Meeting Obligations with Right Effort

Today is January 1, a time I review my intentions for the next year (New Year's Resolutions).  A resolution I thought about recently was, "How can I increase my integrity by meeting my commitments and obligations?"

The solution is a paradox.  For most people reading this, it is impossible to improve in this task by increasing effort in commitment to obligations.  This is because increasing such effort only increases the number of commitments and obligations with no possible end. 

When someone “enables” another person, it is because one person has taken on an obligation that belongs to the other person and therefore he or she is over-doing while the other person is under-doing.  In addition, the other person is deprived of the opportunity to accept responsibility, leaving them increasingly dependent.  It is called co-dependency, when one person is unwilling to let the other person accept his or her responsibility due to an emotional over-involvement.  (As in the case when one would feel guilty if he or she required the other to suffer the consequences of his or her choice.)  One is co-dependent to the extent that he or she sees the the other person's under-do as an opportunity to over-do, to avoid feeling guilty about the other's plight (result of Karma), which of course is totally due to the other person’s conduct (such as a habit of under-doing or doing wrong actions).  No amount of over-doing or enabling (by someone else) will resolve this issue and inevitably over-doing/enabling (by someone else) only contributes to more under-doing or wrong action on the part of the other.

Even in the case were there is no co-dependency operating, this same dynamic (if I over-do, someone else is likely to be in the position of under-doing) is at work. This could be the situation when one fails to delegate appropriately or when one simply volunteers for more than can be handled.

It was suggested earlier that for most of us reading here, it is not possible to increase commitment to obligations as a solution.  It is assumed that if you are reading this you are open to insight and strive for a life of integrity. Therefore you are probably already exerting right effort, but may still be having difficulty.  If this is the case, it is suggested that the problem may be related to not setting boundaries on the obligations accepted.

Engaging in more dilegent effort to meet obligations is (perhaps) what we have been trying without success. Increasing the commitment to work harder at obligations usually results only in accumulating more obligations that cannot be fully accomplished. However, there is at least a partial solution.

The key to meeting obligations is appropriate boundaries.  If one only accepts those obligations that one actually owns, it is more likely "right effort" will accomplish these.  When one accepts obligations that actually belong to others, there is no end to the cycle of accepting more and more obligation, because the others may begin or continue to expect this. With so many things that need to be done in the world, there is an endless supply of obligations that can never be fully met.

Summary:  The key to meeting commitments is to only accept those that are actually yours, by maintaining appropriate boundaries.  Accept only commitments and obligations that are appropriate, by saying “No” when it is needed.  Then you can extend right effort to accomplish these appropriate obligations. Avoid taking on another’s obligations because this diminishes the other by placing him or her in the position of not doing his or her fair share. 

If you think others might like this article submit it to StumbleUpon by clicking Submit.

Lojong 31) Do not strike at weakness (Don't criticize belief, love, trust, etc.)

6. Commitments (21-36)

31) Do not strike at weakness (Don't criticize belief, love, trust, etc.)

I posted this Lojong as a Twitter a few days ago and ever since then it has been returning to me for contemplation. My assessment is that I need to pay more attention to this slogan.

We all have different tendencies, weaknesses, and blind spots. I believe I have been striking at belief. I appreciate the rational analysis of Buddhism, but just as important is a commitment to compassionate action. I can rationally analyze this, but it is also simply a belief I hold. Just as I have many beliefs, and others may hold all sorts of beliefs. I hope to remember Lojong #2 about all of these things.

Belief is a crucial component in many spirtual practices. (Duh....) But actually, I have many connections to spiritual experiences in which I am not commited to belief. I experience Chi, Chakras, Tantra, mystery of the Higher Power, etc., but I still am mostly in an "it was as if ..." when I later recall what happened. The universe is so vast and my understanding so feeble, I can only remain open to "that could be so, and I will never know for sure."  And hopefully, with a genuine attitude of respect and awe.

But back to the point of this Lojong: I judge that I have been overly insistant that others engage in the same rational analysis that I prefer or else I judge them to be lacking in insight or having a barrier to enlightenment.

It is merely my preference that we all acknowledge when these beliefs are ... well, beliefs. (And the same is true for me about judgments; my preference is that we all admit when "it" is a judgment.) As soon as that happens, I am more likely to be "disarmed" of my judgments about their position, statements, etc. My goal is to reach this point of being disarmed without requiring anything of the other. It is not necessary that others meet my expectations in any way.  And others "deserve" my compassion without conditions.

