Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Post sayings or stories you find interesting or useful.

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby greentara » Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:05 pm

Tenzin & Söpa, Thanks for the thoughtful posting and the effort and insight that went into the contribution.
Lets call a spade a spade and the logic in the piece can not be argued with.
Thanks again.
greentara
 
Posts: 917
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:03 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Zhen Li » Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:09 pm

RE: Johnny Dangerous » Thu Jan 02, 2014 5:08 pm
Well the Sravakayana is not eliminated by the Mahayana, which exists as a layer on top of it. Yes, there are methods for dealing with things like marriage within Mahayana and Vajrayana, but the fundamental outlook of the actual facts of the matter is exactly the same, otherwise monasticism wouldn't exist.

When you look at doing worldly things as a skill in means, or as a mechanism in the toolbox of tantra, one's mindset must be pure already - otherwise you're just making excuses.

You can't just do worldly stuff after having heard of skill in means for the first time, and explain it away with some rationalistic logic: it's something which comes after ages of cultivation. Just read all the crazy stuff you'd have to go through first in the Jatakas.

As for tantra, you wouldn't be asking about how to approach the matter from a tantric perspective on this board would you? You'd ask your guru. Would you not?

RE: latest posts
This is more or less my point.

Marriage really isn't a special opportunity - all of samsara can be used in our minds for good or ill. It will be made of what you will, but in the end it really is a samsara and at that, a samsara highly conditioned by culture and circumstance - it's not some cosmic romantic be all and end all to one's life.

People who reject marriage because they recognise that it's not all its cracked up to be aren't being afraid of sexuality. Actually, this was one of Spiro's ideas which I think fundamentally is flawed. The idea that all actions which are somehow heterodox to societal norms are actions that are rooted in some kind of sexual fear or sexual mental complex is also a notion which is really highly conditioned by culture and circumstance (namely, Vienna around 1900 if you catch my drift). To reduce rationalised renunciation to fear, is really not a very Buddhist approach (if I may be so bold as to suggest such a thing, which I don't think is a very outlandish claim).
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Johnny Dangerous » Thu Jan 02, 2014 11:14 pm

Marriage really isn't a special opportunity - all of samsara can be used in our minds for good or ill. It will be made of what you will, but in the end it really is a samsara and at that, a samsara highly conditioned by culture and circumstance - it's not some cosmic romantic be all and end all to one's life.


Since this is exactly what I said in a previous post, i'm having a hard time sussing out what you are trying to say with any of this.

As for tantra, you wouldn't be asking about how to approach the matter from a tantric perspective on this board would you? You'd ask your guru. Would you not?


Well, what we are talking about operates outside of Tantra, as there are plenty of married lay Buddhists not doing Tantra..simple ideas like using family life as an opportunity for the perfections are one example. Secondly, yes, anything i'm interested in knowing about I ask teachers about...what does that have to do with anything though?

You can't just do worldly stuff after having heard of skill in means for the first time, and explain it away with some rationalistic logic: it's something which comes after ages of cultivation. Just read all the crazy stuff you'd have to go through first in the Jatakas.


This is sort of a funny statement on a subject of Buddhist practice, as presumably, for those that practice the things we are talking about, or have the affinity for them..this is not the "first time" for anything. Are you saying people need to spend their life on Hinayana doctrine or what? I understand that Hinayana is of course the foundation..but I can tell you none of my teachers have told me to give up my marriage for practice, and seem to encourage using one's life situations and family as practice - and this is strictly from a Mahayana/sutra teaching point of view I believe.

People who reject marriage because they recognise that it's not all its cracked up to be aren't being afraid of sexuality. Actually, this was one of Spiro's ideas which I think fundamentally is flawed. The idea that all actions which are somehow heterodox to societal norms are actions that are rooted in some kind of sexual fear or sexual mental complex is also a notion which is really highly conditioned by culture and circumstance (namely, Vienna around 1900 if you catch my drift). To reduce rationalised renunciation to fear, is really not a very Buddhist approach (if I may be so bold as to suggest such a thing, which I don't think is a very outlandish claim).


