Eckhart Tolle

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by sky123

' I have been trying to get to the heart of what attachment is and means '


I think attachments are linked with the idea of happiness. If I don't have....... or I lose....... then I will never be happy or content. I'm referring to material things of course.

Then there's attachments to beliefs and ideas etc: Everyone is wrong and your right is an example but there's a lot more going on If my happiness depends on others agreeing with me then that's attachment.


The essence of philosophy is that a man should so live that his happiness shall depend as little as possible on external things.”
~Epictetus

You have hit the nail on the head ..

If 'I' don't have ... If 'I' lose .... then 'I' will never be happy ..

The attachment is created through the sense and through the conscious awareness of 'I' which is self related / self reflected in what we perceive and what we believe .

The 'I' is at the heart of every attachment and suffering . This is why you see a reflection of yourself in everything .

I look at the rock and either perceive the rock to be a rock only or I perceive the rock to be more than just that .

'I' can only see the rock to be this or that in reflection of how I see myself . It is the reflection, it is the comparison isn't it through knowing and realizing.

When you no longer are aware of oneself in reflection of something else then there is no attachment present .

The nearest thing to non attachment is being aware of I AM while not functioning in that awareness in ways where you know yourself in the reflection of what is perceived .

This is why a non attached individual cannot even go up to a rose and smell it's scent let alone entertain a belief it's a real rose or an illusory rose or anything else .

The belief is that it is a rose and that there is a scent to smell .. There is an attachment formed pure and simple .. It's not so much about that one can live without roses, however that is another attachment of an attachment already made . Lot's of layers involved here and this is why it's beneficial for peeps to understand the context of what has been actually said before flying off the handle .


x dazzle x

Originally Posted by muffin

I know it throws people off track sometimes, been doing it to long to change now

I'm good thanks, hope the same is for you and your family

One of the reasons I like coming on here, is a chance to see how others view things.

And I should of thanked you early, for the coloring session with the circles, thats more up my alley. Never been much for research.

The center I call the sweet spot, others have their own ideas what it's called and some follow what others say it should be, we are all different and unique.

No different in childhood here, expect I was the black sheep of the family
All that we go thru helps, you may not like it, but as you said," they've brought me here."
One thing sticks out from mine, at five years old I ask, will I still think the same as I do now, when I grow up(ok get older) that answer is yes. The next one from there, I think you have already figured that one out, if not you will.

I can see why he miss the garden, being apart of nature and all it's wonder, I love nothing more than sitting in mine and I live near the center of town, all that fades away, to me this isn't attachment.

That goes both ways, I appreciate seeing it thru your eyes as I do with everyone else I've come across

If it's a good morning where you are then it's a good morning where you are, but it did make me wonder where your 'here' and my 'there' were. Is. Or something. I'm more interested in where people come from.


You're welcome for the colouring sessions, you did hold your crayons properly I hope? Sometimes having something a little more tangible helps and the diagram helped me, everything exists in relation to something else and there are some deep understandings there.


I don't try and figure out any more because I am the answer looking for the question, and if I stand still for long enough the question comes to me. It's just the way it is.


I found it strange that for all the Spirituality that seems to be about leaving the human behind, when so many Spirits who have passed over seem to miss the human. It doesn't make sense, does it? But then it's human to want to be on the other side of the fence.


No it's not attachment, it just is. The enjoyment of the moment with no need for a specific outcome, no need to have a pre-defined experience from it. The communion with nature that can only happen when there is nothing underneath it. It just is.


We need to spend time looking through each other's eyes, again for the first time.

[Altair]

Cats, mice, and dogs can be attached to things and suffer. It's not just physical pain, dogs for instance can feel jealousy and sadness, indicating suffering. You do not need an identity of an ''I'' to experience suffering. I've also seen a local swan being attached to cars, constantly hugging cars in a most fetishistic manner.. lol. This is attachment, of an animal who likely has no concept of ''I''..

