Question of the Week: 12/31 – 1/06
Is it possible to alleviate, or end, the pain of another? Or is it something that each entity must come upon themselves?
Can one reach somewhere deep inside and bring relief from suffering? Can one be compassionate?
If the self is at the core of the movement of compassion, is compassion there at all? Can the self move in any way other than to perpetuate its own continuity?
One that is compassionate is simply one that acts, free from the trappings of the self. When one moves beyond what is known, then the potential for compassion is realized at each moment. It becomes impossible to move or act incorrectly.
All movement is an extension of that compassion. There is no cause and affect; there is only action. And that action IS an action to alleviate pain without, as it springs from an entity that has no pain.
Every movement in liberation becomes an expression of compassion and love.
In the end, when the mind is clear, any move that is made is a living example of compassion.
Fragmentation is Separation
If one’s mind is fragmented, meaning separate, broken, and incapable of operating clearly, can that mind know what it means to be compassionate?
When the self separates itself from the rest of the world, such as “I” and “THEM,” and what “I” believe and what “THEY believe,” can it be sensitive enough to express compassion? Is the self in any way capable of sensitivity?
One may profess to be compassionate, “I do this and this on Wednesday, and I pay attention on Sunday,” but does any of this mean anything if it comes from a position of fragmentation? I am not saying it does or it doesn’t. This is something to find out for yourselves.
Can a mind dependent upon its suffering, that is steeped in fragmentation, can that mind ever act in a way that is whole? This is important to ask. One might believe that one is compassionate, but does belief have anything to do with it?
One might say, “My belief in a particular religion makes me compassionate.” But is compassion dependent upon religion? Is it dependent upon belief? If you say yes, then how far can your compassion go? How deep is your own fragmentation? Is one without religion incapable of compassion? Or what of other religions? Is there hope for anyone else outside your own belief system?
These fragmentary positions are horrid, and have placed the world in the state it is in today. But I am not limiting this discussion to religious matters. A fragment is a fragment, and all are devoid of wholeness.
Can a separate being, one that is divided, express compassion?
Compassion is Natural
When one is awake, when reality realizes itself, every action is taken without fragmentation. It is through that wholeness that compassion is expressed.
A mind that is whole is incapable of making wrong actions. There are no actions to take. Compassion and life just happen, and every move you make, regardless of thought, is the movement of love and compassion.
Is compassion an action? You might ask, “If I am fragmented, does that mean I cannot be compassionate?” A reasonable question. But can anyone answer it? If the action is taken through fragmentation, can the result ever be whole?
A Short Q and A
The following are a few questions that I received throughout 2007. I never posted them to the blog, but they fit perfectly with this topic.
I changed the wording on a few of them to avoid naming particular religions or organizations, but the gist remains the same.
“If I take an action, does that mean I am fragmented?“
There is nothing wrong with action. If one is whole, then all action is compassionate. A better question to ask might be, “Can I see fragmentation in myself, and if so can it come to an end?”
Compassion begins at the end. If the self is finished, if one is whole, then one cannot help but be compassionate. It just happens.
Compassion is a natural movement, and it is not dependent upon the movement of thought.
“Is compassion dependent upon action?“
When you say action, do you mean a specific action? Such as, Since I am doing THIS, I am compassionate. Is there anything in you that wishes to be compassionate? Is it something that you try to make happen?
Is it possible to be compassionate, or is there just compassion? This is very important to understand on your own.
If one is truly compassionate, there is no idea of compassion. If compassion exists as and idea or an ideal, it can never be expressed as an action.
Compassion is expressed when the idea of being compassionate is dropped.
“I do work at the local shelter in my neighborhood. I feed the homeless, help provide affordable housing, and help educate homeless children. I feel that I am compassionate, but is it true?“
Is it necessary to feel compassionate? If there is a feeling of pride, or a feeling of importance from what you believe to be compassion, does it have any meaning? Could it be the self up to its old tricks, trying to gain some power through one’s actions?
Don’t get me wrong, your work is very important. Without you, and people like you, densely populated cites might be worse off than they are. But one’s job does not make one compassionate. You have probably seen yourself, within your organization, people with little to no compassion in the same line of work as you.
Your job is certainly important and gives you a wonderful opportunity to help others at a deep level, if you choose to do so. But if you are truly compassionate, you’ll never know it.
When compassion seethes through every pore on your body, the idea of being compassionate will escape you. You will move, and compassion will be there. And that is all.
