Expert: Joe McSorley - 6/28/2005

Question
I've got two questions.

1. If we are to work toward an existence in which we do not "cling" to wordly things what can we say about love.  Love intuitively to me seems to be a positive force but it definately sets up a "clinging" to the one/ones we love that can cause suffering.  I find it hard to believe we should not love.  Thoughts?

2. Have you read the Celestine Prophecy by Redman?  It seems to have a very strong basis in Buddhism.  Do you think what he is saying makes good sense or is it a rip off of Buddhism to make money?

Thanks again,

Chuck

Answer
Hi Chuck,
 Although many might say the object of Buddhism is to not cling or to have desire these things miss the point. The object is to overcome the normal dualistic process of human thought.  Clinging is a process that happens after the dualistic thought process happens.  There must be an  ‘I' or perception of self for that self to cling to anything.  If you stop all clinging then you are still clinging to the idea of not clinging.  So the crux of it would be to overcome the normal mind to one that is free of simple dualistic discrimination.  It is the dualistic mind that holds the concepts of happiness; sadness, love and many and all thoughts but what are these things really? When we talk about love we assume there is a definition of love, that we know what it is.  This is easy to talk about what love is but in reality it is hard to define.  What is love?  When we talk about love we say it's caring, affection, compassion and longing but those things are those things, not love.  We use other words to describe love but what is love in and of its self?  People do things for love that are horrific while others are magnanimous yet both would claim its love.  Lust is often mistaken for love while others mistake devotion for love.  Love of spouse, child, country and music are all different things yet we call them all love.  We love someone and then find out they are not what we thought, a child molester or some other despicable thing, and then we suddenly don't love them; so what was happening here?  Do we ‘love' a person or the concept of the person, who we think they are?  This is the root of Buddhism, to know things as they are and not as projection.  So first one must realize what love is, as its self, and then you can talk about it in context with other ideas.   So Buddhism is not about non- attachment or not clinging but it is to ‘see things as they are' and to not be attached to our thoughts of what they are.  The attachment is to our egotistical interpretation of things is what needs to be overcome and not to be an unattached dispassionate being but one who is fully alive and living.  When you love a child it is with unatachment, you love the child for who they are and not what you want them to be.  This is unconditional and unattached.  As the child develops and ego and then stands against the parent then we love them as our child but have to muddle through the personality to get there.  We know what was or is underneath.  In adult life with don't see the other person ‘as they are' but as they present themselves to us.  We like them for our similarities and dislike them for our differences.  We love them for how we feel when we are with them but when this changes we fall ‘out ‘ of love.  This is a conditional, ego based love that is contingent to our attachment to our desires.  If you see the root of your own being then you see the root of all being, then you love others because you see them as yourself.  Here you are liberated from ego based pain and see things as they are.
 As far as the Celestine Prophecy goes, it just a new age nice platitudes book packaged for a modern audience to read.  It has no basis in history and is a work of fiction disguised as reality.  There are many books like this and will be many more in the future.  They take precepts from many places so they seem to make sense but they miss the heart of it all.  If I were going to read fantasy I'd read Lord of the Rings.  
 Take care,
         Joe