It is not true of all of them of course, but I'll bet it is true of some. Please don't take my comments as a black and white statement, as I have the utmost respect for, and wonderful experience with monastics. I was talking anecdotally mostly about celibate laypeople i've known in regard to neuroses about sex, not monastics. Thought obviously, monastics also still have plenty of challenges with celibacy i'm sure.

When you look at doing worldly things as a skill in means, or as a mechanism in the toolbox of tantra, one's mindset must be pure already - otherwise you're just making excuses.


Another somewhat cryptic statement, because generally..you either learn to work with them, or you don't. It's not like there is a lot of choice for many of us, i don't get to wake up to a world free of 'worldly things" in my life, nor do I have the option to leave my worldly life..however good or bad I am at it, it is what I have to work with. And again, one doesn't even need to strictly talk about Tantra with this.

At any rate, given your original statement maybe we don't disagree that much - as I certainly agree that marriage is a samsaric thing.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Zhen Li » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:06 am

Marriage really isn't a special opportunity - all of samsara can be used in our minds for good or ill. It will be made of what you will, but in the end it really is a samsara and at that, a samsara highly conditioned by culture and circumstance - it's not some cosmic romantic be all and end all to one's life.
Since this is exactly what I said in a previous post, i'm having a hard time sussing out what you are trying to say with any of this.

Then I am sure you're not really having a hard time sussing it out. But the points are larger than a single paragraph so perhaps you'll be able to tell by my reply:
Well, what we are talking about operates outside of Tantra, as there are plenty of married lay Buddhists not doing Tantra..simple ideas like using family life as an opportunity for the perfections are one example. Secondly, yes, anything i'm interested in knowing about I ask teachers about...what does that have to do with anything though?

What it has to do with is that you brought up the fact that we should be thinking of this in the Vajrayana context along with the Mahayana context. I think this is a good point, and to what extent have we really addressed this issue? You see, the example you gave is a "sutra" approach strictly speaking.
You can't just do worldly stuff after having heard of skill in means for the first time, and explain it away with some rationalistic logic: it's something which comes after ages of cultivation. Just read all the crazy stuff you'd have to go through first in the Jatakas.
This is sort of a funny statement on a subject of Buddhist practice, as presumably, for those that practice the things we are talking about, or have the affinity for them..this is not the "first time" for anything. Are you saying people need to spend their life on Hinayana doctrine or what? I understand that Hinayana is of course the foundation..but I can tell you none of my teachers have told me to give up my marriage for practice, and seem to encourage using one's life situations and family as practice - and this is strictly from a Mahayana/sutra teaching point of view I believe.

But precisely what are the techniques, the nitty gritty, the bare bones, of how you engage in skill in means (i.e. using means to liberate yourself and others) with regards to marriage here? Nothing discussed thus far really strikes me as skill in means, it strikes me as just being optimistic in the face of what is actually miserable - which is all nice and positive, but just being nice and positive doesn't exactly get one to Buddhahood. Maybe you can just say it's part of the struggle of trying to manage the six perfections one at a time, but just struggling to manage, while balancing with the samsaric choices one has made, doesn't strike me as an example of skill in means as it is described in the sutras. Are you using marriage as a parable to teach your wife? Where is the honest falsehood? Did you INTEND this before the marriage? Or are you justifying it after the fact? If you are justifying it after the fact, are you trying to justify justifying it after the fact by claiming that you are just transforming it? Are you really transforming it? How does the nature change? In fact, I think relating these kinds of things makes very interesting story telling, and indeed I have heard many of many fine examples in which this is one well - but almost always they are by the highly cultivated. I don't pretend to be so cultivated as to be able to manufacture skill in means on a whim like a ch'an master, I am not claiming you are too, but I am curious as to what is meant by all this.
It is not true of all of them of course, but I'll bet it is true of some. Please don't take my comments as a black and white statement, as I have the utmost respect for, and wonderful experience with monastics. I was talking anecdotally mostly about celibate laypeople i've known in regard to neuroses about sex, not monastics. Thought obviously, monastics also still have plenty of challenges with celibacy i'm sure.