“Why can’t I teach someone else to be compassionate?“
For the same reason you feel they need to be different from what they are.
“I am in a particular religion and what it teaches about compassion is different from what you are saying.”
Compassion is natural. Why is it you need to be taught anything about it? If you perform a certain action in a certain way, does that mean you are compassionate? Is it merely set of things to do like a grocery list, or is it a natural expression of the complete human being?
Do you have a belief that says compassion only follows certain actions? I’ll do this and this, then the light will shine on me. Is this a game? Really, ask yourself this question. Is compassion just something for you to play with? Is it merely an activity one takes in order to achieve a greater end? I’ll be compassionate according to these rules, then I can get the greatest benefit in the end.
But what is the end? When you die and go to heaven or wherever it is? Or it is when your local community recognizes what you have done is compassionate? What is the point? It is all in order to get something for the self; greater recognition socially, or an eternal house safe from flames of torment.
Is it possible for you to fathom that compassion is beyond all of those? I am not saying it is or it isn’t, but do you only know compassion because of what someone else told you? Have you ever tried to find out on your own?
Stop accepting and rejecting and just find out.
How can I be compassionate?
One has to come to terms with the self and with the images it projects. I am not saying that it is a way or a method, but what is it within that has this need to be compassionate? What is it that asks the question, “How?”
You might say, “The self has a need to be compassionate.” The self may very well feel a need of this sort. But what can come of it? The self can only accept answers it already has. It cannot see beyond what it already knows, or what it has been taught. Everything it has is old and used.
Now, with that in mind, is compassion dependent upon what has come before? Does one need any history to be compassionate? The self might need to know, or the self might need to be, but it can never grasp compassion and own it like a possession. It is not something that is cultivated, and it cannot be housed as knowledge, stored away, and pulled out for later use.
How does one know this is true? Look at the world, as it is. There are possibly hundreds of millions of people claiming to be compassionate, and look where we are. Is this world the result of compassion? Or the result of fragmentation? If one sees the results of this, can any move from a fragmented position bring order, or wholeness to the world?
Surely it is easy to answer. But what will you do? Fall back into that fragmented position? Or is the seeing of the fact enough to cause a change in the organism?
This is not mere understanding. If you just play with it intellectually, then it might be a fun way to amuse yourself for a short period of time. But if it strikes you and penetrates right to the core, it becomes an understanding at a physical level. The organism rejects the desire for compassion, and the result is compassion.
Compassion is where fragmentation is not.
A Thank You
This post is a result of the group writing project started by the three monks– Wade of The Middle Way, Kenton of Zen-Inspired Self Development, and Albert of Urban Monk.Net. The three of them have produced some incredible articles this year.
The original post that gave birth to this article can be found at the Group Writing Project.
Below are three recent examples of their work. If you like what you have read, please subscribe to their blogs. You won’t regret it.
From Wade:
How to Develop Your Intelligence
From Kenton:
From Albert:
The Art of Giving What You Don’t Have
These three articles will give you plenty to think about for quite a long time.
Compassion is Life
Compassion is not a part of life, or a way of life. It is life, as it is lived.
It is not anything more or less than that.
15 Comments
Beautiful stuff Takuin, I was really looking forward to this post, and it was awesome. I have heard that true compassion only stems from a lack of ego, and you’ve expressed and argued it beautifully. Thanks!
From the standpoint of fragmentation, acts of compassion or love draw one towards wholeness. The movement towards wholeness can take one dramatic leap that obliviates the self, but also can be a ratcheting up that draws you away from fragmentation and towards wholeness. Through acts of love / joy / compassion, one reduces the resistance to non-duality and eliminates separation.
Essentially what most spiritual paths are doing is easing the barriers to fully experiencing what is by virtue of love, acceptance, forgiveness, etc. As this fully takes hold, it eliminates separation and eventually results in wholeness. Each act of service reduces separation by letting yourself connect with the current emotion, feeling, what have you. Eventually you fully accept _what is_ and attain liberation.
Once wholeness is reached / discovered / attained / surrendered, action becomes easy. However, the average person is not operating there. Consequently acts of compassion, as always, operate from the intuitive feel of what is best from the situation. At the lowest levels, using the mind to know what to do is preferable to acting heartlessly. Operating from love whether temporary or permanent, will always find the right path.
