Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Miss Hepburn this comment is veering this thread from trying to
be helpful to being smug.
Ah, again an interpretation or opinion from written words that have no tone...
on forums.
No smuggness...my choice to clarify , thinking it simplified
my point and then you guys go ahead and discuss.
I see no problem with that.
I have a hard time with battles or debates or overly explaining what I see as exciting
and basic...then the zingers start coming from people...hey, so I've said what
I said..and now it has become about something that is foreign to my mind...misunderstanding me or my orig post.
I have explained it better, I hope and there it is.
We have the power to control or chose
our feelings, they do not have to bowl us over "being off guard".
Smuggness, or whatever, is a feeling that I dont allow, (along with jealousy, worry
vindictivness, indignation, guilt, low self esteem, depression, pride, all those)...low energy...gotta
keep the thoughts and feelings higher than that !! Gee.
I know if you knew me in real life you would never even think that of me.
So, another example of not taking words personally...and being fine with being misjudged.
If someone especially a person we trust says something unexpectedly hurtful, it
is natural that our initial reaction is anger. What we do with that feeling is the part that
we can control.
.
Darn it went back before signing out....ok, lol, that I'm back...
This is my point Sugah, we are conditioned to believe it is natural to get angry. (Actually, many others
would initially feel shame, betrayal, shock, pity, hurt...nothing close to anger, btw.)
By you even saying that it is natural, is another message to the subconscious mind to believe
that...thinking everyone feels that way.
No we don't.
How would a yogi treat an insult?
How would a master treat or see an insult?
A Buddhist monk, say?
That's all I wanted.. people to open up to think of yourselves, thus open, to your
higher self that is so a part of you. Christians would call it having a renewed mind.
Or "Christ within you that strengthens you". Focusing above and not on the earth....
for any Christians here. Buddha said many things about it.
The Law of Attraction authors, also.
If we see ourselves as dwelling in our higher selves...that have the compassion, clarity, confidence,
power, forgiveness, insight and inner wisdom....these petty "hurt" feelings never even
happen in the first place.
Now if that gets interpeted as promoting no feelings or being robots...there is no more I can
say about that.
So that is why I thought, i'd leave you all to it. I don't know what else I can say...that is as clear
as I get.
But you didn't. You chose to abandon your original line of rebuttal in favor of another, far more productive, approach.
I have no idea what you mean by this.
Quote:
Interesting. Note that I made no mention of the Dalai Lama other than the one quote, which I said could easily have been spoken by Christ. Now, the more appropriate parallel for me to draw would have been between the Dalai Lama and His Holiness thePope, aka the Vicar of Christ. This is especially true in light of some of the Pope's recent statements and edicts.
Aside from the fact the Dali Lamas in Tibetan Buddhism are gods that made the choice to be reincarnated as humans again, so they may help relieve suffering in the world (a concept more akin to the Christians concept of Jesus being God), yeah... the more appropriate parallel would have been between the Popes and Dali Lama. But there again the Dali Lama was pulled from his childhood into an elite sphere of privilege. It would be like all Popes in Catholicism being pulled from out of Italian ghettos as small boys to be reared up inside Vatican City, becoming the leader of Catholics as an adult, but far removed from the lives of how most Catholics live.
Pope Francis is softer in his statements than Christ. So, before you talk about Jesus why don't you actually read all His words in the New Testament. Many of them are quite hard. As in He came to to bring peace but the sword, to divide mother against daughter, he speaks of damnation in hell more than any other character in the whole Bible.
Quote:
Be that as it may, my actual point was more secular. I was presenting/sharing the outcomes of real-world behavioral research that has been ongoing since the mid-1970s. It clearly shows that we can "choose" our emotions, or at least choose to significantly alter them once they've begun. So, in truth, because we really are capable of choosing our emotions, we are ultimately responsible for them. As others have pointed out, we are certainly accountable for our reactions and responses to our emotions.
Let me also clarify -- I'm not saying that strong emotions are always wrong; in fact, they are often necessary for survival. What I am saying is that, if we allow ourselves to be ruled by our emotions -- to allow our emotions to take charge -- we are depriving ourselves of a truly wonderful gift: the ability to think and reason and consider and choose. There's a detailed physiological and neuro-chemical explanation, but this is probably not the venue for it.
Regards,
-- Nighteyes
I'm not sure we can "choose" our emotions but we certainly can develop different ways of responding emotionally to events.
I believe in free will. I believe homosexuals choose to live homosexual lives rather than heterosexual ones. I'm not sure I believe homosexuals choose to fall in love with a person of the same sex but they choose to pursue that route.
