It’s shallow and offensive to suggest that we selfishly only miss people because of the times we’ve had with them. With your dog, don’t you miss knowing that you always had someone in your corner, just as one example? Losing a human is much worse, and I say that as someone who has loved and lost many animals. I miss the comfort my husband’s presence gave me. I miss the things he would’ve taught me that now he won’t. I miss seeing what he’ll do with the rest of his life or even the rest of his day. I’m with Zeldar*. Get back to us when you’ve lost a human. Your experience here is extremely limited so your speculation is insulting.
*That was a completely tone-deaf comment to Zeldar, Nava.
It’s likely that she was in my corner, or maybe I just projected that onto an animal. I mean I can’t know how she truly feels. But the dog itself is a body. Do I miss the body? OR the less tangible concepts like caring, excitedness, the features. If she wasn’t cute would I love her? I don’t know,but it would mean that I like cuteness and not her. It’s like the example in the paragraph with the mother, you love “care” or the “idea” of it, not the actual human for if she mistreated you then you wouldn’t feel then same way. You fall in love with traits or ideas but not the actual human, if you did then it wouldn’t matter what traits they have.
It was hard to accept that for me but the more that I thought about it the less I could deny it being true in some regard. It still hurts, but if I did fall in love with the person then their traits wouldn’t matter, but I know that’s not true or at least I can’t deny it.
But the thing is that if you loved the person or the dog then it wouldn’t matter what they were like, but like in the case with the mother where if she was cruel you wouldn’t like her it shows that you like the idea of care or kindness, not the human.
Exactly which means you like care and kindness not the person. If you loved the person then it doesn’t matter how they act. It’s like loving the times you had with people and not the person themselves.
If you feel empathy, you miss those you care about whether they are still in your life providing you happiness, or they are not.
My oldest daughter is now in college far away. Sure, it would make me happy to have her close by, but it makes me happier knowing she is happier where she’s at.
My parents and grandparents are long gone. Their antics provided me with many happy times. But, it makes me happiest knowing my antics provided them with more happy than sad times.
I’ve had many pets in my life. I often think back at the happy times I’ve had with them over the past 60 years. But, I also think about their lives. Did they enjoy their relatively short lives? To this day it would hurt me to think although they enriched my life, their lives were…meh. But, I don’t believe that’s the case. It makes me happy to believe I was a factor in making their lives happier. It would make me sad to think they would have been happier with someone else.
…well, there were two hamsters I had as a child that probably would have been happier with someone else. One got stepped on and killed by my mom when I left his cage door open (she didn’t squash him on purpose…I don’t think). Another got squeezed to death by my 2 year old nephew (I think he did it on purpose). I still feel bad for those little guys.
I’ve got much to be unhappy about in my current circumstances, but it makes me happy to think back at the both the happy times others provided to me, and the happy times I provided to them. On balance, I’m a happy guy.
If you explore your feelings I believe most of you will realize that you miss the times you’ve had with people as well as the people (and animals).
Well a Buddhist site said it so it must be the truth, especially since the reasoning seems sound. That you don’t miss them, you just want more good times or other times in general. You are attached to the times you had not the person.
It’s possible to love somebody conditionally, but that doesn’t mean that it’s impossible to love unconditionally.
In actual fact, there’s pretty obviously a continuum here, as evinced by examples of people putting up with some bad behavior but not past a ‘breaking point’. Your position is that the breaking point shows that people only care about the behavior, but the fact that people persist through some bad behavior flatly proves you wrong.
Your homework assignment is naming the specific fallacy that has rooted itself in your thinking, and explaining why it’s causing you to blindly accept “sound reasoning” that is handily disproven by casual observation of reality.
You have not disproven it, if anything you just reinforce it.
Sure that is one component but the argument is still strong in that you love the bits but not the person. If you loved the person then the bits and aspects they have wouldn’t matter. The things about them are still just pieces, like me saying I miss my dog stamping her feet means I miss the act, not her. It’s the same with people,you miss the pieces but these are not “them” because there is no “self” or core aspect that you are loving which endures moment to moment. You love the abstract things currently present: beauty, humor, these can be anyone (which would explain what he meant by fickle).
I’m sorry but I just haven’t seen anyone take his argument down and not reinforce it by accident. Calling it nonsense is a lazy way to turn away from something you don’t want to hear. Granted it’s not something I want to hear either because it shattered what I believed love to be.
Which school of Buddhism, as a matter of interest?
As I’m sure you know, there are many different schools of Buddhism, which have different beliefs, practices, and even different scriptures. Perhaps there is one school of Buddhist thought that believes that, but others would strongly dispute it. It’s not enough to say ‘Buddhism’ as though it’s one single belief set. It’s similar to all the various divisions and sects of Christianity.
The main schools of Buddhism are Theravada, Mahayana, and Vajrayana, but there are many sub-schools with different beliefs.
You say ‘a Buddhist site’, but which particular brand of Buddhist site? Do all other schools of Buddhism agree with what is said there? Which particular Buddhist belief system do you take to be ‘the truth’?