', but they are completely lost in outward seeking and completely addicted and attached to those feelings. Bodhisattva also have feelings, but they are awakened and aware... 'jue'.

When moment to moment we are aware of our thoughts, our feelings, then whatever feelings arise we will not become attached... nevertheless, there is still love and compassion for others. It is just that we do not become attached and become addicted to outward seeking.

just my 2 cents.



~ Fa Yin Xuan Liu (3), Ven Shen Kai

thats human love ,not much on human needs

perhaps in the area of economics in Buddhism perspective ?

Originally posted by bohiruci:

thats human love ,not much on human needs

perhaps in the area of economics in Buddhism perspective ?

He mentioned both :

What are human needs? Are they just money, food, shelter and air? These are physical needs. There are emotional needs as well. Emotional needs refer to the general need for affection from different groups of people; be it from parents, friends, colleagues or even mere strangers. Expressions of affection can be in the form of hugs and praises, or listening patiently and sincerely to the outpour of feelings by others, etc.

I need affection and love from my parents, so is that considered as going against the cultivation of non-attachment to self? I need care and concern from friends and colleagues too, then is that being considered as being attached to self as well?

When our parents satisfy all our material needs but neglect our emotional needs, and thus partly contributing to our yearning or attachment in trying to get love from them, does this mean we are wrong? Does this mean we should stop yearning in order to stay non-attached? But this would be like repressing our true feelings, burying them deep inside; it’s a form of self-denial, no matter how you frame it.

Btw Spnw07 just curious here… how old are you?

Originally posted by bohiruci:

your "I want all " is trying to command us

to have teachings , u must be humble to request ,Buddhism is not a religion to be demanded

Buddha have said , "those who humble themselve to request for the Holy Dharma will have the teaching , not being forced to accept things as they dun like

I'm sorry that I have used the wrong word to express my wishes. It is my personal wish to want all, but not force all. Because I want, therefore I would want to work on it, work hard to see something come true. On reflection, I should have used the word 'hope all' but I feel it conveys a very passive and indirect feeling of hope. Hope should be proactive, direct whenever possible, in my personal opinion.

I agree with you that one must always be humble, and this is regardless of whether one has a religion to believe in or not.

I used the 'I want all' because I wished very strongly for everyone who comes into the forum to benefit from public discussions where words are there for them to observe, to analyse critically and self-reflect upon during periods of spare time in our lives.

There is nothing to hide about Buddhism. If abstract concepts like non-attachment taught in the Diamond sutra and 'Your heart is Nirvana when it regains primordial awareness' are publicly preached and known to almost anyone, including some who are non-Buddhists, then I see no harm in discussing in a public Buddhist forum like this where though there is lack of real time interaction, there is time for slow people like me to think through what I write and what I have read.

Thanks for your admonishment.

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

Btw Spnw07 just curious here... how old are you?

With due respect, may I ask how this is related to my topic and the questions I ask?

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

I have no time to reply in length now... but basically Buddhist practice is not about becoming cold and unfeeling.

Bodhisattva means 'jue, you qing'... sentient beings have feelings, emotions, 'you qing', but they are completely lost in outward seeking and completely addicted and attached to those feelings. Bodhisattva also have feelings, but they are awakened and aware... 'jue'.

When moment to moment we are aware of our thoughts, our feelings, then whatever feelings arise we will not become attached... nevertheless, there is still love and compassion for others. It is just that we do not become attached and become addicted to outward seeking.

When there is awareness, wisdom arise and we will know how to deal with emotions/feelings.. you have to practice and see for yourself. We will then also be able to discern what kind of love/relationship we should develope.. and what kind of relationship are harmful... or what kind of emotions are caused by our addiction/craving and afflictions that should be dropped. We will not be easily misled unknowingly by our feelings into bondage... not completely lost in our thoughts.

Anyway my understanding is it is difficult for ordinary beings like us to be detached to emotional needs... but if we practice we will eventually become contented and 'independent' of 'needs'.. if people care for us that is good but if we lost them, we also do not need to suffer as a result. He lives in a state of utter contentment and uninterrupted bliss... not 'needing' anything. There may be things he continue to look for, but it does not ultimately affect him negatively much. But if one becomes addicted or 'dependent' to someone or something, then there is a problem, and we should always be mindful that when death approaches there is nothing and no one we can bring forward to the next life.

just my 2 cents.



