| CtLily wrote: ***snip*** > Also, would somebody please > define for me the line between > judging others and having an > opinion due to life experiences. > I think I tend to be too > forgiving because of this fear > of judging others. ***snip*** > CtLily CtLily, Well, don't say you didn't ask for it... :) There is a substantial amount of literature dedicated to answering that very question, and the study of it is something that some people spend a lifetime on. Really, I'm not making that up!! In fact, your question, which was put so very succinctly and neatly, could probably be considered the very basis for entire philosophies and religions. Where exactly does the line fall between judging others and having an operating life philosophy? So the following (hopefully not too pedantic) response is my attempt at consolidating and refining in as small a space as possible (and still attempting to make it readable for non-philosophy majors) my version of the answer to that question. Congratulations on doing such a good job at phrasing it so well! * True Happiness First off, we are basically talking about how one can achieve real "happiness". This is not some "ivory tower" debate over how many angels can fit on the end of a pin. It has to do with the very fundamental problem we all face: namely, how to live a life full of real meaning and true happiness. What is true happiness? Well, that also could take up an entire life's study, but I will try to answer this as succinctly as possible by using a quote from the Katha Upanishad (an ancient text from India): "In the secret cave of the heart, two are seated by life's fountain. The separate ego drinks of the sweet and bitter stuff, Liking the sweet, disliking the bitter, While the supreme Self drinks sweet and bitter Neither liking this nor disliking that. The ego gropes in darkness, while the Self lives in light." In other words, we humans are deluded into believing that when we try to satisfy the ever-unfulfilled cravings of our ego that we are achieving happiness. Happiness (true happiness) is not contingent on ego gratification, but is rooted in learning how to live so that these cravings of our ego minimally affect our emotional lives. This concept is tied in with the rest of what I'll be discussing. * What is Truth? Here we go. There is not a single thing that you may point at or name that can be completely 100% verifiable as being absolutely true. Again, I am not debating angels on a pin here. This statement is absolutely fundamental in beginning to learn how to live a life of well-being and happiness. In attempting to prove that something is true, there are five methods that humans use: 1. Authority. Some people actually use this method to prove something is true. This would be along the lines of quoting some famous person and having that stand as the unquestioned authority on the subject. As we will discuss later, even if you are the person that an event happened to, you still cannot truthfully be the complete authority of that event. 2. Divine Revelation. Yep, as we all know there are lots of folks who believe in this method for determining truthfulness. But just what divine revelation should we all believe? Mohammad? Joseph Smith? Baha'Ullah? The Bible? Bob Dobbs? 3. Common Sense. Of course, in the 1300s it was common sense that the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the earth. It's also common sense that some people don't have common sense even if they say they do. 4. Logic. This is getting a little better at arriving at the Truth, but logic is finite in its ability to explain things. I have a good friend who has done a PhD Thesis on the limitations of logic by showing contradictions in mathematics. Logic may also be used to explain many things that are completely not true. People have used logic to explain completely opposite "truths". 5. Experimentation. Finally, this is the considered the best way among scientists for discovering a "truth". However, even this method is flawed. Several philosophers and scientists have taken on experimentation as the way to determine whether something is 100% true or not. One such man, Werner Heisenberg, said that the observer of an experiment has the potential to affect the outcome of the experiment. He actually proved this in the laboratory, however it must be said that his theory applies specifically to experimentation on a very small scale (he was into observing the behavior of atomic particles), but the idea that the observer of an experiment is not an impartial objective witness, but actually a contributing influence on the experiment's outcome has since shaken the scientific community. It is unclear to some scientists and philosophers whether it is at all possible to be able to observe something without contributing to the outcome of the experiment. Again, this is one of those things that we could discuss forever. Let me just say that there are men and women of sound understanding and intelligence who believe that experimentation cannot be relied upon 100% of the time in order to determine "truth". So even if it were possible through a series of logic, experimentation, and