Do I have to like people?

[eputkonen]

Originally Posted by Bhavani

Hi, I am posting in the ND forum as that is where my beliefs lie.
I have kind of had it with liking everyone.
There is a certain notion that spiritual types should deeply love everyone.
Isnt is possible to know that we are a love manifestation, whilst also not liking people?

As the Third Chinese Chan (Zen) Patriarch Seng’tsan said in the Hsin Hsin Ming (https://www.scribd.com/doc/11505262/...e-Perfect-Mind)...it starts out with...

The Great Way is not difficult,
for those who have no preferences.
Let go of longing and aversion,
and it reveals itself.

Make the smallest distinction, however,
and you are as far from it as heaven is from earth.
If you want to realize the truth,
then hold no opinions for or against anything.

Like and dislike
is the disease of the mind.

Like and dislike part of the illusions of the mind and egoic in nature. Forget about liking or not liking...just accept what is as it is.

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by eputkonen

As the Third Chinese Chan (Zen) Patriarch Seng’tsan said in the Hsin Hsin Ming (https://www.scribd.com/doc/11505262/...e-Perfect-Mind)...it starts out with...



Like and dislike part of the illusions of the mind and egoic in nature. Forget about liking or not liking...just accept what is as it is.

Hi Eric

I find a pointer like ‘just accept what is as it is’ to be nebulous and misleading. Which part of your experience are you meant to accept? If someone walked into your house and started removing your computer would you accept that? Of course not - there would be an impulse to prevent them. Should you accept that impulse? But isn't that impulse born out of a wish for things to be different therefore not accepting the present situation? These sort of questions highlight the limitation and murky nature of the pointer.

The pointer is (innocently enough) born out of the realisation that all there is is what is - THIS, however THIS manifests. In the seeing of this there is, by default, the acknowledgement/acceptance that whatever happens - and whatever response that elicits - it is already the expression of a deeper principle at work. It is the recognition of the deeper principle that is key here.

[Dargor]

I live by one rule: Like the likable and dislike the dislikable. If you want to follow this rule or not is up to you, but personally I don't see any use in liking toxic people because they simply aren't worthy to be liked by the likes of me.

[eputkonen]

Originally Posted by Moondance

Hi Eric

I find a pointer like ‘just accept what is as it is’ to be nebulous and misleading. Which part of your experience are you meant to accept? If someone walked into your house and started removing your computer would you accept that? Of course not - there would be an impulse to prevent them. Should you accept that impulse? But isn't that impulse born out of a wish for things to be different therefore not accepting the present situation? These sort of questions highlight the limitation and murky nature of the pointer.

The pointer is (innocently enough) born out of the realisation that all there is is what is - THIS, however THIS manifests. In the seeing of this there is, by default, the acknowledgement/acceptance that whatever happens - and whatever response that elicits - it is already the expression of a deeper principle at work. It is the recognition of the deeper principle that is key here.

Perhaps instead of accepting...which is an egoic action...how about non-resisitng and non-denying. You do not resist or deny that someone is in the house and taking the computer. However, this does not mean you can not decide to stop the person from taking the computer. Acting for change does not necessarily mean you are resisting or denying the reality of what is going on.

Said more generically...yes, you accept that someone is in the house stealing the computer...but then you can act to change the situation. You accept the outcome regardless...whether successfully stopping the robbery or not.

[Torgo]

Originally Posted by Moondance

Hi Eric

I find a pointer like ‘just accept what is as it is’ to be nebulous and misleading. Which part of your experience are you meant to accept? If someone walked into your house and started removing your computer would you accept that? Of course not - there would be an impulse to prevent them. Should you accept that impulse? But isn't that impulse born out of a wish for things to be different therefore not accepting the present situation? These sort of questions highlight the limitation and murky nature of the pointer.

The pointer is (innocently enough) born out of the realisation that all there is is what is - THIS, however THIS manifests. In the seeing of this there is, by default, the acknowledgement/acceptance that whatever happens - and whatever response that elicits - it is already the expression of a deeper principle at work. It is the recognition of the deeper principle that is key here.

Originally Posted by eputkonen

Perhaps instead of accepting...which is an egoic action...how about non-resisitng and non-denying. You do not resist or deny that someone is in the house and taking the computer. However, this does not mean you can not decide to stop the person from taking the computer. Acting for change does not necessarily mean you are resisting or denying the reality of what is going on.

Said more generically...yes, you accept that someone is in the house stealing the computer...but then you can act to change the situation. You accept the outcome regardless...whether successfully stopping the robbery or not.

Ooohhh I love examples!!! And because of that, I think you two have helped me to realize a lot of things with this. I was going to type out a long response to see if you thought I "got it," but I think it's best I don't. I'm pretty sure I understand things much more clearly now though. Thank you. :)

[dream jo]

no 1 shud forsess sum 1 2 lk sum1

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by dream jo

no 1 shud forsess sum 1 2 lk sum1

Yes, dream jo, whether you like someone or not can’t be forced. Sometimes, for whatever reason, people just don’t click. It’s not always an ego-identification thing - even animals and birds have their differences.

[Moondance]

Originally Posted by eputkonen

Perhaps instead of accepting...which is an egoic action...how about non-resisitng and non-denying. You do not resist or deny that someone is in the house and taking the computer. However, this does not mean you can not decide to stop the person from taking the computer. Acting for change does not necessarily mean you are resisting or denying the reality of what is going on.

Said more generically...yes, you accept that someone is in the house stealing the computer...but then you can act to change the situation. You accept the outcome regardless...whether successfully stopping the robbery or not.

Yes. It’s more of an acknowledgement of the reality of the situation.

I’ve never been a big fan of the Hsin Hsin Ming. Some of it seems to have been written from an idealised projection of what realisation entails. In the light of realisation beyond ego-identification the body-mind-personality is still a functioning unit of nature and subject to preferences. If there wasn’t an affinity for heavy metal, prawns, Simon Cowell and racism prior to realisation it’s unlikely that that would change.

[eputkonen]

Originally Posted by Moondance

In the light of realisation beyond ego-identification the body-mind-personality is still a functioning unit of nature and subject to preferences.

Yes, but there is no attachment to the preference...it doesn't NEED to go your way (so to speak).

I can prefer the heat rather than the cold...but I do not insist that I am never cold. I still live in Minnesota - where the winters are very cold...it is not resisted or denied when it is cold out. There is no suffering in being cold.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by eputkonen

Yes, but there is no attachment to the preference...it doesn't NEED to go your way (so to speak).

I relate to the notion of 'sports' being a kind of (Western) 'yoga'. You can have a desired 'goal' (preference, whatever) and keep on playing/going for it without being 'upset' if and when the flow isn't or doesn't 'go' as one wishes to.

It helps to have a 'practice'* (a 'sport' if you will) where the desired 'result isn't always attained in order to learn to quickly identify any 'attachment'-proneness (a 'greenhorn' tendency) on one's own part - and the importance of 'jettisoning' it - I think.

* Note this is not the kind of 'yoga' practice where one regularly approaches something in a route-ine same way (following the same set of guidelines/principles, etc.).

I found reading scientific research-based book Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi quite enlightening in this regard.

Here's a link to a short review for anyone interested in checking it out:
https://medium.com/just-finished/flo...w-5990dd8b8ab7