~ Fa Yin Xuan Liu (3), Ven Shen Kai

I agree with you that if we practice we will become 'independent' of 'needs', but in the course of doing that, we may come across to the general public as not respecting ourselves as a human who will have needs somehow. This is not a healthy image to portray of Buddhist practitioners.

We are not weirdos, we are not Bodhisattvas, therefore we will always have needs somehow. But it's how we react when our needs are not met, that forms the main focus and motivation for spiritual cultivation of each individual.

Even the Buddha 'needs' someone like Venerable Ananda to attend to his basic needs and helping him to decline audiences with certain people. Buddha could have done everything by himself with needing any help, for he is one with perfect wisdom and compassion. Who does he need?

We need the Buddha to guide and love us. But the Buddha doesn't need us to love him. He is and will always be Pure Love and Wisdom itself.

Selflessness is a virtue, but before anyone perfects that virtue, it is still important that we see that both physical and emotional needs of others and ourselves are properly attended to.

We are not people who has attained 1st, 2nd, 3rd of sainthood, not to mention the final stage of sainthood: Arahant.

Only an Arahant is perfectly free from needs of any kind and has attained true non-attachment to self. Above that, would be Paccekabuddhas and higher level Bodhisattvas.

Remember we are humans. Without acknowledging our own needs, we would not know how to really and genuinely attend to the needs of others. Thinking in this way would help us to really examine how to balance the need to attain non-attachment with meeting the human needs of others or ourselves.

is letting go a form of contentment

Originally posted by Spnw07:

With due respect, may I ask how this is related to my topic and the questions I ask?

Unrelated.. just curious.

Originally posted by ahsiang12:

is letting go a form of contentment

Contentment means completely at peace, satisfied, with whatever the moment takes.

When you let go of seeking, it leads to contentment.

Originally posted by Spnw07:

I agree with you that if we practice we will become 'independent' of 'needs', but in the course of doing that, we may come across to the general public as not respecting ourselves as a human who will have needs somehow. This is not a healthy image to portray of Buddhist practitioners.

We are not weirdos, we are not Bodhisattvas, therefore we will always have needs somehow. But it's how we react when our needs are not met, that forms the main focus and motivation for spiritual cultivation of each individual.

Even the Buddha 'needs' someone like Venerable Ananda to attend to his basic needs and helping him to decline audiences with certain people. Buddha could have done everything by himself with needing any help, for he is one with perfect wisdom and compassion. Who does he need?

We need the Buddha to guide and love us. But the Buddha doesn't need us to love him. He is and will always be Pure Love and Wisdom itself.

Selflessness is a virtue, but before anyone perfects that virtue, it is still important that we see that both physical and emotional needs of others and ourselves are properly attended to.

We are not people who has attained 1st, 2nd, 3rd of sainthood, not to mention the final stage of sainthood: Arahant.

Only an Arahant is perfectly free from needs of any kind and has attained true non-attachment to self. Above that, would be Paccekabuddhas and higher level Bodhisattvas.

Remember we are humans. Without acknowledging our own needs, we would not know how to really and genuinely attend to the needs of others. Thinking in this way would help us to really examine how to balance the need to attain non-attachment with meeting the human needs of others or ourselves.

First of all, the Buddhas has his needs but he does not become 'chained' by his needs. That is, he continues to try to fulfill his needs and desires but is mentally unperturbed, contented, not giving rise to negative afflictive emotions due to not finding what he wants.

I think the key to dealing with 'how we react when our needs are not met' is how far we are in-dependent on a particular thing or person, not attached or addicted in that sense. Dependent means becoming chained. This is not the same as becoming cold and unfeeling and we can continue to show love and concern for that person. It just means we are undistracted from present moment awareness rather than completely lost in seeking or tied to the past.

This is also not to deny or suppress our emotions if they arise, emotions that arise are allowed to be as they are in complete openness, arising and passing by itself. As Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche says here: http://www.dharmaweb.org/index.php/Dilgo_Khyentse_Rinpoche:_Dzogchen_Practice_in_Everyday_Life, "We should realize openness as the playground of our emotions and relate to people without artificiality, manipulation or strategy."

Because there is awareness and wisdom, we become 'independent' on things, persons, not so caught up by our emotions.

A way to transcend afflictive emotions as my teacher told us is to practice the Bodhisattva path... to extend the love and compassion into a kind of unconditional love, and furthermore a non-fixated love... not attached to a particular person or thing which would then be an egoic attachment. We are not great Bodhisattvas yet, but we must start practicing the Bodhisattva path.

