Attachment, Detachment, Non-attachment
The stoic philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome wrestled with many of the same basic questions addressed in Buddhism. What is happiness, and how does one attain it? What is real? What is not real? The stoics arrived at different conclusions from Buddhism, for the most part, although in places there is strong agreement.
Oliver Burkeman explores that agreement at The Guardian in "This column will change your life. " For example, Burkeman writes, the philosopher Epictetus realized that emotions are reactions to thoughts about reality, not reality itself. Whether you are fearful about something that hasn't happened yet, or disappointed about not having something you want, it's your own imagination and desire that are making you miserable.
"Since it isn't external reality that determines emotions," Burkeman writes, "you're wrong to imagine that the perfect relationship, job or house would make you happy. What's making you unhappy is the belief that you need them in order to be happy." Sounds familiar.
A superficial understanding of either Buddhism or Stoicism might lead one to think that detachment from the things one fears or desires is the answer to suffering. Indeed, I can't tell you how often I stumble across academics and sometimes even Buddhists declaring that Buddhism teaches "detachment." That might make sense considering how often teachers warn us to avoid "attachment." But flipping from one extreme to its opposite is not the Middle Way.
Detachment is just another form of being jerked around by your own thoughts. The real solution is to change your mind in a very deep way so that your thoughts no longer dictate your emotional state. What Buddhism (and Stoicism) teach is not detachment, but non-attachment.
Burkeman quotes Vipassana meditation teacher Joseph Goldstein: "Detachment implies a sense of withdrawal," Goldstein said. "Non-attachment simply implies not holding on."
For a Buddhist, detachment reinforces the idea of a self that can be separated from the world, which is not exactly the effect we're going for. On the other hand, I don't believe the Stoics had a doctrine that in any way resembled anatta. For the Stoics, as I understand it, the ideal was to be liberated from the tyranny of thoughts and the emotional reaction to thoughts.
The Stoic philosopher Seneca said, "It is not the man who has little, but the man who craves more, that is poor." He also said, "While we are postponing, life speeds on." I need to remember that one.
Comments
We must first understand what attachment is from fundamentals of Buddhism.
According to the Buddha the four Noble truths are within the one fathomed body from head to toes. The “world” is the suffering or Dukka where world means body with mind and memory.(therefore, a dead body is not world).
The mind is attached to three planes of activity within the body and nothing more (called three Bhoomis or three worlds – Rupa bhoomi,Kama bhoomi and Arupa bhoomi).
Rupa bhoomi – five internal sense organs
Kama bhoomi – five external elements taken in through the five senses vision, hearing etc
Arupa bhoomi – memory (or five aggregates)
These three bhoomis can be depicted in a triangle.
You can see at any given instant the mind is at any of the three planes. In fact every thing the mind does is by travelling in the three planes. Each such journey completes the five aggregates and completes in mind “rolling to five” called Papanca.
Therefore, you can see the mind is always attached to matter (or body/Rupa). All the suffering is due to this attachment.
What the Buddha discovered was to dettach the mind from body(or suffering). The method he descovered is called the Noble Eight fold Path or Majjima Patipada (the middle path).
The middle path is like an arrow moving through the triangle mentioned earlier. Therefore, middle path means training of non attachment to three planes. If the three planes are like magnets the mind is like a steel ball moving among the sides. Training of non attachment is like trying to keep the steel ball away from the magnetic planes.
When the mind is detached totally that mind is called “Thilokya tilaka”, the supreme to the three worlds.
When detachment is experienced for the first time the mind cannot keep it even for one minute because it is not used to. This first experience is called “Sothapanna”, or first saint. This experience shows that non moving mind is the bliss or Nirvana.
In the second instance the follower could keep detachment for some time. This reveals that “mind pulsates” or or detached mind lives in Nirvana without a body thus showing it is correct to call Nirvana the supreme eternal bliss!
When detachment is accomplished the Arhath can attain detachment at any time, at any place and keep it for any desired time. The Buddha having attained Buddha hood tested this in the first seven weeks in all possible seven ways whether Nirvana leaves him.
The eight fold path is the living Buddha or Bodhi. People who follow it are called Bodhi satwa.
Chandrakeerthi
I’ve always felt that “Middle Way” was such an unfortunate translation (from whatever is the original Pali or Sanskrit term).
For one, people tend to hear it as a spatial metaphor — implying some kind of passage through or positioning between (fueled by an aversion toward) two sides/polarities, which themselves remain unchanged (as does the “self” that’s finding a way between them). Which of course totally misses the (nondual Buddhist) point.
There seems also to be the tendency to equate “Middle Way” with things like “mediocrity” or “moderation,” e.g. mental or emotional states and/or ways of acting in the world that are utterly lacking in joie de vivre . Which, again, misses the point.
Is there another English translation, I wonder, that might remain faithful to the original, but somehow avoid these pitfalls?
To anyone reading these comments: I have no idea what Keerthi is talking about, either.
B.
