Personality Cafe banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,995 Posts
I don't think I've ever heard someone talk about this before, but I find myself examining this in my relationships without meaning to, just through life's experiences. When my husband's uncle committed suicide and I was trying to think of what that would have felt like from the mother (grandma's) perspective and thought about the way that I love my children. Is it for me? Or for them? For a long time I thought I wouldn't be able to handle it if something like this happened to one of my kids. Something must have changed for me. I trust more now. I think my love has become less grasping. I've still got a ways to go... probably a long ways....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vivid Melody

·
Registered
My vehicle is INFP, 9w8. Vroom vroom!!
Joined
·
1,660 Posts
PREACH IT, LADY!!!!!

Yes!! You cannot expect another person to fulfill you, or you're just going to be let down! No one has the power to fulfill someone else! Life is sooooo not a Hollywood romance!

It's tricky for us buff dudes because the weaklings come to us expecting us to be everything for them. A leech like that is just going to bring me down to their level, and that's not where I belong! I don't need you to need me, and I don't need to need you. I need you to love me and enjoy me, just as I love and enjoy you. Yes, there will be days when we're weak and we do need to help each other, but that's a balance, not the unstable foundation of our relationship!

If two people are selfless, they will each need nothing because the other has already given it to them. But if one is selfless and the other is selfish—or it's the dreaded selfish/selfish combo—they're going down!!

Loving a leech sucks.
Pun intended.
 

·
Registered
Infp 6w5
Joined
·
2,797 Posts
Yes! Agree 100%! God its so refreshing to hear this view being expressed.

I say it all the time, love IS compassion. Love and hate are ideological opposites. If hatred conveys ill-intention and desire to see harm come to the target, then the opposite would be good-intentions and the desire to see no harm come to the target. And that's what compassion is. You can feel both love and attachment towards a person, but neither are mutually exclusive. One can be attached without love (toxic relationship), or one can love without attachment (like feeling compassion towards a stranger.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,454 Posts
I agree 100% as well.



It's unhealthy to form a codependent relationship and it always will be. However, some people don't love themselves yet or don't know how to and it takes time to develop that. Being loved by another and learning how to receive that love (in a healthy way) can often be apart of the process. No man is an island, after all. But nothing ever good truly comes from fear. It only creates havoc and even addictive/imbalanced behaviors. Anything but peace.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
117 Posts
I love this.

According to buddhism, the idea of not attaching yourself applies to everything, not just the person you are in a relationship with. And the main idea is to not expect anything from anyone. This may sound harsh, but it´s stated in the good way. If you think about it, 99% of the time that we get angry, sad, disappointed, etc. at someone else is because they don´t to something we expected them to do, or feel the way we expect them to feel about us, etc. The process of accepting the idea of not expecting anything from anyone is hard as hell, but when you achieve it practically most of negative emotions in your life go away. Your problems don´t change, but the way you feel and deal with them do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,445 Posts
I'm Vietnamese (though not Buddhist ' my culture is heavily influence by Buddhism /Confucianism and Taoism) so this hearing of love without attachment is often explained or debated about upon family members
Loving without attachment- well it depends ' what happens when it's a child or a baby? Don't get me wrong I don't control my child but I believe the attachment stage in early life is most crucial for the child to bond with the parents( trust vs mistrust)

Now if we are talking love for a family member or love - I can agree to a certain extent, I don't force a person emotions or demand something of theirs however- what they want and value must align with mine- is it selfish? Perhaps - but I can't see it working out otherwise . I love my husband- but if he enjoys traveling with his mistress all year round than tending our kids - I wouldn't be happy for him - I might not even love or respect him any longer. So selfless love sounds nice but I don't know- I can't apply the same with romance


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
437 Posts
This is wonderful but it almost sounds like platonic love to me. I am still learning and I have never been 'in love' but I've come close. I can't imagine having no 'attachment' to a guy I am sexually attracted to. My best friends and close family members I do selflessly love them but I can't imagine feeling that way about someone I'm with (I also can't imagine I'd let myself get as far as love with someone I'm not lovers with).

