The Taboo Of Enlightenment

[camerata]

The Taboo of Enlightenment

Do we really believe we can awaken? Stephan Bodian talks with popular lay teacher Adyashanti.

How did this solitary investigation finally bear fruit? It was actually quite simple. One morning I sat down to meditate, and I heard a bird call outside the window. From my gut, I felt a question arise that I had never heard before: Who hears this sound? Immediately the whole world turned inside out and upside down, and I was the bird and the sound and the hearing of the sound, the cushion, the room, everything. It’s not that I as a separate self merged with everything. It was just a pure seeing that everything is one, and that I am that. Unlike other kenshos, this one unfolded with no emotion whatsoever.

Then, in the middle of the experience, something—or rather, nothing—woke up out of the oneness. I knew that I was everything in manifestation, however subtle or dense, and yet I was also total emptiness, empty of even the experience of emptiness, and suddenly everything was seen to be a dream. There was a deeply felt kinesthetic sense of being everything and at the same time nothing. I knew with my whole being that who I really was wasn’t even the oneness, it was the emptiness prior to the oneness, forever awake to itself. This knowing has never changed or faded in any way.

This "knowing" you talk about is traditionally called enlightenment. As you know, enlightenment has been both idealized and trivialized in the West. How would you define it? Enlightenment is awakening from the dream of being a separate me to being the universal reality. It’s not an experience or a perception that occurs to a separate person as the result of spiritual practice or cultivated awareness. It doesn’t come and go, and you don’t need to do anything to maintain it. It’s not about being centered or blissful or peaceful or any other experience. In fact, enlightenment is a permanent nonexperience that happens to nobody. The separate person is seen through, and you realize that only the supreme, universal reality exists, and that you are that.

The joke is that you are now and have always been what you are seeking. Everybody is already the supreme reality, Buddha-nature, or Christ consciousness, except that most of us are asleep to this fact.

Full article.

[fabianfred]

My teacher Supawan Green says that it is like having a mountain right in front of your nose all this time...and only just now becoming aware of it..... not some big 'wow' event but more of a 'oh...so thats it....'

She says it is something so simple and ordinary that you wouldn't believe.

[weary]

So after just over a month's meditation practice, I had a revelation similar to this - minus the emptiness though - the episode lasted for a few days.

I felt immensely energized, experienced the unlimited potentiality in every small now, general harmony, interconnectedness with every living thing, and a sense of 'it's all good at the bottom, even the things my emotions tell me are bad'.

But at the same time, my mind was racing, and I had a sense that if I did not act on the clues and impulses I saw myself as receiving from the universal consciousness I would be stupid. Among such clues was that I saw sides of myself very strongly in the people surrounding me (this was part of the interconnectedness experience) and also I had a sense of almost being in a dream.

So it can hardly be a case of enlightenment, can it? I.e. if it were, I'd not be doubting it, according to these sages. Also, at the time of writing this, my worldview is more back to base. But lots of questions remain, as to how and why my reality/perception of reality turned completely upside down, and what implications it has for the future.

Any thoughts from those of you with more experience of these things?

[fabianfred]

Supawan had an experience when a young student of 20+ when for 5 minutes or so she felt a bit like an out-of-body experience whilst she was totally aware of and understood the seperation of nama and rupa. A year later she had the same but this time it lasted for seven months. She knew this was the goal and strived for it throughout her life as a mother and housewife in England, continuing her practice of daily mindfulness until she had her 'euraka' moment during teaching a yoga class.

[rockyysdt]

So after just over a month's meditation practice, I had a revelation similar to this - minus the emptiness though - the episode lasted for a few days.

I felt immensely energized, experienced the unlimited potentiality in every small now, general harmony, interconnectedness with every living thing, and a sense of 'it's all good at the bottom, even the things my emotions tell me are bad'.

But at the same time, my mind was racing, and I had a sense that if I did not act on the clues and impulses I saw myself as receiving from the universal consciousness I would be stupid. Among such clues was that I saw sides of myself very strongly in the people surrounding me (this was part of the interconnectedness experience) and also I had a sense of almost being in a dream.

So it can hardly be a case of enlightenment, can it? I.e. if it were, I'd not be doubting it, according to these sages. Also, at the time of writing this, my worldview is more back to base. But lots of questions remain, as to how and why my reality/perception of reality turned completely upside down, and what implications it has for the future.