Even if we are not enlightened we will still undergo death, and we must be able to learn how to transcend these afflictive emotions such that we do not become too affected by them during our departure.

From a best selling book, The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment by Eckhart Tolle

Enter the Now from Wherever You Are

I always thought that true enlightenment is not possible except through love in a relationship between a man and a woman. Isn't this what makes us whole again? How can one's life be fulfilled until that happens?

Is that true in your experience? Has this happened to you?

Not yet, but how could it be otherwise? I know that it will happen.

In other words, you are waiting for an event in time to save you. Is this not the core error that we have been talking about? Salvation is not elsewhere in place or time. It is here and now.

What does that statement mean, "salvation is here and now"? I don't understand it. I don't even know what salvation means.

Most people pursue physical pleasures or various forms of psychological gratification because they believe that those things will make them happy or free them from a feeling of fear or lack. Happiness may be perceived as a heightened sense of aliveness attained through physical pleasure, or a more secure and more complete sense of self attained through some form of psychological gratification. This is the search for salvation from a state of dissatisfaction or insufficiency. Invariably, any satisfaction that they obtain is short-lived, so the condition of satisfaction or fulfillment is usually projected once again onto an imaginary point away from the here and now. "When I obtain this or am free of that -- then I will be okay." This is the unconscious mind-set that creates the illusion of salvation in the future.

True salvation is fulfillment, peace, life in all its fullness. It is to be who you are, to feel within you the good that has no opposite, the joy of Being that depends on nothing outside itself. It is felt not as a passing experience but as an abiding presence. In theistic language, it is to "know God" -- not as something outside you but as your own innermost essence. True salvation is to know yourself as an inseparable part of the timeless and formless One Life from which all that exists derives its being.

True salvation is a state of freedom -- from fear, from suffering, from a perceived state of lack and insufficiency and therefore from all wanting, needing, grasping, and clinging. It is freedom from compulsive thinking, from negativity, and above all from past and future as a psychological need. Your mind is telling you that you cannot get there from here. Something needs to happen, or you need to become this or that before you can be free and fulfilled. It is saying, in fact, that you need time -- that you need to find, sort out, do, achieve, acquire, become, or understand something before you can be free or complete. You see time as the means to salvation, whereas in truth it is the greatest obstacle to salvation. You think that you can't get there from where and who you are at this moment because you are not yet complete or good enough, but the truth is that here and now is the only point from where you can get there. You "get" there by realizing that you are there already. You find God the moment you realize that you don't need to seek God. So there is no only way to salvation: Any condition can be used, but no particular condition is needed. However, there is only one point of access: the Now.

There can be no salvation away from this moment. You are lonely and without a partner? Enter the Now from there. You are in a relationship? Enter the Now from there. There is nothing you can ever do or attain that will get you closer to salvation than it is at this moment. This may be hard to grasp for a mind accustomed to thinking that everything worthwhile is in the future. Nor can anything that you ever did or that was done to you in the past prevent you from saying yes to what is and taking your attention deeply into the Now. You cannot do this in the future. You do it now or not at all.

.............. (snippets)

Addiction and the Search for Wholeness

Why should we become addicted to another person?

The reason why the romantic love relationship is such an intense and universally sought-after experience is that it seems to offer liberation from a deep-seated state of fear, need, lack, and incompleteness that is part of the human condition in its unredeemed and unenlightened state. There is a physical as well as a psychological dimension to this state. On the physical level, you are obviously not whole, nor will you ever be: You are either a man or a woman, which is to say, one-half of the whole. On this level, the longing for wholeness ― the return to oneness ― manifests as male-female attraction, man's need for a woman, woman's need for a man. It is an almost irresistible urge for union with the opposite energy polarity. The root of this physical urge is a spiritual one: the longing for an end to duality, a return to the state of wholeness. Sexual union is the closest you can get to this state on the physical level. This is why it is the most deeply satisfying experience the physical realm can offer. But sexual union is no more than a fleeting glimpse of wholeness, an instant of bliss. As long as it is unconsciously sought as a means of salvation, you are seeking the end of duality on the level of form, where it cannot be found. You are given a tantalizing glimpse of heaven, but you are not allowed to dwell there, and find yourself again in a separate body.

On the psychological level, the sense of lack and incompleteness is, if anything, even greater than on the physical level. As long as you are identified with the mind, you have an externally derived sense of self. That is to say, you get your sense of who you are from things that ultimately have nothing to do with who you are: your social role, possessions, external appearance, successes and failures, belief systems, and so on. This false, mind-made self, the ego, feels vulnerable, insecure, and is always seeking new things to identify with to give it a feeling that it exists. But nothing is ever enough to give it lasting fulfillment. Its fear remains; its sense of lack and neediness remains.