I also don't imagine someone loving me in a way they where they expect absolutely nothing in return and just want my happiness. It sounds like a fairytale. Of course I don't expect they demand something, that's not love but I do expect they'd want a bit.
This love sounds so pure to me, I have to think about this more. I can't imagine two lovers feelings this way about each other, only one-sided love.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,567 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
This is wonderful but it almost sounds like platonic love to me. I am still learning and I have never been 'in love' but I've come close. I can't imagine having no 'attachment' to a guy I am sexually attracted to. My best friends and close family members I do selflessly love them but I can't imagine feeling that way about someone I'm with (I also can't imagine I'd let myself get as far as love with someone I'm not lovers with).

I also don't imagine someone loving me in a way they where they expect absolutely nothing in return and just want my happiness. It sounds like a fairytale. Of course I don't expect they demand something, that's not love but I do expect they'd want a bit.
This love sounds so pure to me, I have to think about this more. I can't imagine two lovers feelings this way about each other, only one-sided love.
I found it once but I let it go... unfortunately this idea of love without attachment means that you can't control the permanance of this love, you cannot force something like this to last because as soon as you do you start to lose that 'purity'. I was lucky enough to experience that, I don't know if I'll ever experience it again.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Llyralen

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,567 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I love this.

According to buddhism, the idea of not attaching yourself applies to everything, not just the person you are in a relationship with. And the main idea is to not expect anything from anyone. This may sound harsh, but it´s stated in the good way. If you think about it, 99% of the time that we get angry, sad, disappointed, etc. at someone else is because they don´t to something we expected them to do, or feel the way we expect them to feel about us, etc. The process of accepting the idea of not expecting anything from anyone is hard as hell, but when you achieve it practically most of negative emotions in your life go away. Your problems don´t change, but the way you feel and deal with them do.
This is incredibly important too. Thanks for bringing that up. There's a lot to buddhist principles that I agree with and wish was taught more to the west.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,567 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I'm Vietnamese (though not Buddhist ' my culture is heavily influence by Buddhism /Confucianism and Taoism) so this hearing of love without attachment is often explained or debated about upon family members
Loving without attachment- well it depends ' what happens when it's a child or a baby? Don't get me wrong I don't control my child but I believe the attachment stage in early life is most crucial for the child to bond with the parents( trust vs mistrust)

Now if we are talking love for a family member or love - I can agree to a certain extent, I don't force a person emotions or demand something of theirs however- what they want and value must align with mine- is it selfish? Perhaps - but I can't see it working out otherwise . I love my husband- but if he enjoys traveling with his mistress all year round than tending our kids - I wouldn't be happy for him - I might not even love or respect him any longer. So selfless love sounds nice but I don't know- I can't apply the same with romance


Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I think what you are thinking about with children is not quite the same thing. I hear a lot of people say that having children fulfilled them, and that's beautiful, but it's the expectation and then being let down when those expectations aren't met that is damaging. If you had children expecting them to fulfil you as a person and they didn't give you that, then that love turns into resentment.

Her comment about being able to let go if you aren't attached, of course, that's not applicable to children, because they need you there, but there is still a way of applying this not-so-grasping love to your children. I'm sure you're an excellent mother, I don't doubt that you can provide that love for them. Perhaps being able to let go when they are old enough to decide for themselves, yeah, you need to give them the space to discover who they are.

Love isn't everlasting, not always, not in my opinion. Judging another for betraying you? Of course, there are limits, we can't all be disciplined monks, but if you were to still be clinging to him after he abandons you? Then that's the kind of grasping attachment she's talking about. It's not about remaining in love with the other no matter what, it's about making sure that your love isn't suffocating and isn't dependent on what you get out of it.

Although I'm sure a Buddhist would tell you to forgive and move forward.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Llyralen

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,445 Posts
I think what you are thinking about with children is not quite the same thing. I hear a lot of people say that having children fulfilled them, and that's beautiful, but it's the expectation and then being let down when those expectations aren't met that is damaging. If you had children expecting them to fulfil you as a person and they didn't give you that, then that love turns into resentment.