Yes, I would agree of course, but I was really referring to someone else's post:
"One of the saddest sights is the regular threads that crop up on a forum known to many where people who are afraid of their own sexuality rationalise that fear by identifying it as a spiritual endeavour."

Which of course is just another form of justification, but it's a rather odd accusation in my reckoning. I feel like one needs to know someone better before they start making judgements like this. But I may be misinterpreting the intention of the post, I am not quite sure since he didn't elaborate.
When you look at doing worldly things as a skill in means, or as a mechanism in the toolbox of tantra, one's mindset must be pure already - otherwise you're just making excuses.
Another somewhat cryptic statement, because generally..you either learn to work with them, or you don't. It's not like there is a lot of choice for many of us, i don't get to wake up to a world free of 'worldly things" in my life, nor do I have the option to leave my worldly life..however good or bad I am at it, it is what I have to work with. And again, one doesn't even need to strictly talk about Tantra with this.

What it means is, more or less, what looks like skill in means, when clearly contrived and not coming from one who sees what is being pointed out clearly for oneself, is hardly skill in means. I don't mean to say that this is what you are doing, or that you can do this. But it means that to engage in skill in means, one has to see what one is pointing out. The world to an enlightened on is different - just going of Sutras here, just think of the way one's view of the world is transformed to a Bodhisattva of even the first Bhumi as described in the Sutras.

Actually, I think the only real way to think about these forms of viewing the world differently, beyond merely thinking positively and optimistically about the world, is in Tantra. For instance, viewing the world as a mandala and oneself as the deity.

This get's to deeper issues - as to whether personal or cultural justifications can legitimately be considered Buddhist, when one merely habitually or even cognitively proceeds through their gestures, as opposed to having affectively internalised the justifications as they structurally are intended to be used. After all, a justification is a justification. Something isn't inherently wrong by nature of being a justification - particularly if the justification is a true one. Examples which come to mind are the Newar Vajracaryas who marry as a normal Nepalese would, despite being technically considered monks, except the wife is justified as being a tantric consort. To what extent does this justify the marriage of a monk? Is it still a marriage? Do they need to understand the justification "both" cognitively and affectively for it to be a true justification? What if it isn't a true justification? Does that mean it isn't Buddhist? On who's authority are justifications true or false? Is it like a logical syllogism? On whose authority is something Buddhist or not? Does it matter? Who cares? Are you reading this? How was dinner? etc...

:namaste:
Last edited by Zhen Li on Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Johnny Dangerous » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:10 am

Actually, I think the only real way to think about these forms of viewing the world differently, beyond merely thinking positively and optimistically about the world, is in Tantra. For instance, viewing the world as a mandala and oneself as the deity.



But precisely what are the techniques, the nitty gritty, the bare bones, of how you engage in skill in means


Sutra level teachings in the Mahayana are full of examples of transforming difficult circumstances, and training the mind to use difficult circumstances on the spiritual path. I don't need to give examples of that do I? They are ubiquitous..off the top of my head there's Lojong and Tonglen..

in some sense Mahayana still is a renunciation path, but it seems unmistakable (to me at least) when you read things like the 59 (or however many) Lojong slogans, that a lot of what's taught in Mahayana is skillful means to transform circumstances of a type that renunciates are unlikely to even face!


On the rest of it, ok, and thanks for the conversation, i'm finding it somewhat difficult to understand what exactly you arguing about, and what you are trying to say..so i'm taking a break for now, great thread though.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Zhen Li » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:12 am

Please do, and explain how it works in the context of marriage. I won't pretend to be able to read your mind, or know what you're referring to in the sutras.

Afterall, it's the point of the thread isn't it? :thinking:
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Johnny Dangerous » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:17 am

Zhen Li wrote:Please do, and explain how it works in the context of marriage. I won't pretend to be able to read your mind, or know what you're referring to in the sutras.

Afterall, it's the point of the thread isn't it? :thinking:



I didn't say sutras, I said sutra level teaching i.e. not tantra - and I edited and gave two examples, Lojong and Tonglen.

Please do, and explain how it works in the context of marriage.


Hazard a guess lol, not exactly complicated..the same way you'd use metta or something, start out with people you love..etc. etc., this stuff is ubiquotious, again.

I'm done for the meantime though, the conversation is getting pretty convoluted and I think we are talking around eachother.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Zhen Li » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:25 am

Right, forgive me for not being perfectly instep with the way people refer to things in Tibetan Buddhism.

As for using techniques, like those you listed - okay, these aren't skill in means but of course they are techniques that you can use at any level - though how is it unique to marriage? Isn't your wife just another person? How does marriage make this more than "the usual" in terms of practice?

Moreover, what about justifying marriage using Dharma? Is there a point at which these justifications are internalised such that they really are transformative?

Why should I get married? What benefit is there for someone from the Buddhist perspective?
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Johnny Dangerous » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:27 am

I never argued that marriage was unique or better than any other opportunity, I only argued that from some perspectives, it isn't worse.. so I can't really answer your question.

If someone else feels that marriage provides a unique opportunity, then maybe they'd have an answer for you.

Moreover, what about justifying marriage using Dharma? Is there a point at which these justifications are internalised such that they really are transformative?


I don't think Dharma needs to be used to justify one's life circumstances, which is a waste of time anyway, change them or manage them..why bother with justification, but it sure does come in handy working with them.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby reddust » Fri Jan 03, 2014 12:32 am

I will come back later this evening and address the post directed at me. Just stopping by on my way to cook start dinner.

I started this thread because of my 10 years living with my beloved husband and the amazement I feel waking up every morning and looking at him and feeling happy to see him. That to me is a miracle, people just don't do that for me very often, including myself. Everything in our relationship is part of my practice and he has helped me find happiness in this life. I wanted to honor that kindness that was what this thread was supposed to be about.

I started my practice in my early 30s, Sunim, which means monk in Korean was my first Dharma teacher, we talked over which path I should take after my kids were grown. Should I become a nun or stay a householder. With his help I decided to stay a householder. Sunim told me that Monks and Nuns have just as many attachments as householders, they are just different. Many who become Monks and Nuns are just as unhappy as us householders, but that is their path and their practice, they took vows. He also told me Nuns are almost in a prison, they have no freedom what so ever to mix with the public. As a householder I could be involved with so many people. Also Sunim's English wasn't the best, so take what he said and my memory with a grain of salt.

Also many of you talk about sexual relationships and desire in a marriage. There are many relationships that are non sexual and people live together as partners you would find in a traditional marriage minus the sex. This happens quiet often in more mature relationships. But it seems to be a growing phenomena in younger relationships as well. Do a search and you will pull up hundreds of non sexual dating sites.

Most of you know my story so you may understand why developing healthy relationships is so important to me. I grew up in a horribly abusive home as a child and that carried over into my adult life. Buddhism helped me let go of my aversion I had developed regarding humans and human relationships. Marriage and the relationships involved are my way of letting go of aversion I had towards human beings including myself. For those of you who have picked other paths, a vow is a vow, that's all I am going to argue on this.