But then that special relationship comes along. It seems to be the answer to all the ego's problems and to meet all its needs. At least this is how it appears at first. All the other things that you derived your sense of self from before, now become relatively insignificant. You now have a single focal point that replaces them all, gives meaning to your life, and through which you define your identity: the person you are "in love" with.

You are no longer a disconnected fragment in an uncaring universe, or so it seems. Your world now has a center: the loved one. The fact that the center is outside you and that, therefore, you still have an externally derived sense of self does not seem to matter at first. What matters is that the underlying feelings of incompleteness, of fear, lack and unfulfillment so characteristic of the egoic state are no longer there ― or are they? Have they dissolved, or do they continue to exist underneath the happy surface reality?

If in your relationships you experience both "love" and the opposite of love ― attack, emotional violence, and so on ― then it is likely that you are confusing ego attachment and addictive clinging with love. You cannot love your partner one moment and attack him or her the next. True love has no opposite. If your "love" has an opposite, then it is not love but a strong ego-need for a more complete and deeper sense of self, a need that the other person temporarily meets. It is the ego's substitute for salvation, and for a short time it almost does feel like salvation.

But there comes a point when your partner behaves in ways that fail to meet your needs, or rather those of your ego. The feelings of fear, pain, and lack that are an intrinsic part of egoic consciousness but had been covered up by the "love relationship" now resurface. Just as with every other addiction, you are on a high when the drug is available, but invariably there comes a time when the drug no longer works for you. When those painful feelings reappear, you feel them even more strongly than before, and what is more, you now perceive your partner as the cause of those feelings. This means that you project them outward and attack the other with all the savage violence that is part of your pain. This attack may awaken the partner's own pain, and he or she may counter your attack. At this point, the ego is still unconsciously hoping that its attack or its attempts at manipulation will be sufficient punishment to induce your partner to change their behavior, so that it can use them again as a cover-up for your pain. Every addiction arises from an unconscious refusal to face and move through your own pain. Every addiction starts with pain and ends with pain. Whatever the substance you are addicted to ― alcohol, food, legal or illegal drugs, or a person ― you are using something or somebody to cover up your pain. That is why, after the initial euphoria has passed, there is so much unhappiness, so much pain in intimate relationships. They do not cause pain and unhappiness. They bring out the pain and unhappiness that is already in you. Every addiction does that. Every addiction reaches a point where it does not work for you anymore, and then you feel the pain more intensely than ever.

This is one reason why most people are always trying to escape from the present moment and are seeking some kind of salvation in the future. The first thing that they might encounter if they focused their attention on the Now is their own pain, and this is what they fear. If they only knew how easy it is to access in the Now the power of presence that dissolves the past and its pain, the reality that dissolves the illusion. If they only knew how close they are to their own reality, how close to God.

Avoidance of relationships in an attempt to avoid pain is not the answer either. The pain is there anyway. Three failed relationships in as many years are more likely to force you into awakening than three years on a desert island or shut away in your room. But if you could bring intense presence into your aloneness, that would work for you too.

From Addictive to Enlightened Relationships

Can we change an addictive relationship into a true one?

Yes. Being present and intensifying your presence by taking your attention ever more deeply into the Now: Whether you are living alone or with a partner, this remains the key. For love to flourish, the light of your presence needs to be strong enough so that you no longer get taken over by the thinker or the pain-body and mistake them for who you are. To know yourself as the Being underneath the thinker, the stillness underneath the mental noise, the love and joy underneath the pain, is freedom, salvation, enlightenment. To disidentify from the pain-body is to bring presence into the pain and thus transmute it. To disidentify from thinking is to be the silent watcher of your thoughts and behavior, especially the repetitive patterns of your mind and the roles played by the ego. If you stop investing it with "selfness," the mind loses its compulsive quality, which basically is the compulsion to judge, and so to resist what is, which creates conflict, drama, and new pain. In fact, the moment that judgment stops through acceptance of what is, you are free of the mind. You have made room for love, for joy, for peace. First you stop judging yourself; then you stop judging your partner. The greatest catalyst for change in a relationship is complete acceptance of your partner as he or she is, without needing to judge or change them in any way. That immediately takes you beyond ego.

