In and of itself, everything is neutral -- so really, being exposed to desirable experiences (or undesirable ones, for that matter) doesn't mean anything. But the ego's natural proclivities (our heritage from animal evolution) is to seek pleasure and shun pain and become attached to supposed "external" sources of pleasure (when all joy is actually stemming from the Self within), and
that is what we're trying to undo via spiritual work, not with asceticism, guilt and penance or detachment.
I think Hilary's definition of attachment is more about dedication and love for life, and not attachment as it is commonly described in spiritual teachings -- where if you don't get something, you suffer from desire and craving and you scheme endlessly on how to procure it and whine endlessly if you can't
The perfect state of non-attachment is where although you have natural preferences as a unique creation of Source, either outcome doesn't bother you or disturb your sense of peace/benevolence towards yourself, towards others, towards the world.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Erock Ethereal, that was an amazing post and I really appreciate this response. You seem to really live a balanced life, something I aspire to do. I do have a follow-up question, and that is, should I generally avoid sensory pleasures (money, sex, alcohol, drugs), or, am I allowed to pursue them, yet remain unattached.
Using your example, having a bombshell girlfriend and tons of money. If a spiritual seeker had these, would he have gone after them, yet remain unattached, or let these things come to him? Would he try to get a job that makes a lot of money, go out looking for beautiful women, find parties to go to, or in your example did those things just happen to him, and he "took the pleasure as it came" so to say.
I concerned that if I allow myself access to these things, I will unconsciously become attached and start seeking them out. It's kinda tricky, and I know there is not one correct answer, but where do you draw the line in your own life? |
It is tricky, but by being aware of the potential pitfalls you can recognize it when it hits you
It is especially hard in regards to power, fame, sex, and money, since they have been desired by so many people for so long, you could say that there's a negative energy (glamour) associated with it that's been imprinted into the collective consciousness of mankind. You can say that there's a collective belief system in place that makes those things especially addicting and easy to get trapped by, beyond your personal belief system. Alice Bailey talks about it extensively in her book, "Glamor: A World Problem" (calibrated at ~570 or so).
I actually don't really know where to draw the line, as I have still have problems with it. Personally I seem more inclined towards a monastic life of renunciation, so that's why my posts may sound a little detached (cause that's where I'm coming from
). But the crux of renunciation is the internal decline of pleasure, and does not have to be externalized. In fact, internal renunciation is even harder than external, because you can physically avoid sensory pleasures and the like, but there can still be mental attachment to them. I realized this with my attachment to food -- I had a great diet for long periods of time, but inevitably I get drawn back into overeating and unhealthy diets, meaning that I can physically force myself to eat certain things and not others, but mentally there is still an attachment that needs to be released.
It isn't that pleasure is bad and should be avoided, it's just that the ego gets so easily addicted to it. I recently realized that all those spiritual "rules" and "commandments" aren't because they have some universal law inherent to them, but that the truth underlying them is that they work to deconstruct the ego. With this in mind, all those spiritual "rules" now make sense, and that's when you can master them and know when to break them
Anyway, not sure if I answered your question, and truthfully I don't even think I have an answer to it -- it is probably something that has to be learned through personal experience.
Recently I stumbled upon the Sedona Method, and I think it's great to help people understand what non-attachment means. You release and let go of the attraction to the outcome you want, and you release and let go of the aversion to the outcome you don't want, until you feel completely at peace with either outcome happening. And then you go for the outcome you want anyway, but minus the attachment/craving for it (which not only makes it easier to attain but even more pleasurable). An example is to have sex when you don't have any craving for it -- you can go on for hours, on all 3 levels (gross, subtle, causal) and all 7 chakras, the province of whole-body orgasms and Tantric sex
And to end this post, here's a Dr. Hawkins quote pertaining to success and goals and spirituality:
Success and goals, and where do they fit in with spirituality?
DH: You want to fulfill the potential of your creation. You were created with certain gifts. You want to fulfill the love of God by utilization of those gifts for the good of others. Those goals are not necessarily contradictory to spiritual growth. It shows respect for Divinity and thankfulness for your creation to become that which you can become to the greatest degree. No matter what you are doing, do it to the greatest potential you are capable of. You are respecting the grace and gift of life... to be the perfect expression of your own potentiality.