Any thoughts from those of you with more experience of these things?

From what I've read and learned from a lecturing Monk, your experience, as wondrous as it is/was, is an early stepping stone.

The following is a description of Piti, which can occur once the first four steps (16 all together) of synchronicity has been accomplished.

As the meditator experiences tranquillity (samatha), one of five kinds of joy (piti) will arise. These are:

• Weak rapture only causes piloerection.
  
• Short rapture evocates some thunder "from time to time".
  
• Going down rapture explodes inside the body, like waves.
  
• Exalting rapture "makes the body jump to the sky".
  
• Fulfilling rapture seems to be a huge flood of a mountain stream.
  

Note only the last two are considered specifically piti. The first four are just a preparation for the last one, which is the jhanic factor.^[3]

Successfully completing steps five and onwards will involve experience far more profound culminating in the state of full awakening.

Apparently not an easy task, and perhaps taking many lifetimes to accomplish.

Edited May 15, 2012 by rockyysdt

[weary]

Thank you! Interesting. This is intriguing:

Short rapture evocates some thunder "from time to time".

It can't refer to literal thunder, can it? I thought that was just delusional on my part, but I did have the feeling I had that the thunder seemed to follow my mind state..

[weary]

Sorry for hijacking the thread. Maybe my posts could be moved to a separate one with a title like 'making sense of experiences during meditation' so as not to disturb the discussion on Enlightenment?

[rockyysdt]

Sorry for hijacking the thread. Maybe my posts could be moved to a separate one with a title like 'making sense of experiences during meditation' so as not to disturb the discussion on Enlightenment?

I think your points are on topic.

There are experiential milestones on ones journey which can be a guide towards Awakening.

Sorry about my incorrect terminology.

I was looking for the word anapanasiti (not synchronicity).

There are 4 tetrads:

• 1. Contemplation of the body
  

1. Breathing long

2. Breathing short

3. Experiencing the whole body

4. Tranquillising the bodily activities

• 2. Contemplation of feelings
  

5. Experiencing rapture

6. Experiencing bliss

7. Experiencing mental activities

8. Tranquillising mental activities

• 3. Contemplation of the mind
  

9. Experiencing the mind

10. Gladdening the mind

11. Centering the mind in samadhi

12. Releasing the mind

• 4. Contemplation of Dhammas
  

13. Contemplating impermanence

14. Contemplating fading of lust

15. Contemplating cessation

16. Contemplating relinquishment

Although one may experience profound states along the way, think of them as a reward for your efforts, but not a goal to aspire to.

Attachment to such states can trap you from progressing towards awakening.

Desire for them can have the opposite effect, with frustration setting in, and difficulty re experiencing them.

Rather, remain an observer.

Edited May 16, 2012 by rockyysdt

[khaowong1]

I've had these same "a-ha" moments in my meditation sessions. So, maybe we are on to something here.

Metta

[RandomSand]

In the original post, it is asked, "Do we really believe we can awaken?.

Whilst I do enjoy reading many of the thoughtful posts here, and don't wish to distract from anything already posted, I think mentioning Love is not without merit.

Sorry for any confusion caused.

Edited November 2, 2012 by RandomSand

[rockyysdt]

In the original post, it is asked, "Do we really believe we can awaken?.

Whilst I do enjoy reading many of the thoughtful posts here, and don't wish to distract from anything already posted, I think mentioning Love is not without merit.

Sorry for any confusion caused.

I have heard of "Spontaneous Awakening" (Awakening without practice) taking place but don't know of anyone who has experienced it, or whether it is fiction.

The usual method, the Eightfold Path, does involve a type of Love.

More specifically:

• Metta: loving kindness/boundless friendliness,
  
• Karuna: compassion/to feel anothers pain as if it was yours,
  
• Mudita: sympathetic joy, &
  
• Upekkha: equanimity.
  

Can I ask?

Is it your feeling that there must be some level of Love for Awakening to take place?

Are you uncertain as to whether we can "Awaken"?