This whole thread has been more and more philosophy. The irony is that we have a specific subforum dealing with philosophy but it's barely visited, yet all the popular subforums, like this one and Spiritual Development, are often about philosophy. People tend to rant about ''intellectualism'' being an obstacle yet they seem unaware of what their own discussions are about..

I don't see how most of it is relevant to spirituality or giving people insights or tips in how to live closer to or in alignment with our divine nature. Spiritual growth and development is about practising things and living in those moments. Instead, it becomes a little arena here, and it happens with every popular thread, eventually evolving into ego's battling it out (gorillas pounding on their chests, who is more right.. gorilla A or gorilla B..). People become the thing they think they are not or had sworn to forsake..

I often find philosophy very much anathema to spirituality. And much confusion arises because of all these abstractions that are over-conceptualized. ''Suffering'' for instance is not dependent upon an ''I'' identity, but believing it to be has been key in placing humans upon the top of an imaginary pyramid and ignoring what is out there..

[sky]

Originally Posted by God-Like

You have hit the nail on the head ..

If 'I' don't have ... If 'I' lose .... then 'I' will never be happy ..

The attachment is created through the sense and through the conscious awareness of 'I' which is self related / self reflected in what we perceive and what we believe .

The 'I' is at the heart of every attachment and suffering . This is why you see a reflection of yourself in everything .

I look at the rock and either perceive the rock to be a rock only or I perceive the rock to be more than just that .

'I' can only see the rock to be this or that in reflection of how I see myself . It is the reflection, it is the comparison isn't it through knowing and realizing.

When you no longer are aware of oneself in reflection of something else then there is no attachment present .

The nearest thing to non attachment is being aware of I AM while not functioning in that awareness in ways where you know yourself in the reflection of what is perceived .

This is why a non attached individual cannot even go up to a rose and smell it's scent let alone entertain a belief it's a real rose or an illusory rose or anything else .

The belief is that it is a rose and that there is a scent to smell .. There is an attachment formed pure and simple .. It's not so much about that one can live without roses, however that is another attachment of an attachment already made . Lot's of layers involved here and this is why it's beneficial for peeps to understand the context of what has been actually said before flying off the handle .


x dazzle x

' This is why a non attached individual cannot even go up to a rose and smell it's scent let alone entertain a belief it's a real rose or an illusory rose or anything else '


I'm not understanding what you mean. Why can't an unattached person just enjoy the rose and it's aroma knowing it won't last forever, being mindful in that moment....

[sky]

Originally Posted by Altair

Cats, mice, and dogs can be attached to things and suffer. It's not just physical pain, dogs for instance can feel jealousy and sadness, indicating suffering. You do not need an identity of an ''I'' to experience suffering. I've also seen a local swan being attached to cars, constantly hugging cars in a most fetishistic manner.. lol. This is attachment, of an animal who likely has no concept of ''I''..

This whole thread has been more and more philosophy. The irony is that we have a specific subforum dealing with philosophy but it's barely visited, yet all the popular subforums, like this one and Spiritual Development, are often about philosophy. People tend to rant about ''intellectualism'' being an obstacle yet they seem unaware of what their own discussions are about..

I don't see how most of it is relevant to spirituality or giving people insights or tips in how to live closer to or in alignment with our divine nature. Spiritual growth and development is about practising things and living in those moments. Instead, it becomes a little arena here, and it happens with every popular thread, eventually evolving into ego's battling it out (gorillas pounding on their chests, who is more right.. gorilla A or gorilla B..). People become the thing they think they are not or had sworn to forsake..

I often find philosophy very much anathema to spirituality. And much confusion arises because of all these abstractions that are over-conceptualized. ''Suffering'' for instance is not dependent upon an ''I'' identity, but believing it to be has been key in placing humans upon the top of an imaginary pyramid and ignoring what is out there..

Some on this Thread are actually explaining their personal experiences, which is sometimes very difficult to put into words.

Originally Posted by God-Like

I have spoken about potential issues with teachers that teach about attachments and non attachments while having attachments themselves .

The question is Daz, do they have attachments themselves? How do you know? Are you comparing against your definitions and if so, what are they?

