Here is more from Group Beyond Blue member Luthitarian on what it means to be real. I find him to be so wise. In fact, I wish I could hear his sermons on Sunday instead of the ones I catch as I'm ushering Katherine outside, who is yelling "Jesus is poopy!"...
If looking only on the bright side, being positive, etc., is the definition of being a Pollyanna, which it generally is, then there's plenty wrong with 'Pollyannaism'. That's just as skewed a vision as looking only on the dark side.
A quote of the Dalai Lama's I read recently stated, "If you lose, don't lose the lesson." That's where Buddhist, or contemplative, detachment comes in. We don't grumble over the unfairness of there being winners and losers, or of having to face loss and the pain of grief. We accept it as it is, without labeling "good" or "bad", "positive" or "negative"; without taking a stance called "optimism" or "pessimism". The experience just IS. That's it. Period.
When we are able to see it as it is, hard as that might be, we can get what it has to offer in terms of its lessons.
I've spoken before of the illustration I've used in sermons about "optimism" and "pessimism" and judging a glass of water as being "half full" or half empty". Again, these are judgments, attachments to a certain way of thinking that is skewed and sees only half of the reality.
While the optimist and the pessimist are arguing over whether or not the glass is half empty or half full, the realist comes along, picks up the glass, and gratefully drinks the contents.
But, does that mean we have to accept things as they are, doing nothing about them? I don't believe so. I don't believe a Buddhist or anyone else would tell us that if our arse is on fire, we are to accept the reality and just learn from the experience. We have every right, reason, and expectation to put the *%$@#* flames out!
If we see injustice and poverty, we don't simply accept that "that's life" and life means suffering. We are to engage it and change things in order to relieve the suffering and pain. This is what Thich Nhat Hanh's "Engaged Buddhism" is all about. This is what results from his Buddhist understanding of "interbeing."
It's also the point, after all, behind the teaching of Reinhold Neibuhr, theologian, cultural critic, and author of the Serenity Prayer:
"God grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change,
the courage to change the things we can,
and the wisdom to know the difference."
When we are able to see it as it is, hard as that might be, we can get what it has to offer in terms of its lessons.
I've spoken before of the illustration I've used in sermons about "optimism" and "pessimism" and judging a glass of water as being "half full" or half empty". Again, these are judgments, attachments to a certain way of thinking that is skewed and sees only half of the reality.
While the optimist and the pessimist are arguing over whether or not the glass is half empty or half full, the realist comes along, picks up the glass, and gratefully drinks the contents.
But, does that mean we have to accept things as they are, doing nothing about them? I don't believe so. I don't believe a Buddhist or anyone else would tell us that if our arse is on fire, we are to accept the reality and just learn from the experience. We have every right, reason, and expectation to put the *%$@#* flames out!
If we see injustice and poverty, we don't simply accept that "that's life" and life means suffering. We are to engage it and change things in order to relieve the suffering and pain. This is what Thich Nhat Hanh's "Engaged Buddhism" is all about. This is what results from his Buddhist understanding of "interbeing."
It's also the point, after all, behind the teaching of Reinhold Neibuhr, theologian, cultural critic, and author of the Serenity Prayer:
"God grant us the serenity to accept the things we cannot change,
the courage to change the things we can,
and the wisdom to know the difference."
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
The glass is neither half-empty nor half-full.It's too big.
(Sorry. I couldn't resist.)
The glass is neither half-empty nor half-full. It's half a glass of whatever is in there. I leave my judgement as to whether that is good or bad dependant on whether I like what's in there, and whether I have to drink it. Seriously, sometimes I try to see things that are happening in my life as just being. Hardly ever, am I able to overcome the judgement of good or bad, pretty or ugly, big or small. Judgement has become so entrenched in my mind, that just seeing is a challenge. And even when I manage to refuse judgement, I then judge myself as good. I'm learning, but it's a challenge.
Half-full? Half-empty? My favorite comment on this comes from Bill Cosby--quoting his Father. "It depends on whether you are drinking or pouring." Therese worded it a little differently but it still comes down to that judgment call. And if I step back to a point where I have no investment, then intrinsically the class and the contents just are.
Recently I had a day (I was bicycling into new territory) and it was full of ups and downs. At the end of that day, it would have been easy to say that it was half full of good experiences, or half empty because of the not-so-good experiences. But you know what, that evening, as tired and sore as I was (and that didn't feel subjective); I had a full day.
I don't remember praying the Serenity prayer when I started out that day but I was blessed by being able to accept things that I couldn't change and changing some things that I could change. But today is a new day. I am starting all over and it won't be until tonight that I can see how I did.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.