Brilliant video! ❤ Detachment (as you define it) is nothing but another kind of attachment. Attachment to seclusion, calmness, peace of mind etc. To point out that the "key" is not to stay on a hundred foot pole (case 46, Wumenguan), is massively important in my humble opinion. Not of this world, but IN it... 🙏🏻
In this vein I'd like to see a video or perhaps a mini-series on techniques to practice non-attachement without letting yourself become cold and distant.
Hey Doug, imho this is one of your best videos. It draws a clear dividing line between indifference/aloofness and non-attachment. Also nice is the wink about detachment. Cuz in the end we should not detach ourselves from our world, but better it with love and kindness.
Same old: attached to views, opinions. I am surrounded by people of the same mind set. So it's a stew..Thank you, Doug. Your talks are verymuch appreciated.
Brilliant video, this is an important clarification. Enlightened action in the world is a big part of Buddhism as I see it, not being aloof and away from it. Thanks, Doug.
I like you identifying attachment as that kind of "fluttering of the heart" when aware of something. That way deep down subtle inclination to move towards or away, to "say" a yes or a no that isn't even yet a choice to be made, nor even a reflection or thought, in a way. A resonance with, or resistance to what is being experienced. There is the saying that "the opposite of love isn't hate, but indifference"... that seems like a type or form of being aloof, rather than existentially detached.
Thank you! You illustrated that there is a contradiction in Buddhism between detachment and other values such as compassion, etc. You also described well what Buddhism means by non-attachment and that there isn't a good/useful word for it other than detachment. However, I am still definitely left with resolving this contradiction and finding a better word other than detachment. To me, after reading about this concept and seeing several of your videos on the topic I still feel that to relieve suffering you must become literally detached -- with all the negatives associated with it.
I’ve discovered eft this year & it has a lot to do with allowing & expressing negative emotions & letting them move without all the attachments. It’s a beautiful process & have a theory that it relates to Buddhism or was inspired by Buddhism 💕
I see a flaw here. For a lot of people, many of the named attachments diminish simply through ageing (physical) and experience (insight), without any knowledge of Buddhism. On the other hand why should one not "detach" from standing up against injustice e.g. but actually "detach" from sensual pleasures? Here I see rather a wordplay because what is suggested is actually more than non-attachment, it is not getting involved in accumulating thoughts directed at sexual pleasure and in the end avoiding it, i.e., "detaching" (because your are not tatking part in it anymore). In that area, you either do things in a certain way (which includes arousal and the senses and thought process) or it won''t happen at all. In other words, if you do "non-attachment" right, there is no need to not do those common things anymore, and you may still love your car, prefer a favorite country and indulge in pleasures without clinging to them. I believe early Buddhism has not solved this problem correctly.
'Renunciation' is, along with Patience and Service, one of the three traditional Sufi virtues. And what you tell about 'non-self' is very close to the Sufi (and in general Islamic) theme of overcoming the false Nafs (false Self).
Thank you for pointing out the difference between non-attachment and detachment. However, I think non-attachment and detachment often work together, In deed, detachment is necessary in certain contexts,, in particularly when one is already strongly attached to or clinging to certain thing or certain concepts. In such situation, one needs to remove oneself from such strong affinity. In the process of removing oneself from such strong attachment, one also needs to exercise non-attachment in order to keep oneself from re-attaching to the same thing or attaching to something similar at moments of weakness. Throughout the course of detachment and non-attachment, one in deed is attached to both the notion of detachment and non-attachment. In this case, detachment and non-attachment are the raft that one uses to navigate across the pond. As the Buddha often reminded His followers, we eventually need to abandon the raft in order to land on the other shore.
Yes, but we don't want to be detached from things; that suggests a lack of care, kindness, or compassion. Instead our aim should be non-attachment to all things, including to the raft itself once we've crossed over.
@@DougsDharma The English word "detachment" has multiple definitions depending on the context. It can define the attitude of aloofness and indifference, and it can also define the action of separation. "to be detached" can mean being indifferent or aloof, but it can also mean separated. "To detach" simply means to separate with no regard to any attitude. The latter case in my opinion is the exercise equate to renunciation without condemnation. I think it will be possible to exercise detachment to separate ourselves from our worldly attachments and desire without the attitude of aloofness and indifference.
Doug, if I should not be detached from the sufferings of others, what should I do if I have no means to help them? I mean, who doesn't want to rescue all the street cats, but I don't have the money, time, and wisdom to do so. It's very painful to watch but I can't do anything but be detached from it. Could you give some advice? Thank you!
Sure. For someone like the philosopher Peter Singer, we should all be doing all we can to help others all the time. The Buddha was a bit more pragmatic. Anything you can do to help is good, but there are no obligations other than not doing harm, and avoiding greed and hatred. If you feel like helping the street cats, by all means do so. If you cannot help them properly, then perhaps it would be more skillful to find another use for your energies.
Doug, I appreciate your video. Do you have advice on: should I even speak up for those who are being abused if the abusers (my parents) never listened to me. Plus I have done that but it never worked. Should I, in this case, be detached from the situation completely or should I still try to speak up knowing that it is unlikely to work?