All mind games and all addictive clinging are then over. There are no victims and no perpetrators anymore, no accuser and accused. This is also the end of all codependency, of being drawn into somebody else's unconscious pattern and thereby enabling it to continue. You will then either separate ― in love ? or move ever more deeply into the Now together ― into Being. Can it be that simple? Yes, it is that simple.

Love is a state of Being. Your love is not outside; it is deep within you. You can never lose it, and it cannot leave you. It is not dependent on some other body, some external form. In the stillness of your presence, you can feel your own formless and timeless reality as the unmanifested life that animates your physical form. You can then feel the same life deep within every other human and every other creature. You look beyond the veil of form and separation. This is the realization of oneness. This is love. What is God? The eternal One Life underneath all the forms of life. What is love? To feel the presence of that One Life deep within yourself and within all creatures. To be it.

Therefore, all love is the love of God.

Love is not selective, just as the light of the sun is not selective. It does not make one person special. It is not exclusive. Exclusivity is not the love of God but the "love" of ego. However, the intensity with which true love is felt can vary. There may be one person who reflects your love back to you more clearly and more intensely than others, and if that person feels the same toward you, it can be said that you are in a love relationship with him or her. The bond that connects you with that person is the same bond that connects you with the person sitting next to you on a bus, or with a bird, a tree, a flower. Only the degree of intensity with which it is felt differs.

Even in an otherwise addictive relationship, there may be moments when something more real shines through, something beyond your mutual addictive needs. These are moments when both your and your partner's mind briefly subside and the pain-body is temporarily in a dormant state. This may sometimes happen during physical intimacy, or when you are both witnessing the miracle of childbirth, or in the presence of death, or when one of you is seriously ill ― anything that renders the mind powerless. When this happens, your Being, which is usually buried underneath the mind, becomes revealed, and it is this that makes true communication possible.

True communication is communion ― the realization of oneness, which is love. Usually, this is quickly lost again, unless you are able to stay present enough to keep out the mind and its old patterns. As soon as the mind and mind identification return, you are no longer yourself but a mental image of yourself, and you start playing games and roles again to get your ego needs met. You are a human mind again, pretending to be a human being, interacting with another mind, playing a drama called "love."

Although brief glimpses are possible, love cannot flourish unless you are permanently free of mind identification and your presence is intense enough to have dissolved the pain-body ― or you can at least remain present as the watcher. The pain-body cannot then take you over and so become destructive of love.

Originally posted by Spnw07:

I'm sorry that I have used the wrong word to express my wishes. It is my personal wish to want all, but not force all. Because I want, therefore I would want to work on it, work hard to see something come true. On reflection, I should have used the word 'hope all' but I feel it conveys a very passive and indirect feeling of hope. Hope should be proactive, direct whenever possible, in my personal opinion.

I agree with you that one must always be humble, and this is regardless of whether one has a religion to believe in or not.

I used the 'I want all' because I wished very strongly for everyone who comes into the forum to benefit from public discussions where words are there for them to observe, to analyse critically and self-reflect upon during periods of spare time in our lives.

There is nothing to hide about Buddhism. If abstract concepts like non-attachment taught in the Diamond sutra and 'Your heart is Nirvana when it regains primordial awareness' are publicly preached and known to almost anyone, including some who are non-Buddhists, then I see no harm in discussing in a public Buddhist forum like this where though there is lack of real time interaction, there is time for slow people like me to think through what I write and what I have read.

Thanks for your admonishment.

no spwn ,you see ,I am not admonishing you.All of us lead busy life
as i always on the move during daytime

I dun mind sharing all the topics in skype , but as in what Buddha said
teachings is only a tool ,if one doesnt illuminate ones mind with Greater reflection ,it is very difficult to convince people the fruits of practice

The guiding of reflection must be constant ,like one who follows a guru

One must know our mind is always tends to unguided and not willing to be leashed down to practice ,distracted by the wonders and attachment to the material worlds .

You can ask AEN , i have been sharing those voluminous discussion and nobody ask a question .which is pretty difficult for me to gauge the level of Wisdom in individual .

So if u request for teachings , I wont stingly keep them ,its a matter of discussion and exchange in a open forum .

Originally posted by ahsiang12:

is letting go a form of contentment

yes, why leh.

Originally posted by An Eternal Now:

Btw Spnw07 just curious here... how old are you?

Maybe he see that your thinking is so mature so curious.

Originally posted by justdoit77:

Maybe he see that your thinking is so mature so curious.

Huh? I thought I sound childish and naive though...