What does the concept of ‘Interbeing’ mean?
 

Can anyone explain in fairly simple terms what ‘Interbeing’ means in Buddhism?

I’ve been reading about the ‘Six Elements’ practice in Vipassana meditation. I understand that this is about reflecting on how the physical properties of our bodies are made up of the same elements that are found in the outer world, and how on death when our bodies break up, these elements return to the earth - to be recycled as it were. Is this what ’interbeing’ means? http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

Buddhism* for Beginners:

Imagine a table. This table, says interbeing, doesn't exist on its own: there were trees and carpenters that had to come together appropriately for there to be a table, to say nothing of any nails and wood finish and the specific table blueprint and so on. Then, of course, the wood was first a tree which required sunlight and soil nutrients and so on. The carpenters have parents, need to eat, had to learn carpentry, and so on. The table ultimately relies on all this in order 'to be', and this state of affairs is being described by interbeing.

http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/heart.gif

*Debatable, when it comes to interbeing: yet hopefully this description is enough for the idea to make sense.

Yes, thank you Daverupa....I understand now. Cheers. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/hands.gif

Unity and Diversity in the Body

12 Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by[c] one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 14 Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many.

15 Now if the foot should say, “Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, “Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body,” it would not for that reason stop being part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? 18 But in fact God has placed the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. 19 If they were all one part, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, but one body.

21 The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” 22 On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, 23 and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, 24 while our presentable parts need no special treatment. But God has put the body together, giving greater honor to the parts that lacked it, 25 so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. 26 If one part suffers, every part suffers with it; if one part is honored, every part rejoices with it.

1 Corinthians 12 http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/angel.gif

Thanissaro Bhikkhu is a critic of Thich Nhat Hanh's "interbeing" and prefers "inter-eating" or "inter-feeding." http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/bunny.gif

Can you always provide links to the sources of the quotes you make please, Bucky.

Thanissaro Bhikkhu is a critic of Thich Nhat Hanh's "interbeing" and prefers "inter-eating" or "inter-feeding."
"Our most cherished sense of inter-connectedness with the world — what some people call our interbeing — is, at its most basic level, inter-eating" (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/a...mountains.html). Reference to Thich Nhat Hanh was in a dharma talk at audiodharma.org but I don't recall which one. It seems like he says it a lot in his talks. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/bunny.gif

It seems like Thanissaro Bhikkhu is seeking to be more aligned with emptiness.

I'm not sure the two are so far apart. "Interbeing" isn't just a kumbayah moment -- it involves recognition of anicca, anatta and dukkha.

People always remember that Thich Nhat Hanh talks about clouds, rain, flowers and children, but they tend to forget that he applies the same principle to things like war, poverty, abuse and suffering. When he presents the "positive" side of interbeing, it's as upaya.

We had a thread earlier this year in the Theravada forum called 'Interbeing and the suttas' if you're interested in looking at it, Aasha.

http://www.buddhismwithoutboundaries...and-the-Suttas

Thanks Aloka-D...I will have a read through it. Cheers. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/grin.gif

Good point. Afterall, he introduced me to the rotting corpse meditation.

Re OP topic: There is the concept of inter-subjectivity in discourse ethics, but I'm not convinced by Habermas' arguments for it. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/bunny.gif