Is love an attachment?

A forum for discussion of Buddhist ethics.
Post Reply
boris07003
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:45 am

Is love an attachment?

Post by boris07003 »

I'm seeking an answer to this question. I purposely decided to place it here in the forum for ethical conduct.
It is rather obvious that if one loves somebody (be that a spouse, a child or a parent) one has an attachment in the sense that absence of that person brings a dis-ease or a discomfort. But that is dukkha for the person himself. What about the obligations that the person has to the people he loves?
When Siddharta left his palace to seek his path to nirvana, he stopped at the room, where his wife and his baby son were sleeping. He abandoned them, but he abandoned them in them in the palace, not exactly in the position of destitute.
Most of us if we are to leave our loved ones to search for the "truth", would not leave them in the palace. But even that is not an issue. For the most part, it would not even have to be a material destitute. People depend on us emotionally, spiritually, mentally. So abandonment will cause the suffering to others.
What about the precept not to cause any harm to any living being?
How to resolve this? :namaste:
User avatar
Wayfarer
Former staff member
Posts: 5150
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: AU

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by Wayfarer »

Greetings and welcome to DharmaWheel.

Yours is actually a very relevant and deep question! Here's an interesting fact - the Buddha's son was named 'Rāhula' - which can be translated as 'fetter'. That says something about the Buddhist attitude to family ties. (It might also be noted that according to Buddhist literature, Rāhula later became a bhikkhu.)

Many people have commented, especially in Western culture, that Siddartha (as he was then) might be accused of being uncaring or irresponsible, by abandoning wife and son to seek for spiritual liberation. One response is, would it be considered selfish if he had been conscripted to fight in a just war, to prevent his homeland from being overrun by a hostile army? I don't think that would be considered selfish, but as a justifiable self-sacrifice; to do that isn't to leave home for personal benefit or gain, but for a greater good. There's a sense in which the Buddha's leaving was like that: he wasn't seeking fame and fortune, or a change of circumstances, but victory over the cycle of birth-and-death, which required total dedication and also great sacrifice. So his motivation was entirely altruistic and not self-seeking. In a sense, his family can be seen as contributing to that sacrifice.

I think as far as the general question of attachment and compassion for others - again, a very deep and delicate issue. Overall Buddhism is not as highly oriented around family as some other traditions, notably Christianity and Judaism, for which family is central; Buddhism did start out as as a renunciate path. But even in those cultures, there have always been those who feel a calling to a life dedicated to pursuit of spiritual truths. Often this is very difficult, often it requires sacrifice on all sides. And often it doesn't come to a successful fruition too. So there's no really easy answers there.

I think, speaking as a married Western practitioner of Buddhism, my response would be that I am quite able, indeed obliged, to maintain loving family relationships with kith and kin. In my case, I couldn't justify leaving my family for spiritual pursuits (beyond going on retreat from time to time, although the last one was a long while ago!) But I can envisage renunciation or joining a spiritual order being the correct course of action for some, if they really had that calling and were determined to see it through. Whether that means 'abandonment' would depend on how you went about it; and in any case, I don't think it's the kind of thing which happens often.

Another point is, to focus on a kind of 'householder practice', which means, in family relationships, to avoid co-dependencies and to be the best person (spouse or partner) you can be; treat home and married life as a facet of the path and try your best to act accordingly.
'Only practice with no gaining idea' ~ Suzuki Roshi
User avatar
seeker242
Posts: 2092
Joined: Sat Mar 17, 2012 2:50 pm
Location: South Florida, USA

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by seeker242 »

boris07003 wrote: Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:17 am How to resolve this? :namaste:
He went to get enlightenment and he did thereby ending all of their suffering. I would not consider that to be "causing harm", quite the opposite!

Is there a problem with a father leaving to go abroad and get money to send back to his family? Most people do not consider that to be "abandoning their family" but supporting it. Yet, the Buddha did the same thing. The only difference really is what he went to get is ten thousand times more valuable than money, and sent that back. The first is no problem but the second is? Why? That doesn't make sense!
One should not kill any living being, nor cause it to be killed, nor should one incite any other to kill. Do never injure any being, whether strong or weak, in this entire universe!
User avatar
Könchok Thrinley
Former staff member
Posts: 3275
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2015 11:18 am
Location: He/Him from EU

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by Könchok Thrinley »

I think we are forgetting that although he left them he left them as a crown prince and a mother of a crown prince. That is a pretty good position to be in. But otherwise what Seeker has written is probably the best.
“Observing samaya involves to remain inseparable from the union of wisdom and compassion at all times, to sustain mindfulness, and to put into practice the guru’s instructions”. Garchen Rinpoche

For those who do virtuous actions,
goodness is what comes to pass.
For those who do non-virtuous actions,
that becomes suffering indeed.

- Arya Sanghata Sutra
User avatar
Grigoris
Former staff member
Posts: 21938
Joined: Fri May 14, 2010 9:27 pm
Location: Greece

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by Grigoris »

boris07003 wrote: Sun Jan 13, 2019 2:17 am I'm seeking an answer to this question. I purposely decided to place it here in the forum for ethical conduct.
It is rather obvious that if one loves somebody (be that a spouse, a child or a parent) one has an attachment in the sense that absence of that person brings a dis-ease or a discomfort. But that is dukkha for the person himself. What about the obligations that the person has to the people he loves?
When Siddharta left his palace to seek his path to nirvana, he stopped at the room, where his wife and his baby son were sleeping. He abandoned them, but he abandoned them in them in the palace, not exactly in the position of destitute.
Most of us if we are to leave our loved ones to search for the "truth", would not leave them in the palace. But even that is not an issue. For the most part, it would not even have to be a material destitute. People depend on us emotionally, spiritually, mentally. So abandonment will cause the suffering to others.
What about the precept not to cause any harm to any living being?
How to resolve this? :namaste:
Rahula later became a disciple of the Buddha and achieved Arhathood.

