“That’s the method there,” the Blessed One said. “It’s just as the apprentice Medakathalika said to the teacher. ‘I will protect myself,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness be practised. ‘I will protect others,’ bhikkhus: thus should the establishments of mindfulness be practised. Protecting oneself, bhikkhus, one protects others; protecting others, one protects oneself.
“And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others."
Other people’s intentions can be apparent or not. If apparent, and negative- protecting oneself is important, as this is a natural outcome of having metta towards oneself. The person who doesn’t protect oneself has subtle aversion towards oneself, and can even sabotage oneself or be self destructive, or even suicidal.
We can think the other person has his or her share of defilements, and have compassion, but not get caught on the receiving end of those defilements. Or we can understand they have had a traumatic time growing up leading to being difficult personalities after they’ve grown up. Some people have more resources to live difficult personalities and that can be beneficial. However if it is not within one’s abilities to do so, it is better to step aside and know one’s limits, as otherwise you own defilements will be triggered and grow stronger, and the path to nibbana made longer.
There are also those instances we are in doubt about the other persons’s intentions- was it intentional, was it an accident etc. It is likely sometimes that we choose the negative intention as what actually happened (that is, be cynical) and carry on with that. Yet we would have to be able to read minds to know that. Often it is better to withdraw from getting sucked into the automatic assumption but stay with ‘not knowing’, until further evidence is found. It is better not to react negatively.
When someone’s intentions are positive, it would be good to know how that makes one feel. Does it increase craving or conceit, for example. Some might want to make promises but not deliver or have ulterior motives. Therefore it makes sense to have apparently pleasant intention with a pinch of salt- not cynicism but a bit of detachment- not getting too excited, with some equanimity. Also it is important and natural to be able to be happy with positive things so I don’t mean becoming emotionally numb to positive people/situations/objects etc.
These are all in the pathway to developing a mind of contentment, not dependent entirely on the external world, but more weighted to the happiness of the purity of the internal world, such as purity of sila, the joy of generosity and sukha of jhana/samadhi can bring.
Me too! Good point you also make when you ask if one’s own self-interest is aligned with things that are true. Very applicable questions which bring us to present moment clarity. Thank you.
Yes. So would you say that the key to avoiding these assumptions is developing a mind that doesn’t react to visual stimuli? In the sense of having a mindful equanimous outlook.
(I’m not saying I have that, but the concept is very nice)
Hi Aminah. I get what you are saying - perhaps all these forms of cynicism are always there in some form, as long as we’re not awakened, but our task is to move towards Right View rather than be upset or disgruntled by the consequential mind-states of ruminating on behaviour, which as in the case of Cambridge Analytica, seems to surprise everyone.
I think you are right to suggest something worthwhile/useful can be eked out of this though I don’t quite have the words for what it might be just at the moment.
Stu, I [re]read the Sedaka Sutta on your suggestion. I think there is some applicable wisdom there that, hopefully, will become more apparent to me on further reflection.
Perhaps it touches on it, yes. I do like the ‘let things be’ approach. I suppose the key is having the skill to know when to take this approach and when really to actually get involved.
Should we be developing kindness and weakening the cynicism or can they be mutually supportive?
They are mutually supportive.
The Buddha’s method transforms the cynicism as a “by product” as it where.
The dharma is notably “self-interested” in more than one meaning.
Not-self, as I understand it, is a expanded sense of who/what “the self” is. The enlightened view of self being almost unrecognizable from the former. Not-self meaning something like “a sense of self that very different from the one you hold now”.
The idea of a expanded sense of self is suggested by some lines of development in adult developmental psychology. (Robert Kegan’s socio-emotional development theories for example)
The EBT’s as I read them in translation seem to focus on the end of suffering first for one self. Am I reading this incorrectly?
The dharma seem seems to imply that the major challenge is skillfulness towards ending suffering rather than self interest. Being highly selfish, caring only for myself, does not seem to improve my chances for skillfulness. Perhaps a less comfortable implication/speculation is that kindness and unselfishness may do little to improve one’s skillfulness in finding a means of ending suffering.
In the more negative definitions of the word, cynical people seem to struggle mightily with their lack of skillfulness towards ending or reducing their own suffering. That’s the impression I got after listening to a couple of interviews of criminal psychopaths. With that understanding it becomes easier to have a degree of compassion or kindness even for the psychopath.
A self-interested person with “right view” might be the kindest person in the room. ( I assume here that this person with right view is making some progress on the path suggested by right view.)