Her comment about being able to let go if you aren't attached, of course, that's not applicable to children, because they need you there, but there is still a way of applying this not-so-grasping love to your children. I'm sure you're an excellent mother, I don't doubt that you can provide that love for them. Perhaps being able to let go when they are old enough to decide for themselves, yeah, you need to give them the space to discover who they are.

Love isn't everlasting, not always, not in my opinion. Judging another for betraying you? Of course, there are limits, we can't all be disciplined monks, but if you were to still be clinging to him after he abandons you? Then that's the kind of grasping attachment she's talking about. It's not about remaining in love with the other no matter what, it's about making sure that your love isn't suffocating and isn't dependent on what you get out of it.

Although I'm sure a Buddhist would tell you to forgive and move forward.
Buddhism wants you to let go of all emotions
Sadness anger lust disappointment noltagia guilt and happiness - no kids - no family-

I can't do that - I'm not saying her way is less correct than mine but I need to love and emotions in order to progress and I need human interactions

I want my family to know that they could rely on me and I enjoy knowing the fact that I could rely on them .

I need to feel anger for anger help me fight for justice- I need guilt for its what makes me human - and I enjoy loving others - I don't find it selfish or difficult - I also enjoy being in love.

Love is what make me who I am internally and externally- I live and die for it

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,567 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Buddhism wants you to let go of all emotions
Sadness anger lust disappointment noltagia guilt and happiness - no kids - no family-

I can't do that - I'm not saying her way is less correct than mine but I need to love and emotions in order to progress and I need human interactions

I want my family to know that they could rely on me and I enjoy knowing the fact that I could rely on them .

I need to feel anger for anger help me fight for justice- I need guilt for its what makes me human - and I enjoy loving others - I don't find it selfish or difficult - I also enjoy being in love.

Love is what make me who I am internally and externally- I live and die for it

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I can't argue with that. I didn't initially comment on the video because I was undecided if I really agreed with her. I can see how a lot of it felt like an 'Aha!' moment and sounds wise, but there are holes which you can poke into her logic too. I noticed that the first time I saw it.

And, well, there's a good reason I don't abide to any religion because as soon as I see something I approve of I see another thing which I don't approve of in the same religion. I can't have faith in something which contradicts me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,445 Posts
I can't argue with that. I didn't initially comment on the video because I was undecided if I really agreed with her. I can see how a lot of it felt like an 'Aha!' moment and sounds wise, but there are holes which you can poke into her logic too. I noticed that the first time I saw it.

And, well, there's a good reason I don't abide to any religion because as soon as I see something I approve of I see another thing which I don't approve of in the same religion. I can't have faith in something which contradicts me.
I can relate to every word you say here actually- I don't have a religion either for that same reason- I can't have faith in something that contradicts me :)
However I do enjoy reading and learning about religions and beliefs

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
341 Posts
I love this.

According to buddhism, the idea of not attaching yourself applies to everything, not just the person you are in a relationship with. And the main idea is to not expect anything from anyone. This may sound harsh, but it´s stated in the good way. If you think about it, 99% of the time that we get angry, sad, disappointed, etc. at someone else is because they don´t to something we expected them to do, or feel the way we expect them to feel about us, etc. The process of accepting the idea of not expecting anything from anyone is hard as hell, but when you achieve it practically most of negative emotions in your life go away. Your problems don´t change, but the way you feel and deal with them do.
This may be right, but is a slightly sanguine way to say: we are in a jungle where every relation(ship) is transactional (an using-each-other), and there's nothing behind the "thank you"s, "cheers", "friendship"s and "love"s substantially diverse than what goes on for all other living species in the wild.

I agree with having the courage to see it, but I disagree with the attachment — to use this very word — to the verbal coating ("love", "friendship"): along with taking it for what it is, why not also call it what it is.

Humans have always the hardest struggles when it's time to give things their real names, oddly.
They also are permanently under the urge to stick an "ethics" label on whatever the jungle makes needed.
Or a compelling need to label as immoral and wrong to want and require anything their spiritual size makes them unable to give, calling selfish right every kind of selfishness that differs from their own.

