[Lesson 5] Wary of attachement

Having considered the responses here I feel that the concept of "right attachment" I presented is simply being discussed as "attachment". This looses something of my meaning; and makes the second question I brought forward more difficult to discuss. But I will take the liberty of making a statement about attachment itself, which you should feel free to disagree with; and then press on to discuss the second question.

Statement: In answer to my question, "do we think there are "right" attachments", I would say the consensus is "yes"; under the premise that there must be some attachments in order for us to be wary of them; and we would make none at all if wariness was the only attitude we held towards attachments. But for my second question, having accepted that attachment is a necessity, and "right" attachment, under that umbrella, is also possible, let me provide an example which draws on the points made here, so you know I have indeed been reading your writings. My intent is not to misrepresent anyone; though this may occur. My example is about attachment to people.

Partner and I have committed to working our happiness out together, forever, with no qualifiers. This is a common decision made by people who marry; but it's not always an easy decision to stick to - health, mental or physical, can lead to instances of toxicity and abuse (Arisaig). Disloyalty may occur (Serenity). Blame, hate, and anxiety are indeed not infrequently seen, even in the best of relationships (Carlos). Instances of resentment can occur because dependence is frequently necessary. (MadHatter).

In "being wary" I am taking care to avoid mishap or harm; dangers or problems; with thought and attention. However these things come to relationships simply because they "are"; and also essentially because they "are dynamic" - I can't consider myself into a state where problems won't occur in a relationship. I can reduce some by being wary; but I can't prevent, say and accident which would leave one of us disabled.

I suppose the question is perhaps better phrased as a statement which I am currently exploring; then no-one will feel I am attributing it to them or that I am speaking for the temple: "I believe certain "right" attachments (i.e. we've already determined that attachment can be ok; we've done all our being wary of it within this moment, and the attachment itself is "sound") should be cultivated; developed; as it takes an active effort to maintain an attachment to one who is momentarily being spiteful, abusive, or disloyal". A further statement; "I believe a community should honour or praise publicly "right" attachment" - this being on the basis that it's not always an easy road to walk; and it's positive to be able to walk it together.

The alternative I can see is that I should "Be wary of your attachment to wariness", which might well be right! :laugh: With an eye out for danger all the time, we're going to see it! http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1068/p7290 There's a need to separate the act of being wary from any fear that might cause to arise!

I suppose the question is perhaps better phrased as a statement which I am currently exploring; then no-one will feel I am attributing it to them or that I am speaking for the temple: "I believe certain "right" attachments (i.e. we've already determined that attachment can be ok; we've done all our being wary of it within this moment, and the attachment itself is "sound") should be cultivated; developed; as it takes an active effort to maintain an attachment to one who is momentarily being spiteful, abusive, or disloyal". A further statement; "I believe a community should honour or praise publicly "right" attachment" - this being on the basis that it's not always an easy road to walk; and it's positive to be able to walk it together.

That kind of attachment , which i consider more a commitment , is only possible when there is trust. You cannot expect someone to hang on to something , toxic , damaging , disloyal , disabling. When you commit to something you have to have trust you will survive this and that you are able to contribute in a way that is building up that trust that is needed. When you said yes to your partner , you did expect it to be forever , you know you can trust it , you see it every day , its face , the way it moves , the way it looks at you , the things it does for you. You cannot possibly compare that to an online enviroment as this or other forum based communities where you never even speak to some individuals in my opinion. But maybe i completely am missing the point , please enlighten me?

Serenity wrote: That kind of attachment , which i consider more a commitment , is only possible when there is trust. You cannot expect someone to hang on to something , toxic , damaging , disloyal , disabling. When you commit to something you have to have trust you will survive this and that you are able to contribute in a way that is building up that trust that is needed. When you said yes to your partner , you did expect it to be forever , you know you can trust it , you see it every day , its face , the way it moves , the way it looks at you , the things it does for you. You cannot possibly compare that to an online enviroment as this or other forum based communities where you never even speak to some individuals in my opinion. But maybe i completely am missing the point , please enlighten me?

I don't think Twigga was comparing an intimate relationship sort of attachment with an attachment to a community, much less to a specific sort of online community such as ours. The two serve very different needs in a person's life. One would hope that levels of commitment should be very different between the two. I haven't responded in this thread because I haven't come up with a sufficiently clear way to state my sense that when we talk about "wariness" in this context, we may be talking about "expectations" instead.

I don't think Twigga was comparing an intimate relationship sort of attachment with an attachment to a community, much less to a specific sort of online community such as ours. The two serve very different needs in a person's life.

Hence my request to Twigga to enlighten me , the specific request to tell me if that was what she meant , the commitments serve different needs in a persons life indeed. If you dont mind i await her answer before i go into how you interpret what i said to her, no offense..

Ah, my apologies. I had believed this to be an open discussion.

Atticus wrote: Ah, my apologies. I had believed this to be an open discussion.

No apologies needed , i just find it confusing for myself when others enterprit or talk for others , i would rather wait on what she has to say * big smilieface* :laugh: