Am I feeling pity or compassion?
I'm confused. The 50+ year old nanny whom I hired to take care of my firstborn has just resigned a week ago. Before she left, I willingly gave her about 25% more than the salary we agreed upon. I also bought her some nice gifts for the lunar new year. I even told her to contact me if someday she need any (financial) help and not to tell anyone, including my wife. Until now, I'm still hoping she would contact me (not that I wish her to be in bad financial situation) because I really want to lighten her financial burden. So my two questions are: 1) am I feeling pity or compassion? I really want to help her more as she has take care of my baby so well. 2) is this an attachment? Sorry for my lack of basic understanding of Buddhism. Thank you. Btw, I'm 34
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
"And what is the treasure of generosity? There is the case of a disciple of the noble ones, his awareness cleansed of the stain of stinginess, living at home, freely generous, openhanded, delighting in being magnanimous, responsive to requests, delighting in the distribution of alms. This is called the treasure of generosity.
What is the proper way to foster generosity and gratitude?
I can see how generosity and gratitude are important as means to foster right resolve. But what if someone do good things sometimes due a sense of obligation, but also cause much harm to you? For example, this mother (https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/25143/i-want-to-leave-my-mother). Given that our resources and gains are limited, it is not much better to support the virtuous one rather than the unvirtuous?
And in the case of supporting the unvirtuous and unwise, how this would not contradict others teachings like "do not associate with fools (https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/2270/giving-up-bad-friends/23247#23247)" and "give a gift in a proper time (https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/23924/selfless-charity-to-poor-and-needy/23927#23927)"? (a unwise person would surely use a material gift unwisely causing harm for himself/herself and others).
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
Monks, these two people are hard to find in the world. Which two? The one who is first to do a kindness, and the one who is grateful for a kindness done and feels obligated to repay it. These two people are hard to find in the world."
A raw ranking (http://www.freesangha.com/forums/beginner's-buddhism/dana-(generosity-charity)-'abhidhamma-in-daily-life-'/msg90053/#msg90053) based on it, in regard of worthy (general, can differ in cases aside of Noble Ones):
- Ordinary beings
- Ordinary people
- Ordinary beings hungry, lacking existencial needs
- Normal friends and wordily fellows
- Normal elders
People of goodness:
- Wordily teachers
- Ones family and relatives
- Ones first goods, parents
- People keeping 5 precepts
- People keeping 8 pr.
- People keeping 10 precepts
- Homeless 10 precepts
- Samanera
- Young Bhikkhu
- Full Bhikkhu
- Thera
- Maha Thera
Ecxeled by innwardly qualities, case by case:
- wordlings
- Layperson following the training (still enjoys sensuality)
- Recluse/monastic following the training (still enjoying sensual pleasure)
- Layperson living the wholly life in full, following the Arahats
- Recluse/monastic living the wholly live full, following the Arahats
- Noble One 1. Path winner
- Fruit Winner..2, 3, 4 Patg winner
- Arahat
- Buddha
In regard of Noble Ones, Recluse excels Lay person.
- Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa -
He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart (http://zugangzureinsicht.org/html/ptf/dhamma/sacca/sacca4/samma-sankappo/index_en.html). [He thinks,] 'May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!' He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made pure in three ways by mental action."
Namo tassa bhagavato arahato sammā-sambuddhassa
Has done much
"Bhikkhus, these three persons have done much to a person. Which three? Bhikkhus, the person gone to whom this person takes refuge in the Enlightenment, in the Teaching and the Community of bhikkhus.
"Bhikkhus, the person gone to whom this person knows as it really is, this is unpleasant, this is the arising of unpleasantness, this is the cessation of unpleasantness and this is the path leading to the cessation of unpleasantness.
"Again, bhikkhus, the person gone to whom, this person destroys desires, releases the mind and released through wisdom, here and now abides having realized. Bhikkhus, these three persons have done much to this person.
"Bhikkhus, it is not possible that these three persons could be thoroughly repaid with gratitude, by this person revering him, attending on him, clasping hands towards him and honouring him with robes, morsel food, dwellings and medicinal requisites."
worthy to note that the treasure of real generosity is only gained by a person of integrity, e.g. comes after perfection of silas
Giving in this unencumbered way loosens the grip of greed and helps to develop non-attachment. Such giving also develops virtue and leads naturally to the next perfection, morality (sila).’
Perfect, not different, Fancis
Those Who Can Do Without Dana
There is a class of people who do not need to perform deeds of charity. They are the great yogis who strive earnestly to escape from samsara in the present existence. They are occupied full time in samatha and vipassana work. If they spend their time in the performance of Dana, it will only be a waster of time and effort. Dana is not necessary for them as they are fully intent on gaining liberation very soon, they must zealously practice meditation day and night. Once a Bhikkhu from Madalay who was always eager to perform Dana came to practice meditation under the guidance of Maha Gandhron Sayadaw who was our Preceptor. One morning the Sayadaw saw the Bhikkhu gathering flowers to offer the Buddha. The Sayadaw admonished the Bhikkhu saying, 'While undertaking meditation practices, be intent only on your practice, you may offer flowers later on."