Edited November 2, 2012 by rockyysdt

[RandomSand]

I just feel that anything I write cannot of true benefit. One must be stirred from their own life experience. That's what was important to me. I'm not saying that some people can't make progress in a logical and intellectual fashion. If that's what works for them then I'm not one to counter that. However; I'm not so good an author that I might help such a person in "deciphering" hermetic matters via allegorical discussions. As such I have nothing further to add to this thread. Again; Sorry.

Edited November 4, 2012 by RandomSand

[rockyysdt]

I just feel that anything I write cannot of true benefit. One must be stirred from their own life experience. That's what was important to me. I'm not saying that some people can't make progress in a logical and intellectual fashion. If that's what works for them then I'm not one to counter that. However; I'm not so good an author that I might help such a person in "deciphering" hermetic matters via allegorical discussions. As such I have nothing further to add to this thread. Again; Sorry.

On the contrary.

What you've written in reply is very valid.

Truly authoritative writing/teaching can be very beneficial if it springs from experience.

One way of being "stirred from ones own life experience" is through practice.

Many of us, either due to lack of knowledge of how to practice, lacking regular practice, or short on faith, may find impetus from discussion of Dharma.

Also discussing points may reveal misconceptions and help travelors.

Then again, some may invest much of their resource discussing, at the expense of practice/experience.

Edited November 4, 2012 by rockyysdt

[shimizu]

Perhaps enlightenment is the understanding, that there is no way to ever reach beyond the limitations of the human mind, and that there are no step by step instructions that one follows, or that there is nothing that you can do, to reach your goal.

After completely given up on any further endeavours, you might then achieve an hitherto unknown peace of mind, an acceptance of your condition, and a falling away of your ego.

Edited November 4, 2012 by shimizu

[Jawnie]

In the original post, it is asked, "Do we really believe we can awaken?.

Whilst I do enjoy reading many of the thoughtful posts here, and don't wish to distract from anything already posted, I think mentioning Love is not without merit.

Sorry for any confusion caused.

I have heard of "Spontaneous Awakening" (Awakening without practice) taking place but don't know of anyone who has experienced it, or whether it is fiction.

The usual method, the Eightfold Path, does involve a type of Love.

More specifically:

• Metta: loving kindness/boundless friendliness,
  
• Karuna: compassion/to feel anothers pain as if it was yours,
  
• Mudita: sympathetic joy, &
  
• Upekkha: equanimity.
  

Can I ask?

Is it your feeling that there must be some level of Love for Awakening to take place?

Are you uncertain as to whether we can "Awaken"?

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural expression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

[rockyysdt]

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural expression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

I view compassion as a double edged sword.

When one acts compassionately, their act not only uplifts the other, one finds oneself uplifted.

The compassionate hearted find themselves free from the rigidity and closed mindedness indifference brings.

To those practicing awareness, freedom from rigidity and closed mindedness banishes the short breath and brings a state, both spacious and open.

A state ripe for contemplation of breath, body, mind, feelings, and the external.

Each of us appear to align with specific paths, be they Mahayana, Vajrayana, Theravada, Zen and others, or open to all.

I wonder what causes us to identify with one over the others?

Might such alignments be influenced by Kharma and consequently Vipaka?

Is alignment a form of attachment?

Edited November 9, 2012 by rockyysdt

[Several]

In the original post, it is asked, "Do we really believe we can awaken?.

Whilst I do enjoy reading many of the thoughtful posts here, and don't wish to distract from anything already posted, I think mentioning Love is not without merit.

Sorry for any confusion caused.

I have heard of "Spontaneous Awakening" (Awakening without practice) taking place but don't know of anyone who has experienced it, or whether it is fiction.

The usual method, the Eightfold Path, does involve a type of Love.

More specifically:

• Metta: loving kindness/boundless friendliness,
  
• Karuna: compassion/to feel anothers pain as if it was yours,
  
• Mudita: sympathetic joy, &
  
• Upekkha: equanimity.
  

Can I ask?

Is it your feeling that there must be some level of Love for Awakening to take place?

Are you uncertain as to whether we can "Awaken"?

