attachment

[David Jamieson]

Why is it that in order to understand the inhibitions and draw backs of attachment, we must attach ourselves to a master?

Why is it that when someone frees themselves from the act of kow towing that they are looked down upon when in reality they have dis-attached themselves.

- These questions may seem shallow, but when pondered you will be surprised at what can be surmised.

-Consider this, "know thyself and you shall know the world". Nothing you are doing is either right nor wrong, you are simply doing.

-The greatest master is only master of themself, to proclaim oneself as master of another is indeed attachment and a shortcoming.

food for thought from a small opinion ;)

peace

[TjD]

perhaps attaching ourselves to a master, or to kow towing is helping us disattach ourselves from our ego, which is a far more difficult attachment to detach from?


peace
travis

[Nexus]

Tjd basically summed it up. A master who you would hope has seen their ego for what it is, part of themselves but not the whole kahoots would be able to guide an individual in the proper direction. Indeed it is one more attachment, however in transgression of the ego one would dissolve that attachment as well. At that point the individual could choose to continue with the master, however the reasons would from that point on be different as they are no longer invested in an ego-attachment that they realize is an illusion. From that point they could study with the master to learn techniques and skills which perhaps they enjoy learning or wish to share with others. They can also continue to learn from the life experiences of others and share their own and get feedback and interpretations.

Ideally one never actually needs a master to attach themselves to, however through social conditioning and the self-portraits we paint for ourselves we often find it difficult to see the proper image. A master will (hopefully) point one towards the true source, they are a guide who has walked the path that you would be treading upon and know the destination or lack there of depending on how you perceive it.

The choice is an individual one and if a person has the will to see the truth they will see it regardless of having someone point them towards it. Remember that it is the ego that chooses to have a master in order to discover the truth, and it is also the ego that chooses that it does not want or need a master to discover the truth. The same could be said that the ego is used to make this post as much as it could be used to decide not to make this post. The importance is recognizing things for what they are and being accurate in seeing what is actually occuring.

- Nexus

[prana]

Originally posted by TjD
perhaps attaching ourselves to a master, or to kow towing is helping us disattach ourselves from our ego, which is a far more difficult attachment to detach from?


peace
travis
sadhu sadhu sadhu :)

[Nexus]

Translation to sadhu?

[David Jamieson]

sadhu=holy man

i see the point of detaching from ego by attaching to service to another.

to me this does two things:

1. it burdens the other

2. it's a quick fix to a deeper intent ie: once you have dettached, what shall you do with the bond?

peace

[prana]

The Theravadin monks/nuns/practitioners always chant the words "Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu" after giving a Dhamma discourse. It means "Well said, well said, well said" or so the guru explained.

Sorry to contradict you Kung Lek.

[Nexus]

2. it's a quick fix to a deeper intent ie: once you have dettached, what shall you do with the bond?

The bond becomes seen for what it is. Before the bond existed as a means for you to gain your spiritual freedom. Now that you have gained it through whatever process or lack thereof you can now choose to remain with the teacher to learn skills and techniques. Those techniques and skills could be for you to aid others in spreading your spiritual insights or they could just be for the mere love of them (meditation, calligraphy, tai chi, painting) to name a few.

At that point the bond would change anyways, and also not change. On the level of the ego, you are still the teachers student and they are still your teacher, however you also recognize that these are merely social roles and not absolute.

[guohuen]

The glue dries out and returns to dust.

[harry_the_monk]

Attachment to a teacher may not be good. Teacher is there to be a crutch to help on the way, not the legs to walk it for you; most teachers I know say they do not want their students to be attached to them.
As Nexus says they should point one towards the true source.
Being attached as such to a teacher may also be a way of feeding your own ego by identifying to such a great being as almost being part of you.
Without the attachment you will be able to work more on what the teacher is actually saying rather than what you percieve teacher to be saying.

Dis-attachment is something that most people are afraid of, and it kinda happens that if they see others managing it they create many excuses for why it is not right. Remember also that the norm in the true sense of the word means what the majority are doing, not always what is right.

MHO, Peace.

[David Jamieson]

prana - semantics :) I was unfamiliar with such a colloquial use of the word and was only familiar with it as a title of the wandering sages of india.

thanks for input everyone, good stuff.

peace

[Scott R. Brown]

Attachment is not an action it is an emotional state. It is not attachment in the sense of commitment that we are to avoid, it is the emotional attachment to a Master the causes problems. The Master is not affected by our emotional attachment as long as he has no emotional attachment to us, or rather an emotional attachment to the need to have followers/students. In fact it is emotional attachment to anything that causes us to be bound to illusion and erroneous views.