There are teachers who teach without any attachments to any outcomes - which is contrary to teaching itself in most people's eyes because the point of teaching is that the pupils are there to learn something specific. The teacher can have no attachment to any outcome in particular but can recognise there is something more ephemeral in his teachings. He might feel as though for him it's the 'right thing to do'. Similarly with the pupils, they may not be attached to learning anything specific or have any learning at all, they are there to see what arises from the teaching.

As for Tolle's millions, (and I know what you've already said time and again) he can have millions but not be attached to them - having it and being attached to it are two very different things. I don't know Tolle personally but I'd suspect he'd understand that there is something more ephemeral happening within his teachings and so wouldn't be attached to any outcome in particular. Perhaps he'd like to think that people go home with something but he wouldn't cry in his beer if they didn't - because he's not attached to his teachings. He may well write books because he'd like to think people are going to benefit from them - which is a nice thought - but if they don't that's OK too. He's perhaps not attached to his money but recognises that it has a place to play in his Life just the same. Having money is the means to an end, he can spend his time writing books to help people rather than spend time as a checkout chick to earn a living.

Originally Posted by God-Like

This is what I am saying, and it is that we just attach to something else through our beliefs .

Beliefs are attachments to what are the results of a cognitive process, but this being a Spiritual forum that's heresy. I guess people get soooo attached to their beliefs.

I got my tail out of the forum because I wanted to know what this attachment malarky was all about, because often the chatter is coming from opinions more than anything else. I found this -

Sadly, non-attachment or detachment as proposed in Buddhism is radically misunderstood by many. Non-attachment actually brings about the most profound sense of care, compassion, and freedom you could ever imagine.

But, I understand why the word “detachment” might send chills up your spine. So let’s set the picture straight.
What Does Non-Attachment Really Mean?

Non-attachment doesn’t mean being cold as a stone. Emotions don’t cease to exist as you learn to let go. You just relate to them differently because you understand their ephemeral nature. And that, thank goodness, means there's a lot less to get riled up about.

For example, even great spiritual teachers:
Cry
Smile
Laugh
Play

They may have moments when impatience or frustration arises, too. They're ultra human, and not indifferent in the least.

But, they don’t entangle themselves in these emotional states by firing up aversion for the “negative” or wanting to extend the “positive.” They allow emotions to rise and dissolve. They don't feed emotions, fuel drama, or express distress by engaging in knock-on negative behaviors. They have perspective.

This takes considerable practice, but virtually everyone has the power to tame their mind through cultivating mindfulness and awareness.

The Beauty of Non-Attachment

When you understand the true meaning of non-attachment:

Expectations no longer rule your life.
Emotions arise, but you have space. You have perspective. Emotions don’t catch and torment you every time.
You relate to the world as it is rather than to your concepts about it, which never bring lasting happiness.
You have a clarity of mind so you’re able to see through to the truth of things.
You’re not bothered by much, but that doesn't mean you tolerate harmful behavior.
The problems of this world evoke compassion rather than anger.
You don’t chase after happiness. You just enjoy it when it’s present, and release it when it dissolves.
You're able to allow life to unfold without needing to control everything.
You don't stop loving. You love even more.
Your heart only grows bigger and bigger and bigger, when you see all the unnecessary suffering in this world.
You feel naturally compelled to help, but you’re not attached to the outcome.
The sense of spaciousness and freedom you feel bring a genuine contentment that can never be found in temporary experiences.


You are free because you're in charge of your mind and emotions instead of them bossing you around. And, with this freedom, you can taste the distinct flavor of every experience with no need to squeeze it tightly to your chest.

https://www.alwayswellwithin.com/blo...non-attachment

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by sky123

' This is why a non attached individual cannot even go up to a rose and smell it's scent let alone entertain a belief it's a real rose or an illusory rose or anything else '


I'm not understanding what you mean. Why can't an unattached person just enjoy the rose and it's aroma knowing it won't last forever, being mindful in that moment....

How would an individual know that it's aroma won't last forever?

How does an individual know that it's a rose and not a dog?

