Dear Mitch,
What of compassion? Is it mere thought/label?
Is compassion only thought label?
OK, let’s examine a situation when compassion (or empathy) arises. Let’s say that we have a conversation and you are telling me that your wife has just left you. As I hear your words, some memories arise when I was left by a loved one. As the memories arise, they can trigger some associated emotions. So now, ‘I’ can feel the ‘emotional pain’ and ‘disappointment’ as a reaction to ‘my’ memories (thought stories). So there are some bodily sensations, that are labelled as ‘such and such’ emotions.
Normally, we don’t recognise this whole process. What we recognise is that we feel compassion to the other. But can I ever feel your ‘pain’, your feelings, or can I only feel ‘my’ pain that has arisen due to the triggering memory?
So am I feeling compassion (empathy) towards you or am I just feeling ‘my’ own pain, and then this pain is projected onto ‘you’?
Let’s go a bit further. What happens if all this process is noticed? If this whole process noticed a totally different type of compassion can arise. There is a seeing that both ‘your’ and ‘my’ story is just stories, appearing thoughts here and now. It is also seen that the bodily sensation that is labelled as ‘such-and-such emotion’ is the result of believing the story and not seeing it only as an arising thought.
In this case ‘real compassion’ can arise. Compassion can arise towards you that ‘you’ believed a story and not see it only as a story, and maybe I can help you to show to see how all of this process works (of course only, if you have a desire to see it). I can be with you without being lost in ‘my story’, ‘my suffering’.
In the first scenario, I’m not really compassionate with you because I support your belief in the story. We both believe our own stories and lament over them, as if they were ‘reality’. In the moment, when my own feeling is triggered by a story and not seen for what it is, I lost all connection with you, I stopped listening to you, because I am concerned about my story, my pain (that is projected onto you, so here comes the illusion that I feel empathy towards you). And generally this is what most call as compassion. But actually, we both are lost in storyland, in our suffering.
If no responsibility, then how does love arise?
What is the connection between responsibility and love?
I see no connection between the two.
I wrote a blog post about love, here it is, if you’re interested:
http://fadingveiling.com/2014/09/02/what-is-love/
If the response is that these are mere thoughts, aren't these thoughts to be held, experienced?
Examine this question thoroughly.
How can a thought be experienced?
There are only two options:
- (1) Either seeing a thought as an arising thought and thus not being lost in its content
(2) Or believing it (= being lost in its content) and not seeing as an arising thought only
When the thought is believed and not seen only as an arising thought, associated emotions can arise. Only the emotion can be felt, not the thought.
Let’s see how an emotion arises.
In the actual direct experience (in this moment) there are:
- (1) Arising thoughts stories like: “I’ve made a mistake”. This is nothing more than an arising thought. Just a thought. However, when this is not seen only as a thought, but it is believed it can trigger some emotions to arise
(2) But the ‘emotion’ like ‘fear’ or ‘happiness’ has two components:
- (a) a pure bodily sensation, like contraction or relaxation
(b) a mental label stick to (layered over) the bodily sensation, like “this is fear” or “contraction in the stomach”
(c) and simultaneously arising mental images (pictures) about a certain body parts, like picture about the stomach
So, what we have to do is to separate:
- the thoughts story
- the pure bodily sensation
- mental labels stuck to the sensation
- mental images about certain body parts
(Mental images can also arise accompanying the story itself. Like when you remember about the conversation with your wife, there could be an arising mental image of her sitting in a chair.)
So, if you ignore all thought stories, the mental labels and mental images and you pay attention ONLY to the PURE sensation, then what is left?
Does the pure sensation is ‘bad’ or ‘uncomfortable’ or ‘unpleasant’ or ‘pleasant’?
Or ‘bad’, ‘uncomfortable’, ‘unpleasant’, ‘pleasant’ are just mental labels that are stuck to the pure sensation?
Does the pure sensation have any innate attributes, or is it totally NEUTRAL?
Aren't some "illusions" "better" than others?
This is the same question I asked above.
Does anything have any innate attributes and characteristics or all attributes and characteristics are projected onto the ‘thing’ by believing the mental labels, like ‘better’ or ‘worse’ that are layered over the experience?
What of the interactions, dynamics, interconnections between "us" and "the world?" Even if these are simply images/thoughts arising now, is there not value in holding/acting on such images/thoughts as long as realized as mere thoughts -- as long as the illusion is seen through? As long as no "self" sticks to these?
There is nothing wrong with stories and mental images. They don’t need to be avoided and not even possible to do so. It is enough to see them for what they are, and at the same time they can be enjoyed.
Liberation doesn’t mean that we don’t take part in the stories any more. The movie (stories) goes on. The only difference is that it is seen as a movie, thus not being identified with the main character, ‘me’.
Love, Vivien