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural expression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

Actually compassion is not a part of enlightenment. It is extra, the better choice of behaviour. Compassion is a desire for the cessation of suffering in others, and is therefore a form of suffering itself. It is also dualistic in that it makes one decide what is good or bad. The 7 enlightenment factors are; mindfulness, investigation of Dhamma, energy, rapture, tranquility, concentration, equanimity. Mahayana push compassion because it is necessary for the Bodhisattva ideal. Vajrayana include the 'cruel to be kind' view of compassion. Look at Chenrezig, a great demonic figure wielding a flaming sword, the lord of compassion. Also look at the way Marpa almost kills Milarepa to teach him enlightenment. Compassion is a highly complex subject, but ultimately only undestood clearly by the enlightened.

[rockyysdt]

Actually compassion is not a part of enlightenment. It is extra, the better choice of behaviour. Compassion is a desire for the cessation of suffering in others, and is therefore a form of suffering itself. It is also dualistic in that it makes one decide what is good or bad. The 7 enlightenment factors are; mindfulness, investigation of Dhamma, energy, rapture, tranquility, concentration, equanimity. Mahayana push compassion because it is necessary for the Bodhisattva ideal. Vajrayana include the 'cruel to be kind' view of compassion. Look at Chenrezig, a great demonic figure wielding a flaming sword, the lord of compassion. Also look at the way Marpa almost kills Milarepa to teach him enlightenment. Compassion is a highly complex subject, but ultimately only undestood clearly by the enlightened.

Definately something better understood by the enlightened.

The Buddha also taught that the four Brahma Viharas, associated with compassion (Metta, Karuna, Mudita, & Uppekha) are a path to Enlightenment (Awakening).

John Peacock teaches these as subjects of focus during meditation.

Edited November 9, 2012 by rockyysdt

[huli]

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural expression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

I view compassion as a double edged sword.

When one acts compassionately, their act not only uplifts the other, one finds oneself uplifted.

The compassionate hearted find themselves free from the rigidity and closed mindedness indifference brings.

To those practicing awareness, freedom from rigidity and closed mindedness banishes the short breath and brings a state, both spacious and open.

A state ripe for contemplation of breath, body, mind, feelings, and the external.

Each of us appear to align with specific paths, be they Mahayana, Vajrayana, Theravada, Zen and others, or open to all.

I wonder what causes us to identify with one over the others?

Might such alignments be influenced by Kharma and consequently Vipaka?

Is alignment a form of attachment?

Would you not agree that compassion is a state of mind that one has, not any actions that follow?

[Jawnie]

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural exp<b></b>ression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

I view compassion as a double edged sword.

When one acts compassionately, their act not only uplifts the other, one finds oneself uplifted.

The compassionate hearted find themselves free from the rigidity and closed mindedness indifference brings.

To those practicing awareness, freedom from rigidity and closed mindedness banishes the short breath and brings a state, both spacious and open.

A state ripe for contemplation of breath, body, mind, feelings, and the external.

Each of us appear to align with specific paths, be they Mahayana, Vajrayana, Theravada, Zen and others, or open to all.

I wonder what causes us to identify with one over the others?

Might such alignments be influenced by Kharma and consequently Vipaka?

Is alignment a form of attachment?

The reason the Buddha taught different paths is stated over and over again in Mahayana teachings: the Buddha taught many different paths and methods to account for, and to accord with, the varieties of capabilities of beings. Not all times, situations, and beings are best suited or inclined the Theravadin approach. The Buddha taught other methods and paths for those people. Theravadins generally deny the Buddha taught anything beyond their Theravadin view, however.

Regarding compassion, a Theravadin practitioner once said to me, in denying any form of Buddhism beyond Theravadin exists, that compassionate action as an 'attachment' and hence a sin in Buddhism...that practitioners are to be detached and uninvolved with worldly affairs. However, beyond Theravada, generating the compassionate mind is an 'escalating requirement' in that full and complete enlightenment is not possible without possessing complete and unbounded compassion for all sentient beings. We don't find this in the Theravada.

Edited November 9, 2012 by Jawnie

[Several]

Though it is technically true that compassion is seen as unnecessary in Theraveda it does present as an excellent behavioural tactic. Metta for others, compassionate action or feeling, are antidotes for lust/greed/hate. I'm pretty sure Buddha taught out of compassion rather than for a bet. But how is it possible to balance equanimity with compassion? True compassion requires empathy, feeling, desire for the cessation of suffering in another. According to dependent origination this will ultimately result in rebirth. I believe that the metta/karuna path to liberation can only be realised through aquisition of merit resulting in a favourable rebirth. It is not directly attaining liberation. It is not cutting through. It is hoping that being a good person will ultimately realise the aim in some anonymous future. Compassion is not a bad thing and the world could certainly use much more of it. But it is palliative care for the dying, not a cure for cancer.