common sense to arrive at a conclusion that something is indeed always true 100% of the time, we are observing it through our neural system which is itself flawed. Why don't we see a black spot at the two peripheral corners of our vision? It's supposed to be there, and if you hold your hand at arm's length and move it to the side of your vision while staring straight ahead, your hand will at one point disappear. The black spot is the area on the back of the eye's retina where the optic nerve leaves the eyeball and travels into the brain, so there are no visual receptor cells in that spot to pick up anything. The reason we don't see black spots all the time is that our mind interprets what it is seeing from the rest of our receptor cells, and it fills in the blanks. It makes it up. If you do research into this you'll find out that there are quite a number of other similar situations in which the five senses we humans are gifted with each have flaws and are suspect. So any "truth" that we are witnessing is being filtered through our limited, untrustworthy five senses, and we still pretend to believe that if something is unobservable by us humans that it cannot exist. Additionally, our minds are operating in a three-dimensional world. The universe unfortunately is not restricted to three dimensions. There are things that might possibly, and are indeed probably happening out there in the big universe that are not observable or comprehensible to an observer limited to the first three dimensions. So the bottom line here is that if we are trying to determine what the truth of something is, we are using methods that are flawed, observing through senses that are flawed, and interpreting it all through our minds that are limited and which make things up. In other words, we simply, literally cannot know anything 100% accurately. Nobody can tell you that any thing is true. * Personal Life Philosophy Okay, so even if you cannot KNOW something for sure, you still have to get up every morning and function. There are so many systems that we deal with as modern-day humans that we need to learn and then get to where we don't have to think about them anymore: driving a car, typing on a computer, etc. The problem is that we tend to believe that because we do something a lot and it continues to work that way that we must KNOW that we are doing it correctly. Here is a story from Japan: ************ A Buddhist monk is sitting with three of his students at a table. There are teacups and cakes on the table. The monk takes a fan out of his robe and gives it to the first student and asks, "What is this?" The first student says "It is a fan, teacher." The monk takes the fan from the student and hits him on the head with it. "Fool!" he says. (Note: In these Japanese stories the monk is always hitting his students on the head - it's just the way it goes over there, I guess). Then the monk turns to the second student and gives him the fan and asks, "What is this?" The second student says nothing, but opens the fan and begins to fan himself with it. The monk takes back the fan, smiles, and nods to the student. Then the monk turns to the last student and gives him the fan and asks, "What is this?" The third student opens the fan, gently slides it under one of the cakes on the table, and using the fan to hold the cake, offers it to the monk. The monk gets up and very ceremoniously bows to the third student. ************* This story illustrates that a thing, in this case a fan, is not the word we use to label it. Words are merely symbols or labels of something. When the second student did not say anything, but demonstrated its use, that was better than just calling it a fan. However, the fan is also not merely the object that we use it for typically. This is what the third student showed by using the fan to pick up the cake and offer it to his teacher. What a thing is (whether it be a fan, a car, a theory, or a human being) is much more than anything we could describe it as, or anything we could ever use it as. Objects, people, ideas are all much more than our definitions of what they are or what they do. Getting locked too rigidly into our personal operating system of going to work, raising a family, getting an education, etc presents a risk of giving us the illusion that we know that what it is we are doing is "real". It is necessary to have a personal operating system, but it is also necessary to realize it is an illusion. It might work most of the time, or even all of the time, but that still does not give it the trait of reality or truthfulness. We live in a world that is our own personal "movie" of what is out there, and the problem is that we believe that what we perceive as reality is what we also believe is what is reality (or that ought to be reality) for everyone else. But each of us is watching a slightly different movie on our own, so which movie, then, is the "real" or "true" one? The answer is simply: none of them. * Morals What then about having a personal operating system that allows us to judge what is "good" or "bad" behavior? Oy! Here we are really getting into the meat of the