Well detachment isn't the answer, though removing yourself from a bad situation you cannot change may be. There are no easy answers in cases like these, it's a matter of trying to do the best you can, keeping in mind compassion for yourself and as much kindness as you can muster for those around you.
No - take a look at internal Family Systems-non attachment gives a person freedom to be fully present without being tethered to negative responses based on damaging life experiences
I don't know of Buddhist monks who practice extreme asceticism. Extreme asceticism involves things like starving oneself, undergoing self-mortification, and suchlike things.
Yes, again check out my earlier video on desire in Buddhism. Being enlightened does not mean having no desires: th-cam.com/video/VeShNoUXnxw/w-d-xo.html
I'm cold, indifferent and have zero interest in others. I don't hate them I just don't give a damn about them. I guess this Non-Attachment is my thing.
Thanks Anna, that sounds like detachment. Non-attachment doesn't mean not caring, indeed the Buddha cared a lot about his monastics and the world at large. He just wasn't attached to them emotionally in the sense of taking things personally when they didn't go his way for example.
Free mini-course at the Online Dharma Institute: onlinedharma.org!
Brilliant video! ❤
Detachment (as you define it) is nothing but another kind of attachment. Attachment to seclusion, calmness, peace of mind etc.
To point out that the "key" is not to stay on a hundred foot pole (case 46, Wumenguan), is massively important in my humble opinion.
Not of this world, but IN it... 🙏🏻
Exactly so xiao mao, thanks!
In this vein I'd like to see a video or perhaps a mini-series on techniques to practice non-attachement without letting yourself become cold and distant.
Yes, it might be good to present the practices from this angle loss boss, let me put it on the list and think about it a bit. 🙂
@@DougsDharma thank you so much for your informative and inspiring vids!
The book of secrets: 112 meditations to discover the mystery within
Author : Osho
Thank you. I appreciate the video. I listened to it while cooking
You're very welcome Joywish72, I hope your meal turned out well too!
Hey Doug, imho this is one of your best videos. It draws a clear dividing line between indifference/aloofness and non-attachment. Also nice is the wink about detachment. Cuz in the end we should not detach ourselves from our world, but better it with love and kindness.
That's right Juan, thanks! 🙏
Same old: attached to views, opinions. I am surrounded by people of the same mind set. So it's a stew..Thank you, Doug. Your talks are verymuch appreciated.
You’re very welcome Sid. Yes, attachment to views is soooo easy to do.
Brilliant video, this is an important clarification. Enlightened action in the world is a big part of Buddhism as I see it, not being aloof and away from it. Thanks, Doug.
Yes, my pleasure Chris.
I like you identifying attachment as that kind of "fluttering of the heart" when aware of something. That way deep down subtle inclination to move towards or away, to "say" a yes or a no that isn't even yet a choice to be made, nor even a reflection or thought, in a way. A resonance with, or resistance to what is being experienced. There is the saying that "the opposite of love isn't hate, but indifference"... that seems like a type or form of being aloof, rather than existentially detached.
Yes that's right. Indifference isn't what we're after, it's more an equanimous caring.
Thank you! You illustrated that there is a contradiction in Buddhism between detachment and other values such as compassion, etc. You also described well what Buddhism means by non-attachment and that there isn't a good/useful word for it other than detachment. However, I am still definitely left with resolving this contradiction and finding a better word other than detachment. To me, after reading about this concept and seeing several of your videos on the topic I still feel that to relieve suffering you must become literally detached -- with all the negatives associated with it.
You're very welcome Dusan. In my opinion though there is a good/useful word for the Buddhist approach: "non-attachment". 🙂
I’ve discovered eft this year & it has a lot to do with allowing & expressing negative emotions & letting them move without all the attachments. It’s a beautiful process & have a theory that it relates to Buddhism or was inspired by Buddhism 💕
Interesting Jade, I don't know about that one.
Wow, these topical workshops are so instructive, got me hooked... I watch them instead of TV now :)
P.S.: is attachment to Buddhism - non-Buddhist?
Thanks! I think attachment is normal, even for Buddhists. But it's something that the dharma teaches us to learn to let go of.
Funny, Doug's channel has done the same for me. Now I binge his dhamma talks instead of shows! 😅
Thank you Doug!
You’re very welcome Jean-Michel! 🙏
Great video Doug. The Buddha was simply amazing.
Yes he was Andrés!
I see a flaw here. For a lot of people, many of the named attachments diminish simply through ageing (physical) and experience (insight), without any knowledge of Buddhism. On the other hand why should one not "detach" from standing up against injustice e.g. but actually "detach" from sensual pleasures? Here I see rather a wordplay because what is suggested is actually more than non-attachment, it is not getting involved in accumulating thoughts directed at sexual pleasure and in the end avoiding it, i.e., "detaching" (because your are not tatking part in it anymore). In that area, you either do things in a certain way (which includes arousal and the senses and thought process) or it won''t happen at all. In other words, if you do "non-attachment" right, there is no need to not do those common things anymore, and you may still love your car, prefer a favorite country and indulge in pleasures without clinging to them. I believe early Buddhism has not solved this problem correctly.
