DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Boripiomi** · 12-31-2010, 12:30 PM

Is the desire to be good and generate good karma not a selfish desire to avoid bad karma (or selfish desire to obtain happiness)?

Depends on the motivation. Why does one want to do this? To avoid one's own pain & suffering... or to alleviate another;s?

-Is the desire to help others or have good intentions also not directly related to a selfish desire understanding that pain causes suffering, and wanting to avoid that suffering for yourself or others.

That sounds honest more than selfish to me. One of the things that makes Dharma wonderful for me is that it is a path, so we can progress right from where we are all the way to enlightenment. We have to admit where we are. Also, without a personal inner experience of pain & suffering how would we feel any empathy, compassion, or concern for others? We care when we have enough courage to know how much what someone else is going through, hurts.

-Is happiness and love in general not just an emotional state?

Love is used to mean lots of different things and they are not often clear. It can mean clinging to something/one for happiness, it can mean appreciation, desire, a wish to benefit another because of their connection to you, it can mean universal, equal & all-encompassing wish for others to be happy & free from suffering. Happiness is often used to describe a fleeting emotional high of some kind. Sometimes I think joy is easier to comprehend as a more stable, deeper, and complete state. Happiness as a spiritual goal does not refer to the emotional high, but the underlying potential for pure joy that all of us have. It is not satisfaction as much as release of all the emotions that prevent it combined with the natural wish to benefit others.

Those thoughts lead me to believe that neutrality to everything is the result of true selflessness (if selflessness is even possible for a human to aquire). Obviously Buddha (and other enlightened people) believe being 'good' and showing love to others is how people should live their lives...

So my question is why? Even if someone truly accepts selflessness and not-self fully, are all of their actions/intentions/etc still not directly results of emotional wants? (want for happiness or dissatisfaction of suffering)?

That is the beginning of the path... eventually one can let go of those things progressing towards greater purity of mind/heart. I think for the Buddha it is not a "belief" that he should benefit others. It is more a natural response to the needs of others because it is the only sane response... it leads to happiness & joy for the beings who receive it is joyful for the enlightened one as well. One of the biggest samsaric delusions is that there is a difference between happiness for other and self as if it is a competition. The enlightened one sees the fallacy here so why would he engage?

12-31-2010, 12:30 PM	#7
Boripiomi Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 370 Senior Member	Is the desire to be good and generate good karma not a selfish desire to avoid bad karma (or selfish desire to obtain happiness)? Depends on the motivation. Why does one want to do this? To avoid one's own pain & suffering... or to alleviate another;s? -Is the desire to help others or have good intentions also not directly related to a selfish desire understanding that pain causes suffering, and wanting to avoid that suffering for yourself or others. That sounds honest more than selfish to me. One of the things that makes Dharma wonderful for me is that it is a path, so we can progress right from where we are all the way to enlightenment. We have to admit where we are. Also, without a personal inner experience of pain & suffering how would we feel any empathy, compassion, or concern for others? We care when we have enough courage to know how much what someone else is going through, hurts. -Is happiness and love in general not just an emotional state? Love is used to mean lots of different things and they are not often clear. It can mean clinging to something/one for happiness, it can mean appreciation, desire, a wish to benefit another because of their connection to you, it can mean universal, equal & all-encompassing wish for others to be happy & free from suffering. Happiness is often used to describe a fleeting emotional high of some kind. Sometimes I think joy is easier to comprehend as a more stable, deeper, and complete state. Happiness as a spiritual goal does not refer to the emotional high, but the underlying potential for pure joy that all of us have. It is not satisfaction as much as release of all the emotions that prevent it combined with the natural wish to benefit others. Those thoughts lead me to believe that neutrality to everything is the result of true selflessness (if selflessness is even possible for a human to aquire). Obviously Buddha (and other enlightened people) believe being 'good' and showing love to others is how people should live their lives... So my question is why? Even if someone truly accepts selflessness and not-self fully, are all of their actions/intentions/etc still not directly results of emotional wants? (want for happiness or dissatisfaction of suffering)? That is the beginning of the path... eventually one can let go of those things progressing towards greater purity of mind/heart. I think for the Buddha it is not a "belief" that he should benefit others. It is more a natural response to the needs of others because it is the only sane response... it leads to happiness & joy for the beings who receive it is joyful for the enlightened one as well. One of the biggest samsaric delusions is that there is a difference between happiness for other and self as if it is a competition. The enlightened one sees the fallacy here so why would he engage?
	Quote