Yasodhara also ordained after Rahula and attained Athathood.

What does that tell you about love?

As for the Buddha's obligations: Brahmanic law allows a husband to become an ascetic if his parents, wife and children are provided for.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jeff H
Posts: 1020
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 8:56 pm
Location: Vermont, USA

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by Jeff H »

Love is all about the other and attachment is all about the self. They are polar opposites. Relationships in the conventional world are always a mixture of those two.

We make commitments in conventional life. Some of them can and should be reconsidered and possibly abandoned. But particular care is called for regarding commitments to other living beings that entail significant consequences for them.

I left my family in my late twenties. It was not for religious reasons, I was just selfish. I had grown up some by the time I met my present wife and I made a genuine commitment to her. Years after that, at age 59, I discovered Buddhism and I’ve been quite dedicated in my practice for 12 years now.

The desire to radically change one's circumstances is certainly necessary in some cases, but my personal and observed experience is that far more often it’s simply selfish, or else fantasy thinking.

I have commitments to my wife and to Buddhism. My Buddhist practice tells me I need to recognize the emptiness of my self, and my marriage tells me I need to adjust the love/attachment balance as much in favor of love as I can. There is no conflict; the two commitments have similar short-term goals for this life.

I think that those who are karmically ready for the monastery or the cave will have the circumstances that make it possible and irrefutably obvious to them. The rest of us are still preparing and we need to start where we are.
”In chapter 6 Shantideva” wrote:102. I should not be irritated, saying,
“They are obstacles to my good deeds.”
For is not patience the supreme austerity,
And should I not abide by this?

103. And if I fail to practice patience,
Hindered by my own shortcomings,
I myself create impediments
To merit’s causes, yet so close at hand.

105. The beggars who arrive at proper times
Are not an obstacle to generosity.
We cannot say that those who give the vows
Are hindrances to ordination!
Where now is my mind engaged? - Shantideva
boris07003
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:45 am

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by boris07003 »

Thank you, everyone, for your answers. If I may summarize them, to be sure I understood you correctly:
Siddharta, the future Buddha, left his family to help others, including his own family. Therefore he was not really abandoning them, but leaving to find the path for everyone to achieve the enlightenment.
I have two questions about that:
1 At the time when he left, did he know that was his purpose? I might not understand the story correctly, but I think he left to search for the "greater truth" and as a result, he found the path for everyone.
2 If the search for the path to the enlightenment was his purpose and once he achieved it, what is the reason for all bhikkhu and bhikkhunī to leave their households? Once we know the path, there is no longer any reason to search for it, is it?
Thank you again for your efforts.
:namaste:
User avatar
well wisher
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:57 am

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by well wisher »

There are many different Buddhist schools and method with different explanations to your answer.
My beliefs and guesses are below based on my tradition , which not everyone might not agree with.
I do not believe in pre-destiny, and that each one of us in in control of our own fate, and that enlightenment is in fact achievable by every single one of us, if practiced diligently and correctly.

1. I believe Shakyamuni Buddah himself does not know his own purpose or destiny ahead of time, but he found the path to true enlightenment and liberation only after he witnessed the 4 signs of impermanence (life,aging,sickeness,death) and much struggles on the extreme ascetic path (which led to nothing). Then he bravely taught it to his Sangha, and the teaching has spread still even to today.

2. The answer would really depends on exactly how you would define and measure full enlightenment.
For me, I think a good starting point is to reduce then cessation of fetters and negative qualities (like excessive attachments / aversions / delusions) ). But some will insist highest full form of enlightenment include omniscience and psychic powers, etc.
Therefore I believe becoming a bhikkhu /bhikkhunī really helps a lot of people to pursue full enlightenment in this lifetime, because it greatly aids in cutting down on worldly desires and attachment, forcing yourself to a more suitable environment to practice the path.
But one can get a similar taste in mediation retreats and "temporary monasticism", so it is really up to you. I believe very diligent and earnest lay-persons can achieve near the same levels as a diligent bhikkhu /bhikkhunī.
-------
Shakamuni Buiddah was a teacher from thousands of years ago, and I think it is quite unfortunate for us that he himself did not write down the sutras & manuals or even his own bibliography,
But then again paper and writing might not have existed from the ancient times, and there might be good reasons and factors on why he did not do so.
Maybe to allow more freedom in the path, and allow each one of us sentient being to find our own Buddha-hood?
Very open to one's own interpretation indeed!
User avatar
well wisher
Posts: 436
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 3:57 am

Re: Is love an attachment?

Post by well wisher »

Logical theory below:
I read somewhere out in the internet that one of the core buddhist doctrine something like "all conditioned and conditional existence" is like suffering. Conditioned without one's own control.

So reverse that, then maybe UNCONDITIONAL LOVE is the highest grade and purest type of love there is!
Love without any attachment nor bodily clinging, thus without any drawbacks or downsides.

Its like how you may wish unconditional love for your own parents, your own family and friends, etc, and wish the same back.

This reminds me of Metta , akin to unconditional loving-kindness to all sentient beings and wishing for all's liberation against samsara and sufferings! :namaste:
Post Reply

Return to “Ethical Conduct”