'Renunciation' is, along with Patience and Service, one of the three traditional Sufi virtues. And what you tell about 'non-self' is very close to the Sufi (and in general Islamic) theme of overcoming the false Nafs (false Self).
Interesting, yes there seem to be some similarities in particular between Sufism and forms of Buddhism.
Thank you for pointing out the difference between non-attachment and detachment. However, I think non-attachment and detachment often work together, In deed, detachment is necessary in certain contexts,, in particularly when one is already strongly attached to or clinging to certain thing or certain concepts. In such situation, one needs to remove oneself from such strong affinity. In the process of removing oneself from such strong attachment, one also needs to exercise non-attachment in order to keep oneself from re-attaching to the same thing or attaching to something similar at moments of weakness.
Throughout the course of detachment and non-attachment, one in deed is attached to both the notion of detachment and non-attachment. In this case, detachment and non-attachment are the raft that one uses to navigate across the pond. As the Buddha often reminded His followers, we eventually need to abandon the raft in order to land on the other shore.
Yes, but we don't want to be detached from things; that suggests a lack of care, kindness, or compassion. Instead our aim should be non-attachment to all things, including to the raft itself once we've crossed over.
@@DougsDharma The English word "detachment" has multiple definitions depending on the context. It can define the attitude of aloofness and indifference, and it can also define the action of separation. "to be detached" can mean being indifferent or aloof, but it can also mean separated. "To detach" simply means to separate with no regard to any attitude. The latter case in my opinion is the exercise equate to renunciation without condemnation.
I think it will be possible to exercise detachment to separate ourselves from our worldly attachments and desire without the attitude of aloofness and indifference.
Doug, if I should not be detached from the sufferings of others, what should I do if I have no means to help them? I mean, who doesn't want to rescue all the street cats, but I don't have the money, time, and wisdom to do so. It's very painful to watch but I can't do anything but be detached from it. Could you give some advice? Thank you!
Sure. For someone like the philosopher Peter Singer, we should all be doing all we can to help others all the time. The Buddha was a bit more pragmatic. Anything you can do to help is good, but there are no obligations other than not doing harm, and avoiding greed and hatred. If you feel like helping the street cats, by all means do so. If you cannot help them properly, then perhaps it would be more skillful to find another use for your energies.
Thank you!!
You're very welcome!
Doug, I appreciate your video. Do you have advice on: should I even speak up for those who are being abused if the abusers (my parents) never listened to me. Plus I have done that but it never worked. Should I, in this case, be detached from the situation completely or should I still try to speak up knowing that it is unlikely to work?
Well detachment isn't the answer, though removing yourself from a bad situation you cannot change may be. There are no easy answers in cases like these, it's a matter of trying to do the best you can, keeping in mind compassion for yourself and as much kindness as you can muster for those around you.
Detachment = Being aloof.
Non-attachment = Being non-clingy.
Well said!
Please make a video on Alan Watts Doug!
I'll keep it in mind Noah, I'm not really enough of an expert on him to feel comfortable doing it right now but maybe in the future. 🙂
so if attachment and detachment are the extremes, then non-attachment is between those roughly 0.618 from attachment and 0.382 from detachment :)
😄
No - take a look at internal Family Systems-non attachment gives a person freedom to be fully present without being tethered to negative responses based on damaging life experiences
I think that's what I said in the video?
Before I thought detachment and non-attachment are synonyms
Yes, they are easy to confuse!
Veryyy dificult, i must detach from ideias about the world but mus also keep learning, manifesting...
Yes, very difficult, so don't expect to be perfect at it. It helps to have awareness of the pitfalls of disagreement and dispute.
If the Buddha didn’t agree with extreme aestheticism then why do so many monk’s practice it?
I don't know of Buddhist monks who practice extreme asceticism. Extreme asceticism involves things like starving oneself, undergoing self-mortification, and suchlike things.
But if you are not thirsty, how can you drink? You will die without water. If you don’t have the desire to do something, how can you do anything ?
Yes, again check out my earlier video on desire in Buddhism. Being enlightened does not mean having no desires: th-cam.com/video/VeShNoUXnxw/w-d-xo.html
@@DougsDharma
Watched it, it was really helpful thx 🙏 things are little bit more clearer and making sense now 🙏
Is equanimity uppekkha detachment?
Upekkha is a form of non-attachment.
Thank you for this video! =)
You’re very welcome Oba936!
You can be highly "mentally detached" while pursuing material things. That's a Poker player.
Interesting example, I'd have to ponder that awhile. 😄
I'm cold, indifferent and have zero interest in others. I don't hate them I just don't give a damn about them. I guess this Non-Attachment is my thing.
Thanks Anna, that sounds like detachment. Non-attachment doesn't mean not caring, indeed the Buddha cared a lot about his monastics and the world at large. He just wasn't attached to them emotionally in the sense of taking things personally when they didn't go his way for example.
Non self = non attachment. Self in denial = detachment. Drugs and alcohol detach people all the time
Yes, exactly so AC. Detachment isn't what we're after.
Thank you Doug!
You're very welcome Stanislav! Thanks for watching.