I do not want to develop an aversion to this world nor do I want to have attachments as I live daily life. I want to be able to freely feel everything I experience without the veils of ignorance, aversion, and attachment. As a householder this is the path I follow, I am not a nun and I am an American, I kind of had to fashion a Buddhist practice on my own. There is not a lot of support for me here.... but I did have a lot of help from some very special teachers who I will always love and have deep gratitude for, I give offerings daily for their help and support.
He wore the white clothes of the layman, yet lived impeccably like a religious devotee. He lived at home, but remained aloof from the realm of desire, the realm of pure matter, and the immaterial realm. He had a son, a wife, and female attendants, yet always maintained continence. He appeared to be surrounded by servants, yet lived in solitude. He appeared to be adorned with ornaments, yet always was endowed with the auspicious signs and marks. He seemed to eat and drink, yet always took nourishment from the taste of meditation. He made his appearance at the fields of sports and in the casinos, but his aim was always to mature those people who were attached to games and gambling. He visited the fashionable heterodox teachers, yet always kept unswerving loyalty to the Buddha. He understood the mundane and transcendental sciences and esoteric practices, yet always took pleasure in the delights of the Dharma. He mixed in all crowds, yet was respected as foremost of all.

Vimalakirti Sutra
Mind and mental events are concepts, mere postulations within the three realms of samsara Longchenpa .... A link to my Garden, Art and Foodie blog Scratch Living
User avatar
reddust
 
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:29 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby dharmagoat » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:07 am

Tenzin & Söpa wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:
Tenzin & Söpa wrote:Not having any human relationships at all is a sign of fear.

Not necessarily. I can attest to that.

Hi dharmagoat, I'd be grateful if you could further elaborate. :smile:

I choose to live on my own and have very few friends, not out of fear of relationships or social inadequacy, but because I prefer to spend my time alone in order to have the opportunity to do the things that I consider interesting and important, but have never appealed to friends or partners in the past. Although I (usually) actively avoid romantic relationships, I am always willing to make new friends, but because I rarely find myself in social situations, this seldom happens.

Becoming middle-aged and moving to the country has made this lifestyle more of a natural choice. A marriage-like relationship would now feel unnatural to me, even an extreme.
May all beings be happy
dharmagoat
 
Posts: 1199
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Tenzin & Söpa » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:08 am

Beautiful post, reddust, thanks for taking the time to share your story.
ཁོང་ཁྲོ་སློང་མཁན་མེད་ན། བཟོད་པ་སུ་ལ་སྒོམ།

When there is no one to provoke anger, how shall we practice patience?
Tenzin & Söpa
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2014 2:03 pm

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Zhen Li » Fri Jan 03, 2014 1:19 am

Johnny Dangerous wrote:I never argued that marriage was unique or better than any other opportunity, I only argued that from some perspectives, it isn't worse.. so I can't really answer your question.

If someone else feels that marriage provides a unique opportunity, then maybe they'd have an answer for you. ...

I don't think Dharma needs to be used to justify one's life circumstances, which is a waste of time anyway, change them or manage them..why bother with justification, but it sure does come in handy working with them.

So, fundamentally there's not much to say about marriage in your opinion -- it's more or less neutral. All right, I do think that this is correct on an individual level. I think that on a macro level, marriage comes along with drugs and swearing, it's just tied up in a nice package, as being a particularly samsaric phenomenon. Like drugs and swearing, the individual intention and right view is fundamentally what matters, but on average they are negative. I'm sure you'll agree with me on this one, right?

As regards justification, as you say, "it sure does come in handy working with them," so really justification is not a waste of time. Don't you think that we should justify all our actions? It's best for us to be aware and mindful, and make sure that our actions are right actions isn't it?
reddust wrote:Most of you know my story so you may understand why developing healthy relationships is so important to me. I grew up in a horribly abusive home as a child and that carried over into my adult life. Buddhism helped me let go of my aversion I had developed regarding humans and human relationships. Marriage and the relationships involved are my way of letting go of aversion I had towards human beings including myself. For those of you who have picked other paths, a vow is a vow, that's all I am going to argue on this.