[huli]

Compassion is a fundemantel and natural expression of the enlightened mind. This is why Mahayana and Vajrayana emphasize it so much. One must and will eventually experience a natural state of compassion for all sentient beings. "So why wait?" they ask - start now to express your compassionate nature.

I view compassion as a double edged sword.

When one acts compassionately, their act not only uplifts the other, one finds oneself uplifted.

The compassionate hearted find themselves free from the rigidity and closed mindedness indifference brings.

To those practicing awareness, freedom from rigidity and closed mindedness banishes the short breath and brings a state, both spacious and open.

A state ripe for contemplation of breath, body, mind, feelings, and the external.

Each of us appear to align with specific paths, be they Mahayana, Vajrayana, Theravada, Zen and others, or open to all.

I wonder what causes us to identify with one over the others?

Might such alignments be influenced by Kharma and consequently Vipaka?

Is alignment a form of attachment?

The reason the Buddha taught different paths is stated over and over again in Mahayana teachings: the Buddha taught many different paths and methods to account for, and to accord with, the varieties of capabilities of beings. Not all times, situations, and beings are best suited or inclined the Theravadin approach. The Buddha taught other methods and paths for those people. Theravadins generally deny the Buddha taught anything beyond their Theravadin view, however.

Regarding compassion, a Theravadin practitioner once said to me, in denying any form of Buddhism beyond Theravadin exists, that compassionate action as an 'attachment' and hence a sin in Buddhism...that practitioners are to be detached and uninvolved with worldly affairs. However, beyond Theravada, generating the compassionate mind is an 'escalating requirement' in that full and complete enlightenment is not possible without possessing complete and unbounded compassion for all sentient beings. We don't find this in the Theravada.

All Buddhists agree that it is critical to feel compassion towards other, suffering, beings.

The problem with compassionate action is that people can disagree on what actions are correct.

Even political action can be thought of as compassionate action by each side of opposing parties.

Nearly everyone would agree that feeding hungry people is an appropriate compassionate action. However, some people will say it is better to teach a man to fish than to just give him food, even in that case.

Thich Naht Hahn teaches that protecting oppressed people is appropriate compassionate action. Sound simple? Consider the present-day situation in Syria. Should the international community intervene to protect the Syrians? They seem deserving of help as suffering people, don't they? In reality, it might make things way worse.

Compassionate action is inherently based on opinions and views.

Compassion is a feeling in an individual and totally Buddhist.

Compassionate action flows naturally from such a person, but the pursuit of good works is not mentioned in the 8 Fold Path, and could easily become an attachment.

IMHO.

[Several]

Well, I am Buddhist and I do not think compassion is critical. In the OP the described experience does not mention comapssion, descriptions of enlightening experiences rarely mention compassion as a component. I think it is preferable to other emotional states we indulge in, a stepping stone to higher things. A way to break behavioural patterns. Because I do believe that we can awaken, to refer again to the OP. At very least, from a scientific perspective, a human utilises very little of their potential brain capacity. As though using a supercomputer to play noughts and crosses. Neuro plasticity shows we can re-wire synaptic pathways to learn new habits, so old dogs can learn new tricks if they believe it is possible. Attention and concentration can be strengthened, the subconscious can be unlocked and this is by far the most powerful part of the mind. Vast, deep, containing every memory and experience we ever had, capable of instantaneous problem solving. Though these things may in themselves not be enlightenment are they not proof that the mind can learn? Or unlearn? As again the OP says, the feeling of enlightenment is one of remembering that you were enlightened all along. Perhaps all our rational learning disguises our true potential in favour of a surrogate explaination. Nothing more than an old rag over a lamp.