I actually felt a little anger rising in me when I read this, because I was thinking, Who the hell is this guy telling me I’m not compassionate? I help the needy, I give, etc etc…
But it also got me thinking, Is that really compassion? A long list of things I’m doing for other people and planning to do?
This is a good post as far as I’m concerned. It’s been a long time since I’ve read something that really made me feel uncomfortable and question what I think is the truth.
Good Post.
I believe that we see the world through two chief paradigms or models, that being love and fear. I think that seeing through love is the “wholeness” that you speak of. Fragmentation is the result of fear. Therefore, the CONCEPT of compassion is simply a product of the paradigm of love and nothing more.
Obviously from the paradigm of love, compassion is “natural.” But how many people come from that paradigm completely and are TOTALLY free of “ego” fears?
We are ALL fragmented since we believe we are a mind attached to a “body” and as long as we hold to that BELIEF we will see and react to the world through FEAR. This is because “bodies” cannot join, only minds can be “whole” in the realization that the body is illusory.
Therefore, in a world of separation (bodies) there will always exist “degrees” of compassion based on degrees of love. Just as there are degrees of “ego” attachment and degrees of fragmentation. Thus, greater levels of compassion is achieved through greater levels of ego detachment.
INCREASED compassion is where fragmentation is LESS. I believe to say that it must not exist AT ALL in order to have “compassion,” negates the spiritual journey we are all embarked on.
However, I do believe this complete “wholeness” or total lack of fragmentation you speak of was realized by Jesus, Buddha and other enlightened masters. They point the way. As for most of us, we are realizing greater levels of compassion through greater levels of seeing the world through love.
Thanks,
Mike S
Thanks, Albert. And thanks for adding this post to the list on your site.
Very well said, Hampton, and nice to see you again.
One thing that is important to question is, If something is being drawn away from fragmentation toward liberation, then what is it that is being drawn away or toward? Can one “get closer” to liberation? If the self is drawn away, is it also the self that moves toward?
You have said something very important here, in that resistance is the problem. Too much energy is spent on resisting or countering everything that comes into view. Our ideals or beliefs are designed to resist, and no amount of pushing will ever clear one’s mind or ease one’s suffering.
Certainly. It is not a difficult thing to be kind to others. Even the smallest actions can have large scale effects in the world.
That is great, Ariff. It takes some strength for the self to come up against what it believes to be true.
It is important to question the things that quickly give rise to anger.
Of course, it is not my intention to say that anyone else is wrong. I may be questioning what others believe, but that is not because I believe anything else is better. Questioning, for Takuin, is not a reaction based on belief.
Thank you very much. I am always glad to see your participation.
Hey Mike, it is great to have you here. Your comments have given rise to many wonderful questions that I will share in this reply. Thanks so much for participating here.
Is compassion a concept? Surely in a fragmented mind it is. But if we speak of what lies beyond fragmentation, then what is the result? If I have a concept – a generic idea – can that in any way touch this fullness of life? I am not saying it does or doesn’t, by the way.
I am also not saying that action cannot benefit others. Of course actions can be of great benefit. But we are just asking, exploring, or whatever you want to call it.
As far as how many others, that really isn’t very important. What really matters is how it touches you.
Can a paradigm – essentially a pattern of thought – be naturally expressive in this way? Is love a paradigm? Is love based on patterns of thought? Some say yes. But is that all love is? A preference for something or someone based on memory? Or is it something much more?
I understand what you mean, but we have to be careful with the language we use. If we say ALL, then there is no chance for it to be different from what we believe ALL to be. But I think we are saying the same thing.
I do believe we are saying the same thing. The world you speak of (in this paragraph) is entirely false, of course. All of these happenings within a fragmented mind are mere fantasies.
There are no degrees of compassion or love, as measure occurs within memory and thought. And as I asked above, is love or compassion a mere memory? But within the fragmented mind it appears to be true.
There is always this measure of thought that sees love or compassion as actions that have occurred or will occur. There is always that measurement of more or less compassion, or more or less love. But is there more or less love, or is there only love?
Can there be less fragmentation, or just fragmentation? Can there be increased compassion, or just compassion? Again, what is the instrument that makes these measurements? Are these measurements necessary at all?
And what if your spiritual journey was negated? What if you woke up tomorrow and all of your search was gone? If nothing were left, what would you do?
If there is no search, what happens next?
Thanks again Mike, for your stimulating commentary. You have an interesting blog, by the way.
Takuin
Hi Takuin,
Thanks for your entry into this project. A fantastic post on the topic.