At least, not as a demand or just to belittle but as a matter of generosity and compassion, Danilo, so that you may have more ease and more doors to good places open in future, to train youself in good conduct, is actually not respectfull, not praisworthy and possible for the most cases a hard hindrance to ask indirect, without reverence and yes of course in certain equal manner. So for normal and strict holding on secure ways, Danilo might not only get any useful answer but also be known, like many, as someone with less virtues not at all worthy of gifts.
Ven. Johann, I have read your answer and the thread in freesangha.com mentioned in it. A few doubts pop up.Quote from: Samana Johann in BSEworthy to note that the treasure of real generosity is only gained by a person of integrity, e.g. comes after perfection of silasQuote from: francis in freesangha.comGiving in this unencumbered way loosens the grip of greed and helps to develop non-attachment. Such giving also develops virtue and leads naturally to the next perfection, morality (sila).’Quote from: Samana Johann in freesangha.comPerfect, not different, Fancis
These statements seems to contradict each other. Is really important a strict order of what perfection comes first (sila before dana or dana before sila ?) or the order is merely a recommendation?
An Upside-down Basin (http://www.zugangzureinsicht.org/html/lib/thai/chah/insimpleterms_en.html)
Once we've abandoned doing evil, then even when we make merit only a bit at a time, there's still hope that our perfections will grow full. Like a basin set upright out in the open: Even if rain falls only a drop at a time, there's a chance that the basin will get full.
But if we make merit without abandoning evil, it's like putting a basin upside-down out in the open. When the rain falls it still lands on the bottom of the basin, but on the outside bottom, not on the inside. There's no way the water will fill the basin.
If really, yes. Someone dwelling heedful, meaning aside of really necessary (within right livelyhood: e.g. one living on given) doing Jhana has no need and duty toward giving outwardly. One doing not the duties of an almreceiver needs to do Dana, in what ever way, to fall not strong into debts and lose all merits (means to gain joy with existences). That is the reason why often monks are very "social" and generous ^-^, becoming step by step the slaves of their supporter... if not carefull. Some are simply not able yet to train in higher virtue, concentration and insight, and need to do a lot of Dana.Quote from: Abhidhamma in daily lifeThose Who Can Do Without Dana
There is a class of people who do not need to perform deeds of charity. They are the great yogis who strive earnestly to escape from samsara in the present existence. They are occupied full time in samatha and vipassana work. If they spend their time in the performance of Dana, it will only be a waster of time and effort. Dana is not necessary for them as they are fully intent on gaining liberation very soon, they must zealously practice meditation day and night. Once a Bhikkhu from Madalay who was always eager to perform Dana came to practice meditation under the guidance of Maha Gandhron Sayadaw who was our Preceptor. One morning the Sayadaw saw the Bhikkhu gathering flowers to offer the Buddha. The Sayadaw admonished the Bhikkhu saying, 'While undertaking meditation practices, be intent only on your practice, you may offer flowers later on."
This part seems to dispense the importance of dana declaring that meditation is enough as long as the practioner disposes of full time to meditate. Is this really correct? What about the gradual training and the other factors of Eightfold Noble Path?
Quote from: Samana Johann in BSEAt least, not as a demand or just to belittle but as a matter of generosity and compassion, Danilo, so that you may have more ease and more doors to good places open in future, to train youself in good conduct, is actually not respectfull, not praisworthy and possible for the most cases a hard hindrance to ask indirect, without reverence and yes of course in certain equal manner. So for normal and strict holding on secure ways, Danilo might not only get any useful answer but also be known, like many, as someone with less virtues not at all worthy of gifts.
I find this part a bit confusing. Not sure if I got it right.
Ven. Johann mean that is not praisworthy if I would be so strict regarding to whom should be worthy of my generosity (worrying about the amount of merit I would gain). But it would be praisworthy practice generosity undiscriminately and spontaneously without aiming the amount of merit to be gain.
Am I understood it correctly?
If really, yes. Someone dwelling heedful, meaning aside of really necessary (within right livelyhood: e.g. one living on given) doing Jhana has no need and duty toward giving outwardly. One doing not the duties of an almreceiver needs to do Dana, in what ever way, to fall not strong into debts and lose all merits (means to gain joy with existences). That is the reason why often monks are very "social" and generous ^-^, becoming step by step the slaves of their supporter... if not carefull. Some are simply not able yet to train in higher virtue, concentration and insight, and need to do a lot of Dana.