[rockyysdt]

Though it is technically true that compassion is seen as unnecessary in Theraveda it does present as an excellent behavioural tactic. Metta for others, compassionate action or feeling, are antidotes for lust/greed/hate. I'm pretty sure Buddha taught out of compassion rather than for a bet. But how is it possible to balance equanimity with compassion? True compassion requires empathy, feeling, desire for the cessation of suffering in another. According to dependent origination this will ultimately result in rebirth. I believe that the metta/karuna path to liberation can only be realised through aquisition of merit resulting in a favourable rebirth. It is not directly attaining liberation. It is not cutting through. It is hoping that being a good person will ultimately realise the aim in some anonymous future. Compassion is not a bad thing and the world could certainly use much more of it. But it is palliative care for the dying, not a cure for cancer.

Hi S.

I see "Metta/Karuna/Upekkha" as a direct aid in ones "practice" to Awakening.

Partly, as you indicate, as an antidote to lust/greed/hate, but also due to the removal of the repercussions of lust/greed/hate.

Living a life filled with "Metta/Karuna/Upekkha", one then sits without the emotional and mental baggage which lust/greed/hate bring.

I think of "Metta/Karuna/Upekkha" as another element, along with concentration, awareness, keeping of precepts, and wisdom as a total package.

[rockyysdt]

Would you not agree that compassion is a state of mind that one has, not any actions that follow?

Not being an authority I can only convey my thoughts.

Although compassion may be a state of mind, it will naturally lead to action, just as turning on a tap naturally leads to a flow of water.

[rockyysdt]

The reason the Buddha taught different paths is stated over and over again in Mahayana teachings: the Buddha taught many different paths and methods to account for, and to accord with, the varieties of capabilities of beings. Not all times, situations, and beings are best suited or inclined the Theravadin approach. The Buddha taught other methods and paths for those people. Theravadins generally deny the Buddha taught anything beyond their Theravadin view, however.

Regarding compassion, a Theravadin practitioner once said to me, in denying any form of Buddhism beyond Theravadin exists, that compassionate action as an 'attachment' and hence a sin in Buddhism...that practitioners are to be detached and uninvolved with worldly affairs. However, beyond Theravada, generating the compassionate mind is an 'escalating requirement' in that full and complete enlightenment is not possible without possessing complete and unbounded compassion for all sentient beings. We don't find this in the Theravada.

If this is so, then I'd say it's a perfect example of the original message being lost in the translation (Sanskrit/Pali/English & Buddha/Monks/Time).

When the Buddha was teaching about not being "attached" I don't think he was teaching us to be "detached", but rather to be free from the attachment of conditioned response.

I think it sounds very wrong that Buddhists would teach against being compassionate.

I can see it to be a fine line.

In samadha, perhaps one should focus on why one is compassionate.

If it's due to a strong conditioned state of low self worth, then perhaps compassionate acts could be seen as a form of attachment, as the doer may be seeking recognition/validation.

On the other hand, if compassion is truly selfless (perhaps anonymous) and the practioner can actually feel the pain of another, then I can't see a problem.

A practioner who becomes detached from others (indifferent/ opposite of compassion) then the resulting mindset might work against them.

Doesn't a person, who abandons compassion, for the goal of Enlightenment, sound self promoting and may be missing the point?

Edited November 10, 2012 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

All Buddhists agree that it is critical to feel compassion towards other, suffering, beings.

The problem with compassionate action is that people can disagree on what actions are correct.

Even political action can be thought of as compassionate action by each side of opposing parties.

Nearly everyone would agree that feeding hungry people is an appropriate compassionate action. However, some people will say it is better to teach a man to fish than to just give him food, even in that case.

Thich Naht Hahn teaches that protecting oppressed people is appropriate compassionate action. Sound simple? Consider the present-day situation in Syria. Should the international community intervene to protect the Syrians? They seem deserving of help as suffering people, don't they? In reality, it might make things way worse.

Compassionate action is inherently based on opinions and views.

Compassion is a feeling in an individual and totally Buddhist.

Compassionate action flows naturally from such a person, but the pursuit of good works is not mentioned in the 8 Fold Path, and could easily become an attachment.

IMHO.

Very insightful.

Something I wasn't fully mindful of.

Compassionate action can be a mindfield.

I think some acts of compassion might be considered safe.

• Education.
  
• Medicine.
  
• Employment.
  
• Food.
  
• Shelter.
  
• Clean water.
  
• Opportunities.
  

Moving into political areas can be a problem.

Edited November 10, 2012 by rockyysdt