You Can Be Too Equanimous
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 вер 2024
- Can you be too equanimous? This is a surprising conundrum from early Buddhism, noted by the scholar Anālayo in a recent encyclopedia entry. We will take a look at an answer to that question that seems to say that indeed we can have too much equanimity, at least in certain situations.
Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org.
Support the work we do together and get course discounts at: / dougsseculardharma
Article mentioned:
Anālayo on Upekkhā, Encyclopedia of Buddhism (2008): www.buddhismus...
Suttas mentioned:
suttacentral.n...
suttacentral.n...
suttacentral.n...
Thanks to Patrons:
Matthew Smith
Kathy Voldstad
slidnbob
Thissapunyo
JC
Tony Marina
Pritom Phookun
Shantha Wengappuli
poikkiki
jonitomato
Margo
Karma_CAC
Johan Thelander
Michael Roe
Joseph Kingsley
Jorge Seguel
#onlinedharmainstitute #buddhism #earlybuddhism #secularbuddhism
Disclaimer: Amazon links are affiliate links where I will earn a very small commission on purchases you make, at no additional cost to you. This goes a tiny way towards defraying the costs of making these videos. Thank you!
I was never comfortable with Ñāṇavīra Thera's definition of upekkha as "indifference".
This might work for secluded monastics, but the puthujjana is engaged in the world. Happy to hear that the Buddha teaches equanimity with regard to outcome (non-grasping), and not indifference with regard to being active in the world. Thank-you.
Right yes 4imagesmore, I think this is an important distinction to make!
I think it's important to note that upekkha does not refer to being unreactive to one's environment, but rather to an attitude of detachment towards feeling (vedana) which is the opposite of our usual attitude, craving, thereby countering it; this is the indifference or equanimity the Buddha encouraged all the way. In some cases, the latter might manifest as the former, but they are not equal. Consequently, secluded monastics and laymen alike can equally well be puthujjanas yet appear to be "equanimous" because they act like rocks, but that by no means implies that they have truly cultivated upekkha. For that one needs true understanding.
This is incredibly useful Doug. Thanks so much. I would add one point about the notion of “judgement”. I would say that there are roughly two levels of judgement one can hold: 1) Judging someone’s behavior, actions, performance. In this sense, constructive criticism may (under appropriate conditions, as pointed out in the video) help. 2) Fundamentally judging the person. This is the toxic one we’re always told to avoid. This is where you say “you messed up A & B & ..., therefore you are a bad/selfish/ .... person”. This one comes from a fundamental misapprehension of what a being is.
Oh absolutely so Andrés, great point!
This channel has me back on the path, meditated almost every day this past month since discovering it. Working on cultivating awareness throughout my life, love the comparative philosophy in many of your videos, keep it up!
That's great to hear Ethan, thanks for letting me know! Be well and keep it up.
This lecture/ Dharma talk is very applicable to our daily lives, which is what I love about Buddhism
Thanks for another great talk...
You're most welcome Pauline, thanks for the comment. 🙏
I give you Thich Nhat Hanh who opposed the war in Vietnam, seeing it rightly as evil and destructive. It is many times easier to clearly recognize wrong actions on a grand scale -- and oppose them -- than to deal on a one-to-one basis which too often can become seen as a personal attack.
Yes, it can be less personalized that way. Thanks Ed.
I was aiming to be the 3rd type of person and have made mistakes in the process. Cannot thank you enough for sharing this.
Lots of metta.
You're very welcome, glad it helped! 🙏
I admire Analayo for his analysis. Equanimity must not be misunderstood as indifference. It must also be seen in the context of and infused with the other 3 brahmaviharas: metta, compassion, sympathetic joy. In the first part of his book _Compassion and Emptiness in Early Buddhist Meditation_ from 2015, there's a very elaborate practice-oriented analysis about this subject. Highly recommended. As everything by him... 😂
🐱🙏
Yes indeed! 😄
Powerful stuff, this is a perfect follow up to the last video. Very well done.
Thank you kindly!
The stoic concept of equanimity is useful: It refers to a state of mind in which one is not disturbed by the passions., as distinguished from indifference.
Indeed so, it is in fact essentially identical to the Buddhist notion of equanimity. One can therefore see the examples in this video as reinforcing a correct understanding of equanimity as versus an incorrect one (indifference), depending on how one understands the examples.
This may be my favorite of your videos to date. It really drives home the need to be realistic and practical in regard to being “judgmental” or “critical”. There is a time for every purpose under heaven.
Exactly so! 🙏
Sadhu Sadhu Sadhu. Well said, well said, well said.
Thanks Alicia. 🙏
Thank You for all Your Hard Work! I am seeing clear Strengthening of my practice through your videos. Deeply Grateful. :)
That's great news TJH! Thanks for letting us know, and keep it up!
A enlightening talk, thanks a lot. Just what I needed to learn at this moment.
You're very welcome Pilar!
Here an amusing aside: I clicked on this video enthusiastically because my brain somehow perceived the title as, “You, too, can be equanimous.” Needless to say, I had to recalibrate my expectations.
😄 Well I hope it lived up to those recalibrated expectations!
I'm am the fourth type of person.. Context is the key to this. I have been critized by others for being this way. That is perfectly fine. Thank you, I'm on the right track 👍😊
Yes, me too Bill. Though the hardest is really doing it with a mind of kindness.
"Worthy persons deserve to be called so because they are not carried away by the 8 winds: prosperity, decline, disgrace, honor, praise, censure, suffering, and pleasure. They are neither elated by prosperity not grieved by decline. The heavenly God's will surely protect one who is unbending before the right winds. " Nichiren Daishonin
“But, bhikkhus, (1) when an instructed noble disciple meets with gain, he reflects thus: ‘This gain that I have met is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change.’ He thus understands it as it really is. (2) When he meets with loss … (3) … fame … (4) … an.iv.159 disrepute … (5) … blame … (6) … praise … (7) … pleasure … (8) … pain, he reflects thus: ‘This pain that I have met is impermanent, suffering, and subject to change.’ He thus understands it as it really is." The Buddha. suttacentral.net/an8.6/en/bodhi
wow! great talk!!
Thanks Nicole! Glad you found it useful.
Hey Doug I wonder if you already did a Video about the similarities and differences between Schopenhauers Philosophie and Buddhism?If not it could also be an interesting Topic. Love your Channel keep going with the good Work. 👍
Thanks Iazar. I haven't discussed Schopenhauer on this channel mostly because I don't know much about him! 😄
I've noticed how the Buddha used truth tables quite a bit, e.g. the 4 individuals the Buddha asked the monastic about.
Certainly it can be understood that way; the Buddha was very analytical.
Sometimes silence speaks loudest
Indeed it can Socrates. Unfortunately it'd be hard to get viewers for the video so I have to talk! 😄
Operant conditioning (sometimes referred to as instrumental conditioning) is a method of learning that occurs through rewards and punishments for behavior. Through operant conditioning, an association is made between a behavior and a consequence for that behavior.
Thanks optizap.
🙏🙏🙏 thanks for the talk!
My pleasure Annie, thanks for the comment! 🙂
I can't help but wonder if this can be applied outside the context of monks.
Who are “ They” to criticize?