The goal is "to conquer oneself and to regulate one's life in such a way that no decision is made under the influence of any inordinate attachment." Ignatius of Loyola
You know, I get the whole Buddhist non-attachment thing ... but sometimes I think that attachments are all we have that really make us human. What are 'inordinate' attachments anyways? And according to whose judgement?
I am a person of extreme, and this approach to life has helped me become a better person, personally and socially.
I assume someone with children has a different and likely more profound understanding of attachment and what it may mean.
But what I like about these words is that unlike Buddhism, it does not purport to affect complete non-attachment, but recommends against inordinate amounts of attachment.
Surely, any decision that is made, if made with an unusually and disproportionately large investment, suffers from the possibility of being clouded.
Roberts often comments on the warrior, where his/her every decision is thought out, not made in haste, especially in the extreme, as in one should not strike when angry for example, as one has already lost if done so.
This makes sense to me.
Another good one that has helped me personally and socially is:
I am certainly of two minds on this topic, unashamedly so. I do strive to accept my surroundings in a peaceful way, but on the other hand there is always a need for people to stand up against something, be it another person or group, or some other kind of obstacle like a natural disaster. There is nothing wrong with the impulse to do so, and yet like everything it may be misapplied in another circumstance. So perhaps it is really all about appropriate attachment, given the situation one finds oneself in.
Incidentally, I do feel that parenting is a great lesson in the nature of humanity. I always did feel, in my life before having children, that there really was little sense to be made of the world when one lives out their life solely as an individual - and having children merely confirmed that for me. It has always been a mystery to me where people get the drive and motivation to achieve certain things in their lives when they only have themselves to benefit from the rewards of their accomplishments. For instance, most of my professors went straight into university, and then grad school, and yet few are married and even fewer have any children, and all after their careers were well established.
For the life of me, I cannot understand what would drive a person to go through all that without someone to share it with, or to do it for. I only went to university in the first place because my grandparents insisted that I go, and I never would have gone back to enter grad school, except that I found myself with a family to support. So, for me, attachment is motivation, and the human desire to provide and care for others leads me to attempt to achieve something greater in my life.
A Love for Art was a collaborative blog for visual artists, musicians, writers, and social scientists. This blog has evolved into a new blog called BETA, go check it out!
11 comments:
yikes. if i didn't know better, i would swear that was some zen buddhism there! :)
That`s a tall order.
A tall order indeed, and one that resonates across most (if not all) religious doctrines (whether theist or not).
So it is our challenge to control ourselves, to make judgments based on justice, which in the opinion of some means love.
Love g-d and thy neighbour, and it will all be glorious shining beauty.
You know, I get the whole Buddhist non-attachment thing ... but sometimes I think that attachments are all we have that really make us human. What are 'inordinate' attachments anyways? And according to whose judgement?
ha ha, Sky articulated my confusion over the quote.
I agree with Sky.
It is for you to decide what inordinate is, and you know.
Well, I feel that attachment to the need to follow such a rigid doctrine is highly inordinate! Seriously!
I am a person of extreme, and this approach to life has helped me become a better person, personally and socially.
I assume someone with children has a different and likely more profound understanding of attachment and what it may mean.
But what I like about these words is that unlike Buddhism, it does not purport to affect complete non-attachment, but recommends against inordinate amounts of attachment.
Surely, any decision that is made, if made with an unusually and disproportionately large investment, suffers from the possibility of being clouded.
Roberts often comments on the warrior, where his/her every decision is thought out, not made in haste, especially in the extreme, as in one should not strike when angry for example, as one has already lost if done so.
This makes sense to me.
Another good one that has helped me personally and socially is:
Unconditional acceptance of your surroundings.
I am certainly of two minds on this topic, unashamedly so. I do strive to accept my surroundings in a peaceful way, but on the other hand there is always a need for people to stand up against something, be it another person or group, or some other kind of obstacle like a natural disaster. There is nothing wrong with the impulse to do so, and yet like everything it may be misapplied in another circumstance. So perhaps it is really all about appropriate attachment, given the situation one finds oneself in.
Incidentally, I do feel that parenting is a great lesson in the nature of humanity. I always did feel, in my life before having children, that there really was little sense to be made of the world when one lives out their life solely as an individual - and having children merely confirmed that for me. It has always been a mystery to me where people get the drive and motivation to achieve certain things in their lives when they only have themselves to benefit from the rewards of their accomplishments. For instance, most of my professors went straight into university, and then grad school, and yet few are married and even fewer have any children, and all after their careers were well established.
For the life of me, I cannot understand what would drive a person to go through all that without someone to share it with, or to do it for. I only went to university in the first place because my grandparents insisted that I go, and I never would have gone back to enter grad school, except that I found myself with a family to support. So, for me, attachment is motivation, and the human desire to provide and care for others leads me to attempt to achieve something greater in my life.
Whew!
And how.
Post a Comment