I think Americans chose to get extra-animate and emotional over the deaths of the people in 9-11. An insignificant people in my book.
Frankly, I think most people choose to be ruled by their emotions including adult female rape victims.
I don't necessarily disagree with the concept of not being ruled by emotions, ergo, why I'm not persuaded by the whole liberal campaign to promote gay marriage by appealing to the emotions of people.
But it's rather ridiculous to harangue an obese woman in tears for crying because she should "control her emotions" after a group of boys publicly humiliate her on a public bus.
In my own life I have chosen to disregard a lot of American horse sh*t. I observe and learn from what American society is doing wrong. And it's my choice to be pleased in seeing the increased social pathologies in America and the decline of its civilization by its own people eating each other. That's my emotional choice. And one I'm proud to have.
To the Brazilian boy broken in spirit on the side of the street it is my emotional choice to meet him eye to eye and praise him for the heroic and great boy--and man to become--he is, born of the greatest men on earth, birthed from the greatest women the world has known. That's my emotional choice.
Those that do not want to practice being as cool as a cucumber as a stranger
starts ranting at you on the street for no reason...with no reaction externally...
and those that want to be effected bigtime and all upset about the encounter talking
about the trauma for days, with no reaction externally...the choice is yours.
That's all.
Interpret that as you may.
It is. That's stating the obvious.
To the boy being bullied I might recommend trying to turn the other cheek--depending on the extent of things. But if he keeps getting bullied I likely will suggest that he seek the assistance of other, stronger boys, to beat the bully badly enough he'll never mess with him again.
And I like coming on discussion boards like this, in part, because I pass a lot of women frequently, and without these discussion boards I might be kinder towards them. Which would be a mistake on my part. Literally (no exaggeration) many times after existing these discussion boards, a number of women pass by me smiling, and I return their smile with a look of sheer disdain or hatred towards them. Other times I ignore their existence. Sometimes... I will return a greeting with a gentle hello. All depends on how I feel.
I'll do as I want. Bet that.
I'm looking forward to the day of lawfully defending myself and shooting another American dead, blowing off his or her face if necessary when they attack me. That's my choice. And one I'm proud to make.
Miss Hepburn this comment is veering this thread from trying to be helpful to being smug.
This was the whole point to begin with. A superior, elitist smugness, is a common trait among many Americans that look down on their countrymen in some trouble. A demoralized trouble. Rather pathetic. I look down on this behavior with disdain. Especially from those that fashion themselves the "taller." Because the better should fight the better.
And no, we all can't get along. We can get a long if each one extends some basic respect to the other. Pretty simple. Not f*cking rocket science.
Ah, again an interpretation or opinion from written words that have no tone...
on forums.
No smuggness...my choice to clarify , thinking it simplified
my point and then you guys go ahead and discuss.
I see no problem with that.
I have a hard time with battles or debates or overly explaining what I see as exciting
and basic...then the zingers start coming from people...hey, so I've said what
I said..and now it has become about something that is foreign to my mind...misunderstanding me or my orig post.
I have explained it better, I hope and there it is.
We have the power to control or chose
our feelings, they do not have to bowl us over "being off guard".
Smuggness, or whatever, is a feeling that I dont allow, (along with jealousy, worry
vindictivness, indignation, guilt, low self esteem, depression, pride, all those)...low energy...gotta
keep the thoughts and feelings higher than that !! Gee.
I know if you knew me in real life you would never even think that of me.
So, another example of not taking words personally...and being fine with being misjudged.
I apologize for my previous comment. But I still strongly believe in assertively letting people know that I will not be disrespected by some random person for whatever reason. Not aggresively but assertively.
Entirely disagree with this. People refuse to view emotional hurt or attack as being as valid as physical hurt or attack because they cannot SEE the damage. But it's not that different.
If someone punched you in the face, is it your fault if your face hurts or bleeds? Is your face just "too weak"?
Is it your fault you didn't dodge them?
NO. That person violated you. They disrespected you. They crossed a line. They ARE responsible for your hurt.
I disagree with both extremes, which can easily become callousness and hypersensitivity. If someone is deliberately hurtful with words, it's naturally to be offended and sometimes unavoidable. On the other hand, if a person's words are misinterpreted and cause harm, the problem probably is with the listener. I'll end with one word: intent.
lulz.. I like how ALL of you are justifying attacking others, something supposed Buddhists shouldn't condone at all.
If that's all you've come away from this thread with, then
you probably weren't really paying attention. For example, I'm not Buddhist.
-
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