matter! I would suggest if you wish to really delve into this to first read Nietzsche's book "Beyond Good and Evil". That would be a good start. If you would rather not read this wonderful Victorian German philosopher, I would forgive you, but you're really missing something there! Anyway, as I have outlined above, if it is impossible to prove whether a thing or idea is true or not, how then can we prove that something is "good" or "evil"? Basically we can't. So again, we come to the idea that in order to get by in our modern world, we must create a personal operating system by which we can run our daily lives. In this case, it would be a code of conduct. It is necessary to have a system to which we can assign certain behaviors as being desirable or undesirable (or, good and evil, if you will). This keeps us from going out and killing someone over a parking space (unless you live in Chicago). But again, we run the risk of believing that the code of ethics that we have created for ourselves is the "correct" or "true" code. No matter what sort of behavior you can mention, there has been a time in some society that it has been acceptable. No behavior can be said to be wrong for all people at all times in the history of the human race. I know I will probably get flamed for this statement more than anything else I am writing here, but I challenge anyone to come up with something to show that I err in saying this. When the European Christians came to North America and saw the Native Americans dancing around a fire in animal skins they were so outraged that they had to kill their whole tribe. That's what judging another culture will get you. * Judging Others So finally we get to the point in the discussion where we discuss judging. If you have been following my logic (or my attempt at it), then when I say that it is impossible for someone to know what another person is doing, then it will make some sense. Firstly, it is impossible to KNOW what another person is doing, because we cannot KNOW for sure what is going on at any given time anyway. We might have a pretty good idea or theory about something, but we cannot know 100% for certain what it is that somebody (including ourselves) is really doing because WE CANNOT KNOW ANYTHING FOR SURE. And when we come to the motivations and underlying subconscious pressures that a person is operating under that motivate him or her to do something, then we are really at a loss to understand their behavior. However, we still need to have a working moral system (code of ethics) in which we maintain structure in our lives, the lives of our family, and in society in general. If we see somebody doing something that appears "wrong" or "bad", we might feel compelled to act in a way to prevent or stop it from happening. This doesn't mean that we are judging the person, however. We're just acting by our personal code in order to stop something that we see as undesirable from occurring. Story time: The book called the "Bhagavad-Gita" is a story written in India probably around 300 BC. In it there is a hero called Arjuna who is the son of the king. His father dies while Arjuna is still very young, and so the boy's father's brother acts as the Regent until Arjuna becomes old enough to inherit the throne. The problem is that once he becomes old enough, the uncle does not wish to give Arjuna the throne after all. The kingdom is divided into supporters of Arjuna's claim and supporters of his uncle's. A civil war breaks out, and armies are organized, and the day dawns when the two armies are gathered on a battle plain facing each other, and are prepared to attack. At this point in time Arjuna asks his charioteer (who's happens to be Krishna) to drive him in his chariot out in the field in the middle of these two armies. The rest of the book is basically a conversation between Arjuna and Krishna. Here are some paraphrased excerpts from this conversation (in my own words): Arjuna tells Krishna that if he chooses to attack with his army, that he will be killing his kinsmen, his uncles and cousins, and that is a horrible sin. Krishna then tells Arjuna that he has very little choice in the matter at this point: that these two armies are going to go to battle, and that he had better make up his mind to try to encourage the people who are going to fight and die for him. Arjuna tells Krishna that he wishes he would not have to fight: that it is suffering, murder and bloodshed, and that he does not wish to participate in it. He doesn't want to fight his uncle and cousins, because he loves them, even if they oppose him. Krishna tells Arjuna that whether he wills it or not, the fight will take place. Then Krishna tells Arjuna that the battle is basically an illusion, the whole world is basically an illusion (refer to my previous discussion). Krishna says that we each must fight our fights, but we must realize that those who oppose us are not really evil. We must love even our enemies, even as we must fight them. We may not be able to know for certain that we are fighting on the "right" side or not, but we do what we deem best and necessary. It is entirely likely that when