Elizabeth — good point; I know what I mean when I say “Middle Way,” but I suppose I should explain it sometime.
I think that the “Middle Way” originally meant neither indulging in the pleasures of the senses nor trying to achieve an escape from the world by extreme asceticism. It seems to me that it only captures a small part of the whole teaching of the Buddha, and probably should not be given as much importance as it often is.
JonJ: In Mahayana, “Middle Way” also refers to the crushing of dualities; see Madhyamika (literally, Middle Way).
i love u keerthi
The Middle Path also refers to the middle view between the twin delusions of the view of an eternal unchanging self (soul) and the nihilist materialist view. The Middle Path view is that a mental process continues on from life to life body to body not some unchanging self. The realization of final Nirvana that ends that process of rebirth is beyond the duality of existence and non-existence.
Barbara, Do not dismiss Keerthi’s contribution as something unknown to Buddhism. It is the esence of Buddhism. Those who cannot get their head around this unversal truth preached by Buddha, are only looking at Buddhism superficially. Keerthi was trying to explain how non-attachment is achieved by true Buddhists. A deeper understanding of the essence of Buddhism is called for!
Wilfred — Yes, of course, I understand non-attachment very well. I don’t disagree with that. I’ve written about it myself. My issue is with the word “detachment” that Keerthi keeps using.
In English, “detachment” is entirely the wrong word to use and gives people the wrong idea about Buddhism. It tells them Buddhists should be cold, unfeeling and uncaring about others, for example. Non-attachment and detachment are two different things.
I understand that if you aren’t a native speaker of English it might not seem like a big distinction, but it’s huge.
The “Middle Way” simply means BALACE; stay in toon; don’t cause dissonance.
Remember Buddha’s discovery was the Middle path or the path to Nirvana called Dhamma Chakka or The Noble Eight fold Path. In fact his very first sermon was for explaining the middle path called Dhamma Chakka Pawattana Suthra. Therefore, any Buddhist must have a clear idea of at least The Buddha’s first discourse.
Mind is attached to matter, luckily, with vacuum(Akasha Dhatu)in between or in the “middle”. Therefore, if one knows how and puts effort he/she can separate the mind and go to Nirvana. This is why the path is called the “middle path”. This path was lost for last 2000 odd years hence the problems we have today.
So, what is the better word, Detachment or anything else?
Buddhism is not for argue and decide, not to read or learn and remember, not to follow blindly with beleif and most importantly not for every one.
Like any branch of science it has it’s own scope and definitions. You can’t make a whole country engineers, doctors,accountants etc. Each discipline is for those who study each particular disiplne. Likewise, Buddhism is for those who come in and investigate with its “practical exercise” the noble eightfold path or middle path.
The mind attaches to the body a 255 times in less than a twinkle of an eye. Attachment causes memmory (Vinnana)and this memmory is the delusion of self or “I”.
Nobody knew “I” is three fold. The sides of the triangle explained in earlier posting. At any given time you have 1. Past “I” – the five senses, what you brought to this life or Rupa Bhoomi. 2. Present “I” – what you take in from five sense doors in this life or Kama Bhoomi.3. Future “I” – what you have stored for future, the memmory or Arupa Bhoomi. This is called birth(Uppada), live(Tithi) and death(Bhanga). This is the cycle of rebirth! You don’t have to beleive in any thing not seen!Being an expert of this is the purpose of Buddhim. This the Tripitaka! Reading the book of self, “I”.
Buddhists just talk about continuous rebirth and call it cycle of rebirth (Samsara Chakra). But, with that definition it is linear or something like propagation of a wave! It is a linear cycle!! Or you have to be reborn back in the previous life.
They call the middle path or the eight fold path the cycle of Dhamma(Dhamma chakra). The eight fold path is a “list” of eight items. They cannot explain how the list was put in to a cycle by The Buddha.
All these problems are due to the problem of losing the tool, the practicle middle path or the unique discovery of the Buddha. He called it the “mould” so that you can put everything in and do corrections with his absence even long after his death. You cannot do this purification in other religions.
In his last discourse called Parinibbana Suthra he said any religion is “cheap” and void of saints if it lacks the middle path. It is now true for any form of Buddhism.
Telescope was the tool discovered to see the objects in the outer space. Middle path was the tool or greatest discovery of human kind to see the mind!
It had been rediscovered in Sri Lanka by Ven. Lankapura Sariputhra. Therefore, we have one enlightened teacher now. All problems can be sorted out and even Mahayana and Therawada can be reunited now!
No authentic Buddhism is found elsewhere! You may sometimes sense it from what I write. The middle path is easy to learn and practice.Only thing you need extreme determination and courage. Because the ancient monks gave it up it was lost. It can be practised at home. Even I am an engineer, a businessman enjoying familly life with two daughters and wife.
Anybody interested please write to keertiwijet@gmail.com. I will tell how to practice the middle path and attain Nirvana in this life without falling into beleif.
Nirvana is given free but, difficult to take!
Keerthi