To answer in regard of lay people generally: Althought it is broadly understood so that it might be possible to practice without Dana as yet not on the highest livelihood, it's total impossible. Even 98%of monks are not really able to do without generosity, since often enough receive or take more willingly as needed. May it by accumulation of knowledge by not perfect means, for example, they need to share and teach their wealth in spiritual materials. So as long as there is something not needed carried, one needs to share to be able to carry it on.
That's a really importand and grave misunderstood matter, or better a dangerous zone of a lot of demerits and waste away of old. It's mostly justifyied by "there is no worthy" or even "I am actually more worthy, giving would be demeritiouse".
Not sure if this "soft" places rebuke was seen. My person saw that Nyom placed wise questions, mature questions, an thought to warn him not to fall into internets usual respectless ways, asking the crowd and demanding or hoping that a wise burdens himself by giving the requested: in sort, its not of good conduct to ask not direct but others while the origin is even in reach or present. That's disrespectful, yet sadly usual everywhere on internet. It's ok to ask into the group of equal, to find common opinion but if seeking seriouse advice, one should proper approach.
Wise would really not easy enter the normal zones on internet and actually, if thinking on rules even Bhikkhus would be bound, nearly impossible to ever meet wise ones. So inregard of: "may Danilo have most ease to access other worlds of real benefit", it was said, assuming that he understands and regards the "sharp" advice.
The way Danilo does here and now, is actually good, which point again to a circumstances that his nature is actually of better kind but by to much association with improper usuals adopted to "survive" in that kind of enviroment.
Atma (my person) guesses that Danilo appreciates advices even if very direct, of what is my persons kind (...of generosity and less care of win or lose personally in this regard) to bring it also into the topic of the further questions here.
May Nyom Danilo have enough patient and "forgiviness" with especially language and ways, so that he might be able to receive and possible dig further.
My person ends will end here for now, giving space for prove and reflections.
Anumodana
If really, yes. Someone dwelling heedful, meaning aside of really necessary (within right livelyhood: e.g. one living on given) doing Jhana has no need and duty toward giving outwardly. One doing not the duties of an almreceiver needs to do Dana, in what ever way, to fall not strong into debts and lose all merits (means to gain joy with existences). That is the reason why often monks are very "social" and generous ^-^, becoming step by step the slaves of their supporter... if not carefull. Some are simply not able yet to train in higher virtue, concentration and insight, and need to do a lot of Dana.
To answer in regard of lay people generally: Althought it is broadly understood so that it might be possible to practice without Dana as yet not on the highest livelihood, it's total impossible. Even 98%of monks are not really able to do without generosity, since often enough receive or take more willingly as needed. May it by accumulation of knowledge by not perfect means, for example, they need to share and teach their wealth in spiritual materials. So as long as there is something not needed carried, one needs to share to be able to carry it on.
That's a really importand and grave misunderstood matter, or better a dangerous zone of a lot of demerits and waste away of old. It's mostly justifyied by "there is no worthy" or even "I am actually more worthy, giving would be demeritiouse".
So the intention to donate counterbalance the tendency to cling which is created by volition and delight of consume. If one is always heedful, there is nothing to consume (unwise attention), thus no defilement will ever arise. Isn't this by itself full awakening?
Not sure if this "soft" places rebuke was seen. My person saw that Nyom placed wise questions, mature questions, an thought to warn him not to fall into internets usual respectless ways, asking the crowd and demanding or hoping that a wise burdens himself by giving the requested: in sort, its not of good conduct to ask not direct but others while the origin is even in reach or present. That's disrespectful, yet sadly usual everywhere on internet. It's ok to ask into the group of equal, to find common opinion but if seeking seriouse advice, one should proper approach.
Wise would really not easy enter the normal zones on internet and actually, if thinking on rules even Bhikkhus would be bound, nearly impossible to ever meet wise ones. So inregard of: "may Danilo have most ease to access other worlds of real benefit", it was said, assuming that he understands and regards the "sharp" advice.
The way Danilo does here and now, is actually good, which point again to a circumstances that his nature is actually of better kind but by to much association with improper usuals adopted to "survive" in that kind of enviroment.
Atma (my person) guesses that Danilo appreciates advices even if very direct, of what is my persons kind (...of generosity and less care of win or lose personally in this regard) to bring it also into the topic of the further questions here.
May Nyom Danilo have enough patient and "forgiviness" with especially language and ways, so that he might be able to receive and possible dig further.
My person ends will end here for now, giving space for prove and reflections.
Anumodana
I will surely take the advice in consideration. _/\_
But, I thought it was better to post the question in BSE because the number of accesses there is much higher than sangham.net, thus much more people would benefit reading the answers (especially regarding such topic like generosity, virtue and make merits which is neglected in the west as Ven. Johann already mentioned many times).
_/\_
by the way, what is "perfect virtue"?
_/\_