Do you walk up to a dog knowing it's a dog and sniff it like you would a rose?

What I am pointing out is that how you perceive everything else will be reflected in how you perceive yourself and vice versa .

These perceptions you have of yourself is entwined within your belief system which is a form of attachment .

That is also why you get out of bed and walk upon the floor and you don't try and climb the walls as a spider and crawl along the ceiling .

The foundation of your belief system is entwined within your perception of self . What you believe yourself to be in other words.

What you are suggesting is an attachment already made that one can be attached too or not in a specific way and context, like I can take it or leave it regarding whether I have fish or chicken for dinner, I am therefore not attached to one or the other per se (that's irrelevant) because I am attached to having something to eat regardless . It's no good saying I am not attached to money either as an example when you are deeply attached to the love of a loved one or the need for a 4 bedroom house with two bathrooms . This also reflects wants and needs and desires on so many levels for which spiritual teachers also speak about . This is why people raise an eyebrow or two when certain spiritual teachers have more than they need like Osho's 94 rolls royces lol or when is enough ever enough for some and when will their desires ever burn themselves out, perhaps when all the people of the world is fed, sheltered and nourished and forevermore satisfied? You see some teachers frown upon desires of the flesh no matter what they are . Each to their own on that score and it just illustrates that teachers and so called masters can come from a multitude of self reflections . My mum didn't think twice about crapping in a bush because for 15 years she never had a toilet lol .

I am however attachment to the belief that I need food and water and shelter in reflection of how I perceive myself .. I mean even dogs act upon their hunger because they believe in a sense of I AM in there own way that is and feels hungry or sad or happy . My mums left two young dogs when she passed and now one of them has died last week, the dog that is left can't bring himself to eat as yet . He whines for his playmate . This is attachment in effect through his belief system isn't it .

If there was no attachment to this sense there would no acknowledgment that the hunger and the suffering is associated to himself or what he believes himself to be on some level ..

This is why animals show signs of suffering because it is 'them' that suffers and they know that they do .

It's to do with being self aware compared to not.

Lions don't need to know that they are Lions in the way that we know they are in order for them to know what's what inline with how they perceive themselves and everything else . They know their cubs from a baby elephant lol .. They know the difference between an antelope for dinner and a tree to shade under or a river to drink from .

(All beliefs that are based and associated with our perceptional attachments) This is why such conditioning which is another form of attachment keeps them in the same field of perception so to speak and they won't try and drink from a rock once they experienced the taste of water from the river .

A bit long winded (sorry) but it does explain the nature of perception and beliefs and the attachments made .


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

The question is Daz, do they have attachments themselves? How do you know?


There are teachers who teach without any attachments to any outcomes - which is contrary to teaching itself in most people's eyes because the point of teaching is that the pupils are there to learn something specific. The teacher can have no attachment to any outcome in particular but can recognise there is something more ephemeral in his teachings. He might feel as though for him it's the 'right thing to do'. Similarly with the pupils, they may not be attached to learning anything specific or have any learning at all, they are there to see what arises from the teaching.



As for Tolle's millions, (and I know what you've already said time and again) he can have millions but not be attached to them - having it and being attached to it are two very different things. I don't know Tolle personally but I'd suspect he'd understand that there is something more ephemeral happening within his teachings and so wouldn't be attached to any outcome in particular. Perhaps he'd like to think that people go home with something but he wouldn't cry in his beer if they didn't - because he's not attached to his teachings. He may well write books because he'd like to think people are going to benefit from them - which is a nice thought - but if they don't that's OK too. He's perhaps not attached to his money but recognises that it has a place to play in his Life just the same. Having money is the means to an end, he can spend his time writing books to help people rather than spend time as a checkout chick to earn a living.


Beliefs are attachments to what are the results of a cognitive process, but this being a Spiritual forum that's heresy. I guess people get soooo attached to their beliefs.