My interpretation of this slogan is that it equally applies to love, trust, faith, and all of the other things that are not measured so easily (even with my best behavior analysis techniques!)

I intend to allow others to enjoy their beliefs, love, trust, etc., just as I enjoy mine.

If you think others might like this article submit it to StumbleUpon by clicking Submit.

Lojong 29) Don't malign others. (Do not gossip either good or bad.)

6. Commitments (21-36)

29) Don't malign others. (Do not gossip either good or bad.)

My Twitter post from practicaldharma was stated as: 29) Don't malign others. (Do not gossip either good or bad. Even talking about someone's good traits, sets the occasion for negative gossip)

So what is there to talk about. I could talk about my stuff or other people's stuff, but this only reinforces my attachment to those things. I think it is possible to talk with others about social connections, without it being in the form of gossip. I can tell when my talk begins to slide toward maligning others, but I have a harder time catching it before it gets to that point. That is why some talk about others, even if it starts out "good" has the potential to slide into maligning someone.

I think the key for me is to maintain a positive outlook on all others and their motivations. If I assume good motives and innocent actions on the behalf of others, I am less likely to slip into maligning anyone. My conversation naturally, flows to other content about the issue I'm discussing as opposed to the personality, motives, interests, etc, of others.

I find this particularly challenging when it relates to certain political figures, for example. I confess, I have said some bad things about former dictator and war criminal (... whoops, I mean former President) George Bush. You notice, I caught myself before I went off on a rant.

What should we say about individuals like Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Mao Tse-Tung, etc? Should I assume their motives where good.  E.g. "He was just trying to eliminate terrorism the way he thought was right?".

Is the following quote contradictory to Lojong 29):

"Evils that befall the world are not nearly so often caused by bad men, as they are by good men who are silent when an opinion must be voiced."

Det. Steve Thomas Harris
Quoted by Lawrence Schiller in Perfect Murder, Perfect Town (1999)
ISBN: 9780061096969

I wonder where this quote originally came from?

Lojong 29 is a challenge, but in everyday life and with our casual acquaintances; it is easier to see its merit.

If you think others might like this article submit it to StumbleUpon by clicking Submit.

Lojong 32.) Don't transfer the Ox's burden to a cow. (Don't shift responsibility)

6. Commitments (21-36)

32) Don't transfer the Ox's burden to a cow. (Don't shift responsibility)

This saying reminds us to take responsibility for our feelings, words, and actions.  It is about not making excuses.  Instead we should face up to the truth.  To the extent that we engage in excuse making we create another barrier to seeing reality clearly.  At one level this saying is about straight talk, so that I simply tell the truth, but it is also about owning my feelings and judgments (about others). 

Do we know when a thought we have (or statement we make) is a simple statement of fact and when it is a judgment, colored by our prejudices, feels, or culture?  My judgment is this is an area that requires significant awareness and mindfulness, so we don't "transfer the Ox's burden to the cow".

In the collection, The Best of Buddhist Writing (2008), edited by Melvin McLeod, the first essay is "Meeting the Chinese in St. Paul" by Natalie Goldberg.  It is a personal story, so it is about Ms. Goldberg's understanding and insight, that she obtained from a particular Zen koan.  The full reference for the source of the koan can be found in the essay.

The koan goes something like this. 

One day Yanguan called to his attendant, "Bring me the rhinoceros fan."

The attendant said, "The fan is broken."

Yanguan said, "If the fan is broken, then bring me back the rhinoceros!"

The attendant had no reply.

Ms. Goldberg has an intricate and detailed personal understanding of what this koan means to her.  (I don't get how she comes up with it, but I suppose it is her personal truth.)

I would like to suggest the meaning of the koan is similar to Lojong saying 32.  That is, Yanguan did not ask his attendant for a report on the status of the fan.  He asked the attendant to bring him the fan.  Instead of bringing the fan, the attendant made an excuse "The fan is broken."  Yanguan "busts" the attendant on his failure to be in integrity, by saying, "... then bring me back the rhinoceros!"

How often do we make an excuse for not accomplishing something we have an agreement to do, by making some (lame) excuse.  In the koan, the response from the attendant that would have integrity and honesty, would be to bring the master the fan and perhaps say, "I see it is broken, what else can I offer you."

Remember, "Don't transfer the Ox's burden to a cow."  Stay in integrity, by owning your feelings, judgments, and actions.  Don't make excuses, that are additional blinders to seeing reality.

If you think others might like this article submit it to StumbleUpon by clicking Submit.