See, this is quite interesting. But do you think it is an individual case? Or does this mean that marriage as a whole is something people should aim for?

Since the more general parts of your explanation involve the nature of the environment of a nun, speaking generally then, do you think that the same argument could be said for Buddhist men?

As for how you use marriage to let go of aversion, did you see a transformation in yourself after marriage which makes you say this? I'm interested in how it makes you feel. Do you think men can feel the same thing in marriage?
Image
User avatar
Zhen Li
 
Posts: 930
Joined: Sun Apr 07, 2013 8:15 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby Johnny Dangerous » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:27 am

Zhen Li wrote:
So, fundamentally there's not much to say about marriage in your opinion -- it's more or less neutral. All right, I do think that this is correct on an individual level. I think that on a macro level, marriage comes along with drugs and swearing, it's just tied up in a nice package, as being a particularly samsaric phenomenon. Like drugs and swearing, the individual intention and right view is fundamentally what matters, but on average they are negative. I'm sure you'll agree with me on this one, right?


Sure, but that is the way with most things - most things don't work out for most people, most of the time. Since that's how samsara is, in fact it defines life governed by the three poisons, it's harder to pick and choose than you are making out, I think. So yes, I agree that for most people marriage might end up being negative in some respects..that is the same also for things like jobs and friendships though, maybe even moreso than marriage in terms of employment - which often has more direct terrible effects on a wide range of beings..and yet, we still have to work, or at least the majority do.

So saying "this thing is uniquely, inherently more samsaric than this thing" can only be true in a conventional sense, and so conventionally different for different folks, for some people simply staying away might be the answer, for others it's not even an option, or a good option.

Viewing the thing (marriage) as bad, and not the process leading to it being bad..how can I explain it, it's like you're confusing what is actually a verb for noun...marriage means a lot of different things.
"Just as a lotus does not grow out of a well-levelled soil but from the mire, in the same way the awakening mind
is not born in the hearts of disciples in whom the moisture of attachment has dried up. It grows instead in the hearts of ordinary sentient beings who possess in full the fetters of bondage." -Se Chilbu Choki Gyaltsen
User avatar
Johnny Dangerous
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2409
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 10:58 pm
Location: Olympia WA

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby reddust » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:31 am

Zhen Li wrote:
reddust wrote:Most of you know my story so you may understand why developing healthy relationships is so important to me. I grew up in a horribly abusive home as a child and that carried over into my adult life. Buddhism helped me let go of my aversion I had developed regarding humans and human relationships. Marriage and the relationships involved are my way of letting go of aversion I had towards human beings including myself. For those of you who have picked other paths, a vow is a vow, that's all I am going to argue on this.

See, this is quite interesting. But do you think it is an individual case? Or does this mean that marriage as a whole is something people should aim for?
reddust wrote:I don't know if I am the only one who is married and integrated the Dharma into their daily lives and experienced positive fruits. I am willing to bet my eye teeth there are many just like me. I am not that special but I think marriage is special. It's a vow to care for someone no matter how tough life gets. This resonates with my bodhisattva vow. However that does not mean one puts up with abusive behavior in self or other. I would never condone living with someone who is hateful and physically abusive. In general my husband and I can work together because we have the same goals even if we come from different traditions. We sat down many times and talked this over before we promised to care for each other as man and wife. Living with someone brings up all sorts of hidden conditioning, which can then be addressed correctly, used as a tool to see deeply into one's own conditioning.

Regarding the question of marriage.... Human's are social creatures. You can see this with children who are neglected at birth, no touching, eye contact, mirroring emotions, the child fails to thrive, many die. I feel we do not drop this need for nurturing relationships as adults. So maybe marriage isn't a good word to use unless you decide to have children and own property and you need a contract to protect the people in that relationship. If you look back throughout human culture, we partner up, form small groups and tribes. Marriage can mean so many things, I look at it as a vow you don't take lightly, to live together and care for someone other than yourself. Do I think marriage is for everyone? If you want to get married, I do not think the state, authority, religious figure should have any say in the matter. A free people can make up their own mind whether they want to marry or not.

Since the more general parts of your explanation involve the nature of the environment of a nun, speaking generally then, do you think that the same argument could be said for Buddhist men?
reddust wrote:You would have to ask Sunim

As for how you use marriage to let go of aversion, did you see a transformation in yourself after marriage which makes you say this? I'm interested in how it makes you feel. Do you think men can feel the same thing in marriage?
reddust wrote: I started practice while in a very abusive first marriage, I saw transformation of very old fears and behavior, the conditioning dissolved from extensive retreat work and I no longer needed to be in an abusive relationship. I divorced, went to college at 40 years old and several years later met my second husband. I had worked very hard to let go of old conditioning and from that work I became a kind and caring person, attracting kind and caring people. I have seen much transformation all the way through my practice. Marriage to a kind wise caring person has given me the freedom, saftey and space to see clearly old conditioning from betrayal bonding (We all suffer from this conditioning) that must still be let go of so I can walk as a free person, that has been my main practice. I don't think this is gender specific because my husband has experienced much the same kind of growing up, so to speak, as I have.




http://www.amazon.com/The-Betrayal-Bond ... 1558745262
Mind and mental events are concepts, mere postulations within the three realms of samsara Longchenpa .... A link to my Garden, Art and Foodie blog Scratch Living
User avatar
reddust
 
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:29 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby reddust » Fri Jan 03, 2014 3:32 am

Tenzin & Söpa wrote:Beautiful post, reddust, thanks for taking the time to share your story.
Thank you, I got a gratitude attack writing it :heart: I want to hug my Dharma teachers and my husband now!
Mind and mental events are concepts, mere postulations within the three realms of samsara Longchenpa .... A link to my Garden, Art and Foodie blog Scratch Living
User avatar
reddust
 
Posts: 761
Joined: Thu Nov 14, 2013 7:29 am
Location: Oregon

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby greentara » Fri Jan 03, 2014 4:05 am

Reddust, "Should I become a nun or stay a householder. With his help I decided to stay a householder. Sunim told me that Monks and Nuns have just as many attachments as householders, they are just different. Many who become Monks and Nuns are just as unhappy as us householders, but that is their path and their practice, they took vows. Also many of you talk about sexual relationships and desire in a marriage. There are many relationships that are non sexual and people live together as partners you would find in a traditional marriage minus the sex. This happens quiet often in more mature relationships. But it seems to be a growing phenomena in younger relationships as well. Do a search and you will pull up hundreds of non sexual dating sites"

Some interesting insights and concepts being discussed above, food for thought.
greentara
 
Posts: 917
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:03 am

Re: Marriage – a Dhamma point of view

Postby mandala » Fri Jan 03, 2014 5:50 pm

dharmagoat wrote:I choose to live on my own and have very few friends, not out of fear of relationships or social inadequacy, but because I prefer to spend my time alone in order to have the opportunity to do the things that I consider interesting and important, but have never appealed to friends or partners in the past. Although I (usually) actively avoid romantic relationships, I am always willing to make new friends, but because I rarely find myself in social situations, this seldom happens.

Becoming middle-aged and moving to the country has made this lifestyle more of a natural choice. A marriage-like relationship would now feel unnatural to me, even an extreme.


Your post really resonates with me, I'm in a very similar position.
Funnily enough, some friends and family seem to have the notion that my 'commitment-free' lifestyle is enviable and somehow more trouble-free than theirs - but going it alone isn't an easy path, IMO.
Sometimes I find it tough having noone to rely on or to offer support, or even just things like making me soup when I'm sick or even to take the damn bins out :tongue:
Then I get over it and go back to doing what I want..
User avatar
mandala
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 7:51 pm

Previous

Return to Dharma Stories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

>