Peace,
Wade
http://themiddleway.net
Thanks, Wade. I was happy to do it, and I look forward to the next one.
This is my first time ever visiting your site and so far I feel that you are on to something concerning the human race. We were created to go beyond our “bodily” experiences yet our fragmented minds keep us from that experience. We are discovering that there really never were any limitations–just in the mind. It is a jouney though and it will take a lifetime–as we know time to be now–to totally realize who we really are!
Welcome to the site, Tracy. Thank you for stopping by.
I don’t think I have written anything on fragmentation since this post. I may make it the subject for my next podcast.
Whether or not we were meant to transcend remains to be seen. The organism is certainly capable of making the leap, although the numbers seem minuscule. There is hope that it can be done.
The problem seems to be the approach. People want to be free of fragmentation (although they may not express it in quite that way). But their favored means of attainment is also fragmented. All of the systems, rules, and apparent regulations of How to be Liberated keep people dull and kind of stupid. (Stupid in the sense that there is no energy for pure inquiry, as it is all being wasted on the system of thought being pursued.)
It seems like an endless struggle, but don’t believe it. And don’t believe me either. The greatest freedom comes from what the human being can explore on its own, outside of the external powers that be.
Listen to everyone, but follow no one.
Great to have you here, Tracy. I look forward to seeing you again.
Well, speaking as a person with a fragmented mind (due to abuse and trauma) I would say – yes people who have a fragmented mind are quite compassionate. We understand pain of others because we’ve have been through it. One fragment or personality may be more compassionate than another personality because that personality was perhaps still more resilient than the other. A personality developed during early years has also not experienced as much trauma during their shorter life span than a personality who has was fragmented at a later age. A secondary personality may be less compassionate because they were created (fragmented) under duress, in an uncaring environment, as a way to protect themselves from being further traumatized – thus learning to shut off feelings in order to prevent experiencing less pain. This process of shutting down feelings also turns off feelings of compassion – not likely intended for the purpose of lacking compassion towards others/causes/events, simply to protect oneself from further psychological/physical pain.
I suppose if a personality that experienced little or no compassion took over the body’s life completely, that person likely could not show compassion from that point on.
Someone once described their fragmentation/personalities as doing what other people (without fragmentation) do, but doing it as many people in one body. e.g. During my younger years I enjoyed crafts, writing poetry, walking, riding bike, singing, etc. Some of these activities became hidden to me as my mind became fragmented with new stresses and traumas. As I went through therapy the different personalities came with the interests that they were fragmented with. I am no longer able to plan interests as a whole personality – but we decide among us who will do what part while the person born whole has to be in charge. This person is no longer able to take on all the activities as an individual. If I try to do it alone as a single, I become very overwhelmed and break down further. Hence, it is better to work as a group and work together to make life as normal as possible. (Normal is a setting on a dryer)
My father, who was also severely abused from an early age, most often could not find it in himself to show compassion. It didn’t mean he didn’t feel it. He didn’t know how to show it. He had shut himself off to others so much he was not able to show it. Many times his compassion seemed superficial or “head knowledge.” There were times when he showed compassion but usually towards people who weren’t close to him – possibly for reputation sake. I Thinking it was because he couldn’t allow himself to be close to the people closest to him.
Anyways that my 2 cents worth…. ziggy
In the first paragraph where it reads “thus learning to shut off feelings in order to prevent experiencing less pain” should read ……prevent experiencing more pain.
Thank you very much, Ziggy.
Although what you’ve described as fragmentation is not what I had intended with the article, I think it is marvelous that you have the insight to see the various movements of that particular disorder, if I can use that word.
By fragmentation I meant the apparent separation of the I, or the self, from everything and everyone else. Not necessarily a mind that is split with multiple individuals.
I never really thought of it in the way you’ve described, and you’ve added a wonderful element to the whole thing.
4 Trackbacks
[...] Takuin Minamoto at Daily Action and Natural Expression. [...]
[...] Giri and ReddyK at the Atma Jyoti Blog. Mary Jaksch at Goodlife Zen. Takuin Minamoto at Daily Action and Natural Expression. Robin at Reflections on Compassion, posted at Yogini Myspace Blog. Karen Zara at Abaminds. Jenny [...]
[...] Takuin Minamoto at Daily Action and Natural Expression. [...]
[...] Takuin Minamoto at Daily Action and Natural Expression. [...]