How to assess whom to associate with, and whom not to associate with?
- Thread starter greenberg
- Start date
Hmm? Are you running for public office?
I find that when I was at certain jobs that there were people that were good to keep in close touch with for they could help me get a better position. That takes awaile to learn who is who however and sometimes you make bad judgements about others. I just try to stay away from the ones who look like they are not heading up in the world of work. Now when I was working for myself that was a different story.
The best breakpoint is probably just refusing to associate with people whose screennames start with "Kadar-". After that, it's a question of degree rather than difference.
as cosmic indicated, a lot has to do with what values one is holding - IOW we choose who to associate by being on the look out for what qualities we find attractive.
There is a saying common in some parts of latin america that translates as something like "If I want to know you, I get to know your friends" - the idea is that our values are commonly composed of those things we regularly associate with - so if one associates with a drunkard, one comes to see the value of being a drunkard, associate with a businessman and see the value of being a businessman etc etc.
The general frame work that association operates through is this
NoI 4: Offering gifts in charity, accepting charitable gifts, revealing one's mind in confidence, inquiring confidentially, accepting prasāda and offering prasāda (prasada means footstuffs) are the six symptoms of love shared by one devotee and another.
So even though we might be buying something from the same cash register operator for ten years, we may not necessarily be associating with them - it is only by confidential inquiry and the giving and receiving of gifts and services that one takes on board another's values.
I guess the question remains, what are good values, so one can know what one is looking for ....
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Hmm I think Green is more concerned with what values others hold. I could be wrong though.
But the opposite is also true - sometimes, people seek to associate with those who hold diametrically opposed values, by the "opposites attract" principle.
A common example of acting on this principle is the seemingly normal, average woman who falls for a brutish man. Some of such women do so because it is only in comparison with a brute that they can feel compassionate, good, magnanimous, wise - and they see no other way to practice and develop compassion, goodness, magnanimity, wisdom but to stick around with a brutish man. Such a woman, when faced with a man -or any other person- who is compassionate, good, magnanimous, wise, feels unfit, lowly, worthless.
And this doesn't happen only to women.
Yes. And a necessary part to answering this question seems to be in having some philosophy about how the world works, where and how a person fits in, what happens after the death of the body ...
If there is no end to suffering, if samsara is forever - then why bother trying to be good and moral? Or if the Universe is ruled by a chaotic or evil god, then it might be feasible to fall in line with that.
If ...
true, but socially speaking there must be some common ground or interest - I mean even if we are to go on arguing about philosophy 24/7, despite our conflicts, we both have an interest in philosophy
I would argue that the common ground is affection - IOW if the relationship was literally in a boxing ring from beginning to end, the woman would be looking elsewhere to ply her skills
certainly
if one has the view that samsara goes on forever, they tend to operate out of the position of "have a good time however you can", accepting material pleasure as some sort of indubitable constant.
If one is a little bit more sharper they can see the folly of that position which gives rise to all sorts of cynicism, misanthropic tendencies or nihilism, but even then, the "have a good time how you can philosophy" still calls in (unless they begin to seriously consider the ultimate significant nihilistic issue of life - whether one should commit suicide).
If one sees the universe as ruled by a chaotic or evil god, its difficult to understand how we could hope to attain a state higher than that (unless one has a view that god is also subservient to the time factor, and his reign of eternality can hope to be challenged) .... but of course even after all is said and done, such notions simple become the chaff for discussion forums like this, while one still hotly pursues "have a good time as you can" no matter how constantly bad the track record of such endeavors appear.
Would you not agree though, that if you spend your time here your beliefs are going to have to be mostly intellectual? Those who believe in renunciation would surely have nothing to do with the internet, since conversation is almost impossible and strained. That hedonistic attitude is something we all pursue, even those who subscribe to renunciation find it may pull them back into aesthetic pursual at times. The challenge is to strike an equal balance of renouncing excess and indulging in whatever the mind wants.
in one sense renunciation is the same as material gratification since they are both based on a materialistic view of the world. When a person engages in renunciation they naturally get agitated and swing into sense gratification and a person in sense gratification naturally gets tired of it and swings into renunciation.
An alternative lies in seeing everything connected to god - so instead of having a world view which is essentially selfish (ie "i am the enjoyer of this world/ I am not the enjoyer of this world), one has the view that the world is meant for god's enjoyment - ironically, this enables one to access a greater type of enjoyment and also exhibit a greater type of renunciation than what is capable of within paradigms of materialistic sense gratification.
Then our definitions of renunciation differ. By renunciation I mean developing the wish to attain liberation. By meditating on the four noble truths and the twelve dependent-related links and correctly identifying Samsara, developing a wish to abandon it, being convinced we are able to do so, and developing conviction in the path that leads to liberation. Renunciation is a firm decision to become free from samsara. As defined by Je Tsongkhapa. Clearly not the same as your definition.
An enjoyment still based on suffering.
To keep someone's company, to listen to them, to talk to them, to do things together. And further: to take what they say seriously, to heed their advice, to appreciate their presence.
my point is that there are other issues to perfection outside of a matter based paradigm of renunciation
BG 3.4 Not by merely abstaining from work can one achieve freedom from reaction, nor by renunciation alone can one attain perfection.
what makes you say that?
Agreed, though I'd say your view is very generous.
Not necessarily - people will sometimes get into all sorts of messed up relationships and situations; the motivation seems to be blind attachment (irrespective to both love and hate), and not so much affection.
But anyway, I was just giving an example that people seek particular associations for all sorts of reasons, and it's not necessarily because they would appreciate the values of the other party.
And then what?
From what I've seen -and granted, this is limited knowledge-, various religions and philosophies address the issue of suicide, they usually forbid it - but I have so far not come across any that would actually give counsel for the case that one seriously contemplates suicide.
In his advice to the Kalamas, the Buddha has in a way addressed the issue. He said:
Of course, these four assurances (also called four consolations) are acquired, as stated, by one who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure.
In other words, if one wants those assurances, then one simply needs to practice for his mind to become free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure. - And that as unfortunate as the situation of seriously contemplating suicide might be, the only way to get any assurance is to practice, against all odds, despite the apparent hopelessness of the situation - even though for the one contemplating suicide, practice is the hardest and the most remote thing to do.
By all means, having the view that the Universe is evil, chaotic, or ruled by an evil god leads to nothing but a lot of wasted time and energy.
Perhaps by our associations we can progress from what we are brought up to be; what might or might not be expected of us; to what we might become if given the right balance of affection and honesty.
So as we age and change so might many of our associations. Beware though; an old associate is not necessarily a good one simply because of their longevity. By the same token new for the sake of it might not 'cut it' either. Time will usually tell. However, each and every one of them usually has something to teach us about ourselves. Even if it is whom not to associate with!
Trusting yourself to know is usually a good guide.