Attachment: the cause of Insecurity and Selfishness

David Hume, a British philosopher of the 18^th century, argues that as much as we want to believe that we have a self, there is no empirical evidence. All that we have are mental impressions that are banded together by memory. Because of the constant conjunction of these mental impressions, a mental habit of connecting these impressions, coupled with the belief that every effect has a cause, has led to the belief that there is something that is thinking these mental impressions. We give it a name: the self. But the self, by itself, is not an impression.

Grammar may also have contributed to the belief in the existence of the self. Take, for example, “Peter is running”. This is the simple 'subject – predicate' form, which has it that the predicate refers to the subject. The predicate, in this case, is the action, and the subject is the acting agent. But, what about 'It is raining'? The predicate is 'raining' and the subject is the 'it'. What is this 'it” that rains? Grammar imposes its structure on reality.

Some may argue that there is a true self that lies behind the mental impressions; or that there is a true self that is different from the empirical self that consists of mental impressions (memory). The feeling that there has to be something does not guarantee that there in fact is a some thing.

In other words, we want so much to believe that something of us, the soul, will live forever, after resigning ourselves to the fact that something of us, the body, will die and turn into ashes. We crave for immortality.

It is this belief in the indestructibility of the self (or, the soul if you wish to call it) and the experience of pain and suffering, that makes us insecure. Centered on this insecurity, we plan our lives for the purpose of surviving.

Wanting so much to believe that we can and must live forever makes it very difficult for us to appreciate the value of compassion and love, and our responsibility towards the well being of the others. We cannot love the others because we are comfortable with our being insecure. We act aggressively towards those who rile up our comfort zone.

Until we let go of the illusion of the 'true' self, we will stay selfish and live in fear.

Insignificant Suffering vs. Significant Suffering (preview)

Life is Suffering
One of Buddhism’s Four Noble Truths states that life is suffering. This does not mean that you have to resign yourself to it. The proper attitude is one of acceptance. Resignation and acceptance are two totally different attitude. Resignation implies that you believe that no matter what you do, your actions lead to suffering. And, since your actions lead to suffering, you commit an erroneous belief that life is bereft of significant meaning. Without meaning, life then is not worth living. More erroneous is the accompanying belief that life is not worth living because nothing makes sense without you there to participate in total pleasure. Such is the resignation attitude: Suffering negates you. Life is suffering because you can’t accept that life can be enjoyable without you being there.

On the other hand, acceptance of life as suffering enables you to embrace both suffering and joy of living. By accepting it, you adopt an objective and realistic stand on the status of life. This affords you to inquire into two kinds of suffering. I will differentiate them into two categories: the insignificant and the significant kinds of suffering. First of all they are both necessary. Experiencing the insignificant one is necessary in that experience allows you to differentiate the significant from the insignificant. It also allows you to realize that, without first experiencing the insignificant, you would not be able to appreciate the significant kind of suffering, which is a kind of joy.

Insignificant Suffering
Because every human being is self centered, he naturally desires to satisfy himself. Once he satisfies himself, he yearns for the same experience in the future as he had in the past. He expects to make the future a replicate of the past. But, reality has another plan in mind. It frustrates every human being who expects reality to do his bidding. As a result of not getting what he wants, he suffers. Yet, he strives on, changing his plans by replacing the failed means with another. Consequently, he suffers, and suffers needlessly. Changing the means changes nothing for as long as the end of desire, which is himself, remains unchanged.

And this is what he must realize if he is to transcend his ego. Holding on to the belief in the ego imprisons him in the cage of unnecessary forms of suffering - a possible life sentence.

Significant Suffering
Life is suffering. If you are stuck in it with your belief in the ego intact, you will suffer unnecessarily. However, by transcending the ego boundaries, life is lived to the fullest and with significant meaning despite suffering that comes along with human living. How is this so?

Stuck in the prison of self centeredness, he is selfish. He behaves selfishly: he yearns for attention. He feels selfishly: he is ever conscious of how he feels, not of how the others feel. He thinks selfishly: that is, he cooks up an intellectually closed system that humans and nonhumans have to conform to.

In a social relation, he treats the other human being as a means to his satisfaction. However, by transcending the ego, he reaches beyond towards the other as a human being, a being with intrinsic value. Then, he learns the true meaning of love. He becomes passionate, sensitive to, and caring for, the well being of the other. When the other suffers, he suffers. When the other dies, he grieves. He grieves not for his loss, but grieves because he realizes the absolute intrinsic value that is the other. He extols the other to his rightful place in the universe. He grieves, he suffers. And, he suffers necessarily, significantly. As the Christians would say, there is ‘joy in suffering’.

You don't have to be a Buddhist to be Buddhist

You can still maintain your belief in Christianity, Islam, Judaism or any other religions, and still be a Buddhist. To be a Buddhist in the way Siddartha - the most famous of all the Buddhas -has it, is to realize the simplest truths about behaving, feeling, thinking, and living, and relating to human and non-human beings. Unlike other faiths, the Buddhist attitude does not cling to a set of beliefs; nor does it pass judgement on the beliefs of other religions. The Buddhist attitude has no quarrel with anyone who chooses to believe in any set of beliefs. The Buddhist attitude is primarily concerned with how one believes in, and practices, beliefs of his choice.

When Siddartha abandoned his princely life and headed for the hills to find the truth, it took him six long years to finally get on to the path of true living and being. During those six  long years, he had experimented on the different ways of living and thinking, and believing. Each time, he failed and failed miserably. He must have had dabbled with what was described  Philosophy. He may have had dabbled with the different sets of beliefs. Each time, he failed and failed miserably. After six years of failure, he finally discovered the path. He set foot on that path. The path was long. To stay on that path, the Buddha was required to question himself, his biases and prejudices, his ego centric ways, his long held philosophical beliefs. In other words, he had to question almost everything he had held dearly. In the end, he was rewarded.

Of the several fundamental truths about living, behaving, feeling, thinking and associating with human and non human beings, he discovered The Eightfold Path. These truths are not exclusively Buddhist because not only did he not create these truths, these truths apply to any human being, whether he be a member of a religion, an atheist, or a secularist.

Take some time to go over The Eightfold Path, and The Four Noble Truths.

Are you "Lucas"?

The handcuff between the oppressors and the oppressed is cemented in fear. That is, the ‘bond’ exists for as long as the oppressors are allowed, by the oppressed, to instill fear and guilt in them; and the oppressed need their protection from hostile forces. The oppressor can be anyone: a manipulative politician, a self conscious manager, a self righteous teacher, an insecure priest, or your father. This relationship usually begins with your father or an authority figure when you are most vulnerable and malleable. And, it lingers on long after you leave home.

Not all fathers are authoritarian or oppressors. But, for those who are, they only hear their voices. They speak loud and rough. They use their eyes to transmit their messages secretly and threateningly; while they use their hands and arms for making sure that the others got their messages. So much for a meeting of minds and hearts. Dialogue is a threat to the rule of the oppressors. Monologue is safe.

As a result, you are taught their meaning of ‘strength’ and ‘weakness’.

If you are ‘strong’, then you enjoy the right to impose your will on the others. Identify yourself with the oppressors in your life. But, if you’re the opposite, that is, too weak to impose your will on the others, then keep your lip sealed tight, and abide by the rules.

Can Lucas free himself from this behavioral pattern, this web of destructive beliefs? Does he have the courage to search for the key to release himself from the handcuffs?

Are you Lucas? Are you Lucas to yourself? To your child? To your friend?


(‘Lucas’ was first mentioned in What glitters is not necessarily gold: The Golden Rule)