I got my tail out of the forum because I wanted to know what this attachment malarky was all about, because often the chatter is coming from opinions more than anything else. I found this -



Sadly, non-attachment or detachment as proposed in Buddhism is radically misunderstood by many. Non-attachment actually brings about the most profound sense of care, compassion, and freedom you could ever imagine.

But, I understand why the word “detachment” might send chills up your spine. So let’s set the picture straight.
What Does Non-Attachment Really Mean?

Non-attachment doesn’t mean being cold as a stone. Emotions don’t cease to exist as you learn to let go. You just relate to them differently because you understand their ephemeral nature. And that, thank goodness, means there's a lot less to get riled up about.

For example, even great spiritual teachers:
Cry
Smile
Laugh
Play

They may have moments when impatience or frustration arises, too. They're ultra human, and not indifferent in the least.

But, they don’t entangle themselves in these emotional states by firing up aversion for the “negative” or wanting to extend the “positive.” They allow emotions to rise and dissolve. They don't feed emotions, fuel drama, or express distress by engaging in knock-on negative behaviors. They have perspective.

This takes considerable practice, but virtually everyone has the power to tame their mind through cultivating mindfulness and awareness.

The Beauty of Non-Attachment

When you understand the true meaning of non-attachment:

Expectations no longer rule your life.
Emotions arise, but you have space. You have perspective. Emotions don’t catch and torment you every time.
You relate to the world as it is rather than to your concepts about it, which never bring lasting happiness.
You have a clarity of mind so you’re able to see through to the truth of things.
You’re not bothered by much, but that doesn't mean you tolerate harmful behavior.
The problems of this world evoke compassion rather than anger.
You don’t chase after happiness. You just enjoy it when it’s present, and release it when it dissolves.
You're able to allow life to unfold without needing to control everything.
You don't stop loving. You love even more.
Your heart only grows bigger and bigger and bigger, when you see all the unnecessary suffering in this world.
You feel naturally compelled to help, but you’re not attached to the outcome.
The sense of spaciousness and freedom you feel bring a genuine contentment that can never be found in temporary experiences.

You are free because you're in charge of your mind and emotions instead of them bossing you around. And, with this freedom, you can taste the distinct flavor of every experience with no need to squeeze it tightly to your chest.

https://www.alwayswellwithin.com/blo...non-attachment

I will come back to this G.S.. Time for lunch


x daz x

Originally Posted by Altair

Instead, it becomes a little arena here, and it happens with every popular thread, eventually evolving into ego's battling it out (gorillas pounding on their chests, who is more right.. gorilla A or gorilla B..).

I have to agree whole-heartedly with this. When the focus is placed on the concept and eyes are turned away from how it affects one personally, the question then becomes "What are the reasons I'm looking outwardly instead of inwardly?" Isn't that what Spirituality is all about? Instead of coming to realise what we are attached to or not, what attachments are we displaying?

Both gorilla A and gorilla B, in all their Spirituality, haven't come to realise that they have become attached to thinking they are both right and by the attempt to influence a certain outcome they've become attached not to just their own ego. That's the forum vernacular 'ego'.

Originally Posted by Altair

People become the thing they think they are not or had sworn to forsake..

People become the monsters they're done battle with, instead of making their enemies their friends.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

The question is Daz, do they have attachments themselves? How do you know? Are you comparing against your definitions and if so, what are they?

Look at what peeps do, look at how peeps live, look at what peeps say, it's all there so to speak in some shape or form .

I just said to Sky that my mums dog is pining and whining because his playmate is no longer with him .

How do I know that he was attached to the dog that just died? Just look at how he has reacted to what has happened .

It can be that straightforward ..

I have also said that I can eat chicken or fish and it is true enough to say that I am not overly attached to either just as long as I eat something .

There is however an attachment to eating something .

I have been speaking of the nature of attachments and the foundation of attachments .

My mum for instance didn't need a toilet, and she wasn't a follower of ego fashion either, but she would of died trying to save me, my sister or any of her dogs from harms way .

That is attachment .

It's all attachment .

I have as you know been speaking quite in depth of self perception / beliefs in regards to attachment .

I hope it answers your question ..


x daz x