two people oppose each other that they are both doing so because they each feel that they are doing the "correct" thing, and that they are in the "right". We must never think that we are right and therefore good, and that the other person is wrong and therefore evil, even if it is our perceived duty to oppose that other person. End of story time. * Compassion If we live so that we avoid judging others we are practicing true compassion. There are two (at least) interpretations of compassion: the Christian and the Eastern. In the Christian view of compassion, emphasis is placed upon giving somebody else time, money, or merchandise as their need requires, and that it is done without thought for recompense in a true spirit of giving. A good example of this is the parable that Jesus taught of the Good Samaritan, who was the truly compassionate person, even though he was not Jewish (and therefore supposedly not of the Lord's chosen race). It is the Eastern interpretation of compassion, however, that I would like to discuss. In the traditional view of the East (Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism) the emphasis of compassion is placed not so much on the giving of needful gifts, but rather of not judging others. It is true that the Christian view of compassion includes this element (the Samaritan did not judge the Jew he was helping on the side of the road, as did the others who passed him by and did not render aid), but the element of non-judging is much more emphasized among the philosophies of the East. All of this previous discussion is meant to lay a foundation for why it is necessary for us to not judge others. How is it possible for us to judge another when we cannot truly know what the other person is doing, or what the other person's motivations are? This is not to say that we should not oppose someone who is performing an act that we do not support. So here we see that it is necessary to judge the act but not the person. One of the worst forms of judgementalism is gossip. However, gossip does indeed have its place in society - how else do we find out about whether a person we are attracted to is dating someone else? Or whether someone would be sensitive to a discussion about a story of someone dying in a car crash when he or she just had a friend die? There is a role that gossip plays in our culture, but it is the TYPE of gossip that is judgmental of others that is unhealthy. It is so easy in our modern society where we come into contact with so many strangers on a daily basis to quickly write somebody else off for cutting into traffic, saying something that you choose to take offense to on the Internet, or numerous other seemingly rude behaviors. My personal buttons get pushed over space issues a lot (that neighbor better keep his dog out of my yard!). But it is still judging someone to cuss at them when they cut you off on the freeway. Who knows? Maybe they are on their way to the emergency ward? We simply cannot know why people act the way they do, and instead of swearing at someone, give them a blessing instead and see how that makes you feel. *Conclusion The bottom line is this. If you wish to live a happy life, do not judge other people. It is difficult at first, but as you practice this it becomes easier. I know that when I start badmouthing someone I start feeling dirty inside, like I know I am not supposed to be doing this. The amount of juice I get out of putting someone else down whom I think deserves it is not worth the negative energy I am bringing into my life as a result. Add that up a bunch of times as I judge other people throughout the day, and it soon becomes quite a large amount of negative energy that I am creating for myself. In my own personal life I was in the middle of a very lengthy depression that had been increasingly more problematic as the years took their toll. After two divorces, the stress of leaving the Church, problems with relationships with women who ended up cheating on me as a continuous pattern, it added onto the hurt that I was carrying around with me. By the time I was in my late 30s I felt like I was at the end of my life. I was living with a woman who was constantly cheating on me, and it got to the point that I started acting out in a violent way when I'd discover another incident of her unfaithfulness to me. I was seeing a pretty good counselor at the time, but he was working on an HMO plan, and there is just so much that the insurance companies allow the health practitioners in the US to do or say to people. But it was good to have someone to talk to. Then one summer in 1998 I went to Colorado to attend a pagan festival called Dragonfest. It's held every year in the mountains west of Denver. I was having a pretty good time hanging out with old friends that I knew from the days I used to live in Denver. There are typically workshops and rituals that are held during these events, and I was looking forward to attending one that was going to be discussing the finer points of making mead (I make my own wine and mead at home). But the friend whom I was hanging out with said that he wanted to go to this