Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!apple!agate!eos!data.nas.nasa.gov!news
From: hugh@chook.ua.oz.au (Hugh Garsden)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Question on detachment
Keywords: Buddhism
Message-ID: <1990Dec10.024959.15785@nas.nasa.gov>
Date: 10 Dec 90 02:49:59 GMT
References: <1990Nov29.005643.6034@nas.nasa.gov>
Sender: news@nas.nasa.gov
Reply-To: hugh@chook.ua.oz.au (Hugh Garsden)
Organization: NAS Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA
Lines: 62
Approved: prabhu@amelia.nas.nasa.gov


In article <1990Nov29.005643.6034@nas.nasa.gov>,
pur-ee!surge@en.ecn.purdue.edu (PhD-in-Training) writes:
|> I am a novice to Buddist ideas and there is one question that has
|> been gnawing at me about detachment.  I understand (to some
|> extent) that attachment to objects in this world leads to misery
|> or unsatisfaction (the first noble truth) and that detachment
|> from desire is the first step to freedom from this misery and
|> cycle of birth.  However, if I imagine myself completely detached
|> emotionally from all things and desiring almost nothing, don't I
|> lose a quality of being alive?

If you want to understand detachment, in my opinion about the
best example we have in modern times is Gandhi. I recommend
you read some books about him, and also anything that he
wrote himself. My favourites are -

		"Gandhi: The Man"  E. Easwaran
		"All Men Are Brothers" 	Gandhi

Being detached does not mean that you don't care, or that you don't
love. Because modern man equates love with desire, romance, or sex, 
he/she also then assumes that loving someone means wanting them.
However, truly loving someone, what psychologists call unconditional love, 
implies the capability to give without receiving. It does not need to be 
requited. This is simplifying it a bit, a good book on the subject is 
"Unconditional Love" by John Powell. Also "The Art of Loving" by Erich Fromm. 

I also recommend "Fear of Freedom" by Erich Fromm, which describes in part why 
human  beings are afraid of unconditional love, why they afraid of detachment. 
Basically, it is because human beings are afraid of being free, not
externally, but internally. This is a very important point, no human being
can acheive detachment without first being strong and secure enough
within themselves so that they can detach themselves from humanity but
at the same time then turn around and give themselves back to humanity,
without holding anything back, and without fear.

Detachment really implies _giving_ without the need for receiving.
And giving, in the spirit of love, compassion, and caring, can make us happier 
than any amount of getting. Once again Gandhi is a prime example. He was 
burning with love and joy for all mankind, but at the same time non-attached. 
He gave his life, he gave everything he had, and was probably the happiest man 
alive because of it. He was free!!

I think the reason most people can't understand detachment is because
they can't like or love someone unless they are attached to them.
They can't love someone unless they are "in love" with them. The idea
of a one-way exchange is inconceivable, mainly because of our
current obsession with the market i.e. buying and selling.

Your statement that becoming detached means you lose the feeling
of being alive indicates you think that desiring is a necessary
prerequisite for feeling alive. However, this is simply a particular
view which it is possible to change. It is difficult, and I haven't
done it myself, but I have no doubt that it can be done. 

Hope this helps.

-----
Hugh Garsden		
University of Adelaide		
hugh@cs.adelaide.edu.au