(first installment here)
Wright: If somebody gave you just two sentences to characterize the essence of Buddhism generically, could you even do that?
Joseph Goldstein: The Buddha did. He summed up the whole thing in one sentence. He said, “Nothing whatsoever is to be clung to as I or mine.” He said, “Whoever understands this has understood all the teachings.” So all the teachings are an elaboration of seeing through the illusory nature or conceptual nature of self, of I, of ego. And all the teachings are just helping to facilitate seeing that with clarity.
Wright: Ok. Now at a moral level this translates into a kind of selflessness. You’re supposed to not harm other things; and, if possible, do good and not favor your own interests over other people’s interests.
Joseph Goldstein: Right, which is not easy to do.
Wright: Oh, I’ve noticed. Not that I’ve spent much time trying but that’s my impression.
Joseph Goldstein: Yes.
Wright: And then at the everyday level, even leaving aside your relations with other people, it gets back to the kinds of things we were talking about — to clinging, in the sense of desiring things intensely and focusing on the desire for things.
Joseph Goldstein: I think there’s also a big difference — you know, in English the word “desire” means a lot of different things, and so often we confuse some of those meanings. It can mean just the motivation to do something: I have the desire to get enlightened or a desire to be more compassionate. We also use the word “desire” to mean addiction, addictive desire, where’s there’s really strong grasping and clinging. Grasping in the mind. Even though we’re using the same word, those two mind states are completely different. So it’s important actually to clarify the language, because all of these words have been translated from the Pali and Sanskrit, where there’s more differentiation.
Wright: So it’s not inherently bad to want something?
Joseph Goldstein: Not necessarily. It depends on the nature of the wanting.
Wright: What’s the bad kind of wanting?
Joseph Goldstein: Well, if there’s grasping, if there’s clinging to it.
Wright: If not getting it would just ruin your day.
Joseph Goldstein: Exactly. Or if getting it and holding on to it is another kind of grasping. Why? Because if you hold to something that in its nature is changing, you’re going to suffer. It’s not the experience of the changing phenomenon that’s the problem; it’s the fact that we’re holding on to something that in its nature is not going to last.
A simple example: We hold on to being young. We hold on to youth, which, as you know, in our culture is rampant. Of course there’s going to be suffering, because the body naturally ages. We even hold on to health. That’s not to say we shouldn’t take care of ourselves and do what we can to stay healthy. But if we are attached to it, then as the body gets sick, which it inevitably will, we suffer. If we are not holding on, then we do what do to take care, but as the body goes through its changes, the mind is much more peaceful. This is part of it. So that that’s the implication of not grasping. It doesn’t mean pulling away from experience. It means not holding on. And that’s very different.
In some way this could be clarified by the distinction of two words which often get confused. Often people understand that in Buddhism that there’s a great value on detachment, and that sounds a little grey. You know, just to be detached from everything. That’s not what the teaching is about. The teaching is about non-attachment. Detachment implies a sense of withdrawal.
Wright: Withdrawal from?
Joseph Goldstein: From whatever.
Wright: Including joy, including…
Joseph Goldstein: Anything! It’s like a pulling away from. Non-attachment doesn’t imply withdrawal. It simply implies not holding on. So that’s a very different experience. It’s a very different mind-set. That’s really what we’re practicing.
(next installment here)
meditation
Post a Comment