workshop/ritual about compassion that was taking place at the same time as the mead workshop, and I decided on a lark to accompany him. It ended up changing my life! During this ritual the people that were leading it invited each of us to talk about something that had to do with compassion. We were all standing in a circle in this beautiful mountain meadow. People shared their stories with the group, and I remembered that I had a story to share as well. My story happened a couple of years earlier while I was living in Chicago. The Dalai Lama came to speak publicly at a hall, and I attended this lecture. It was so amazing to see the Dalai Lama in real life! He came out on stage, smiled and bowed with his hands together in a namaste gesture to everyone in the crowded theatre. His spirit filled the whole place! Then he began to tell about a Tibetan Buddhist nun who had lived in an abbey until the Chinese soldiers came to her town. All of the nuns in the abbey were raped by the soldiers, and most of them were killed. She and the handful of survivors were imprisoned for over 10 years, during which time the guards continuously raped and tortured them. One by one each of her fellow nuns died or took their lives under this treatment. Eventually she was released, but her hands were bent and crippled from her torture. She begged food from houses as she made her way across Tibet and over the passes of the Himalayas into Nepal and then into India. This took many years, but eventually she arrived in Dharamsala where the Dalai Lama and his court in exile live. She requested an audience with the Lama, and he told us a part of their conversation. The Dalai Lama asked this nun, after hearing her story, "What was the most difficult thing that you faced during your life?" And the nun replied, "I ALMOST lost my compassion for the Chinese soldiers who tortured me." This so impressed the Dalai Lama that he began to cry, even while he was telling us about it years later. Of course even today it is difficult for me to tell this story. So when I told it to the group of people gathered in a circle in the mountains, having invoked the spirits of compassion, my heart was so wide open, and my eyes were so full, that I felt I was going to burst. I noticed that others in the circle also had leaky eyes as well. Suddenly, just as I was ending my story, a hummingbird flew into our group. It flew in a clockwise circle three times inside of our closed space, and then it came right up to me and stopped right in front of my heart! It hovered there for the space of several seconds, pointing directly at my heart (and since I was wearing a black t-shirt with no markings, it wasn't being attracted by any visual color). Then it quickly turned around and flew off out of the circle of people. God! This still gets to me! When I returned from Colorado I took a vow that from that point forward I would try to live my life so that I would not judge others. It was very hard, and I fail in this all the time, but slowly my life began to change. My poisonous relationship with the woman I was living with blew up rather shockingly within a half-year, and I moved out. As I began to seriously try to incorporate the concept of compassion into my every day life, I began to notice little changes in how the world appeared to me. I started becoming less depressed, events and peoples' energies began to lose their impact on me so that what would create fear and stress before was replaced by trust and peace. This finally prepared me to fall in love with the woman I am married to today. I don't know if I cold have been able to have done that earlier. The energy in our relationship is so incredibly much better than anything I have ever experienced in my own life of the lives of my family members! We moved and I went through what would be considered an incredibly stressful job for a few years, which would have previously had me getting really down and messed up over, but it hasn't. And I can honestly say that the single biggest contribution to this is the fact that I have consciously made an effort to not judge other people. I know this might seem simplistic, however since my first experience with the hummingbird I have done research into compassion, and I have learned that this is taught by a lot of other people. In fact, what the Eastern religions call enlightenment is really the concept that one cannot judge - in other words, by attempting to live a life of compassion, trying to not judge other people or one's own self, a person is living what would be considered to be an enlightened life. Thanks for those who followed this through all the way to the end. I hope that I haven't sounded too much like a know-it-all smartaleck. I am still learning so much, and I am still just beginning to really learn how to be compassionate. It's important to me though, and it gives me hope for the future. There's a Zen saying: When an ordinary man gains learning he becomes a sage. When a sage gains wisdom he becomes an ordinary man. That is all I hope to be. Humbly submitted ~~Curt Allred |
| On Compassion This was posted to an online group on August 31, 2004. |