Humans play a lot of oddly games with language, and "morals".

Being attached and expecting sympathy are strategically wrong lines of conduct in the human jungle, not morally objectionable ones.
That the jungle's need to believe itself a place of morality leads to everything be named contrary to what it is doesn't change the way things really are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FranklTheTankl

·
Registered
Joined
·
341 Posts
*empty*
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
179 Posts
The video made me cry, I used to think my idea of love was wrong because I've never looked for somebody else for fulfillment but see it in so many other relationships. But truly, the love ive felt for people in the past has not been about that. My first love ended up being 90% platonic, and it was this exact feeling described. I didn't NEED him to be happy myself. I wanted HIM to be happy. And thats how I could let him go.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,850 Posts

What are your thoughts on this?
I understand what she means, completely.

It's easier with friends you do not feel possessive over -- I have one person in my life, I just want to see her happy. That is literally all I want for her, and if that means her moving somewhere else, which frees her from the baggage of where she is now, and me never being able to see much of her again, so be it.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,428 Posts
From the Alagaddupama Sutta of the Tipitaka

"Monks, I will teach you the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded to the Blessed One.

The Blessed One said: "Suppose a man were traveling along a path. He would see a great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. The thought would occur to him, 'Here is this great expanse of water, with the near shore dubious & risky, the further shore secure & free from risk, but with neither a ferryboat nor a bridge going from this shore to the other. What if I were to gather grass, twigs, branches, & leaves and, having bound them together to make a raft, were to cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with my hands & feet?' Then the man, having gathered grass, twigs, branches, & leaves, having bound them together to make a raft, would cross over to safety on the other shore in dependence on the raft, making an effort with his hands & feet. Having crossed over to the further shore, he might think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having hoisted it on my head or carrying it on my back, go wherever I like?' What do you think, monks: Would the man, in doing that, be doing what should be done with the raft?"

"No, lord."

"And what should the man do in order to be doing what should be done with the raft? There is the case where the man, having crossed over, would think, 'How useful this raft has been to me! For it was in dependence on this raft that, making an effort with my hands & feet, I have crossed over to safety on the further shore. Why don't I, having dragged it on dry land or sinking it in the water, go wherever I like?' In doing this, he would be doing what should be done with the raft. In the same way, monks, I have taught the Dhamma compared to a raft, for the purpose of crossing over, not for the purpose of holding onto. Understanding the Dhamma as taught compared to a raft, you should let go even of Dhammas, to say nothing of non-Dhammas."

[hr][/hr]
When this was said, a certain monk said to the Blessed One, "Lord, might there be agitation over what is externally not present?"

"There might, monk," the Blessed One said. "There is the case where someone thinks, 'O, it was mine! O, what was mine is not! O, may it be mine! O, I don't obtain it!' He grieves & is tormented, weeps, beats his breast, & grows delirious. It's thus that there is agitation over what is externally not present."

"But, lord, might there be non-agitation over what is externally not present?"

"There might, monk," the Blessed One said. "There is the case where someone doesn't think, 'O, it was mine! O, what was mine is not! O, may it be mine! O, I don't obtain it!' He doesn't grieve, isn't tormented, doesn't weep, beat his breast, or grow delirious. It's thus that there is non-agitation over what is externally not present."

"Therefore, monks, if others insult, abuse, taunt, bother, & harass you as well, you should feel no hatred, no resentment, no dissatisfaction of heart because of that. And if others honor, respect, revere, & venerate you as well, you should feel no joy, no gladness, no elation of heart because of that. And if others honor, respect, revere, & venerate you, you should think, 'They do us such service at this that has already been comprehended.'

"Therefore, monks, whatever isn't yours: Let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term welfare & happiness. And what isn't yours? Form (body) isn't yours: Let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term welfare & happiness. Feeling isn't yours... Perception... Thought fabrications... Consciousness isn't yours: Let go of it. Your letting go of it will be for your long-term welfare & happiness.

(Source A) (Source B)
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top