So how do we practice non-attachment when it comes to praise?
This is a line from the Dhammapada. In reading it I am struck by what I find so utterly compelling about Buddhism. That this one single line can be so simple, yet cut so directly to the deepest truth that it becomes achingly beautiful. And yet beneath the simplicity lies great complexity. What can be more difficult than to let go of those times when we are given praise?Just as a solid rock is not shaken by the storm, even so the wise are not affected by praise or blame
In teaching, praise is an absolutely essential tool. It gives you the opportunity to build the self-esteem of your charges, give them a glimpse of success, and make learning an enjoyable experience. It also helps you gain control over classes, as students continually pushed to work hard for no reward will become disillusioned. But with all things balance is key. Young people will see through you as soon as you start to use praise where it is not truly deserved, and you will lose them. Unlike many adults, young people have a keen sense of justice and merit.
So does the Buddha intend for us to abandon praise altogether and live in that kind of old fashioned world where hardy men would work hard not because they wanted praise but because they were hard working men and that's what they did? To me this is not the point of this teaching.
As I am preparing for my first term as a 'proper' teacher, and writing schemes of work, I am finding myself getting caught up in the praise and positive feedback I get for what I am devising. As I observe my response to this praise I notice how it very quickly brings up ideas of who I want to be as a teacher, or even as a person. I find myself dreaming of being the best teacher ever to set foot on this planet. And while I'm at it: Mars, Alpha Centauri, or even Cybertron.
Ego doesn't need much to encourage it to spiral beyond its reality and praise seems to be something of an ego roller coaster. And this is where I think the heart of this teaching lies. It is all too human to attach to praise and run with it. To fantasise of where it might take you and how great you will be. This is all just ego. What happens when the praise dries up? The higher you go on the praise roller coaster, when the fuel runs out, the further you have to fall.
Praise at certain stages of our lives is necessary. It is a useful means of showing someone that they are doing something right and that you regard them in a positive manner. Attachment to praise on the other hand can only cause us suffering because it will not always be there and in the end it will control us as we come to desperately chase after it. Letting go of praise by accepting it when it is given, but also accepting that it will not always be there is a more balanced approach.
Everything is impermanent, and so to is praise. Every time we receive praise, just around the corner we could receive blame. And vice versa. Practicing non-attachment to blame AND praise leaves us solid as a rock and able to enjoy the roller coaster ride without being sick or screaming 'We're all going to die!'
Garsh! What a wonderful post Delbertino! It certainly confounded my desire to praise you for it. :p I am watching the videos of the Dalai Lama teaching the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism at London's Barbican Hall. I am newly looking into Buddhism, so please forgive me my ignorance my friend. In other words please ignore anything stupid that I may say from here... to eternity.
ReplyDeleteBut on your topic... the Dalai Lama said that when we feel happiness, and I am only guessing that you can include any kind of innocent pleasure, that we are to remember to give it to the formless realm. *Cringes* I am very unfamiliar with Buddhist terminology and hope that is what he said. I am mentioning this to maybe get an understanding from you on what he may have meant and if it would also be applied to praise? If the pleasure one feels is preceded by correct thought, can it still be considered as negative? I completely understand the wrong being done if you allow yourself to fantasize in anyway. By giving it to a higher realm, are we practicing non attachment?
P.S. Can you point me in some direction... the only classes available to me are an hour and a half away, and are only offered on Monday nights. No good for me I am afraid. :(
Thanks for my very first comment Vesta!
ReplyDeleteI'm not particularly familiar with the Dalai Lama's teaching these days as I'm pretty much focused on zen practice. But it seems from what you say that he is essentially encouraging the idea of non-attachment to happiness. He's just using a bit of a more mystical kind of language.
Its not so much that pleasure is a bad thing, orpraise or any positive feeling or experience. In Buddhism consciousness is seen as being another sense, such as sight or smell. Consciousness is created through the brain being fed information via the other senses. So when we experience pleasure or pain, priase or blame, or brain comes to identify with preference for one or the other. The situations that can cause pleasure or pain are the same kind of impermanent states that Buddhism argues make up our existence. So we do not want to attach to them because they are impermanent. Often we are happy in a situation for a period of time, while at a latter period the same situation could actually make us unhappy.
So it is practice to let happiness go just as you would let pain or hurt go. That doesn't mean you can't enjoy it, just as long as you understand it for what it is.
But I should also point out I am very much a nouvice myself!
This website is a good resource: http://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/index.htm
Feel free to drop me a line if you have any questions.
Thank you so much! The website looks great!
ReplyDeleteMy knowledge up until this point has solely been about Siddhārtha Gautama. I assumed that like most religions, although I now view Buddhism as a form of philosophy, the source is where one should look to if you truly want to follow the religion to its fullest. And having had that opinion, I felt that Buddhism was not something that I could necessarily agree with. I am against nihilism, in my own life.
Now, because of the Dalai Lama's teachings, I have seen that Buddhism has changed over the centuries, and not in the way religions change, but it has grown in its understanding of itself. :) Which is quite beautiful to me. And because of that fact, I now understand it as a philosophical entity and not just another static religion.
I was upset by Siddhārtha's back tracking if I can call it that. I didnt agree with his actions after he discovered enlightenment. To me it was equivalent to Jesus having died on the cross and having gone to heaven, then only to tell everyone that the way is too hard so dont try it for yourself, just be happy and live out your life following these rules instead. It just didnt make sense to me. Even with my objection to nihilism and its many forms, I felt that he did everyone an injustice. Now, looking at it with a different understanding, I can see that there were probably good reasons why he chose to discourage people from the path that he himself took.
I may not actually make much sense, lol, but I am going to have to get used to putting my mind out there for others to see, if I am to become a blogger! :) It is not going to be easy my friend.
I am really intrigued by your ideas about nihilism. could you maybe explain a bit more about what you see as nihilistic in the Buddha's actions after enlightenment, and also Jesus?
ReplyDeleteYou had to ask that didnt you! :p Okay, I will do my best to explain. I am in no way saying that I am right for having thought this, I am in fact by my previous post trying to explain that I now see that I was wrong.
ReplyDeleteWhen I first looked into Buddhism, I started with wanting to know about the founder because in my opinion that is where one should look if you truly want to follow any religious path to the fullest. And I think it is safe to say that by following any religion your main goal is to understand what life really is and how you can get to "heaven" or what ever state would be equivalent depending on the religion that youre studying.
So, I began researching the life of Siddhārtha Gautama. This was close to ten years ago, I can not find the exact information that was available on him back then. It was a more detailed biography than what I find when I google his name now. But it took me through his entire life. It is frustrating to me that I cannot find anything on what he learned during his first meditation and fasting, they all simply say that "He realized that neither the extremes of the mortification of the flesh or of hedonism would lead to enlightenment." Which isnt entirely true from what I remember. He gained important understanding from those times, isnt that when he first viewed the different states of enlightenment?
As I read the story of his journey, I did not get the feeling that he ever "threw out" any of the experiences that he was having, instead, each new experience made him want to learn even more. I still retain the idea that he could have chosen nirvana as soon as the meditation and fasting period, but chose not to because he felt there was more to understand. I do not know if this is correct and cannot find my original materials to reference, so please forgive me. Is there anything that you can clarify for me before we go further?