One of the best indicators that any action is Identity-free is the presence of True Equanimity. However, this is infrequent so the correct
approach must be to consider why Equanimity is not present. This is
accomplished by examining the presence of experiences of emotion, mental
passion or relief from the tension of confusion which reduce any potential
Equanimity to ashes.
We must
then consider if there has been harm or suffering caused to the body or mind of
any sentient creature. This is not as simple an exercise as one can imagine,
for one must consider if your speech has in any way been incorrect.
Have you said what should at that moment not be
said, or ommitted what indeed should be said? Has there been gossip or
disparagement?
All is not as simple as it appears, for one must
examine the way in which you make your living. Is your work really without
stain when you appear to be doing something quite innocent? Is it correct,
for example to sell makeup which encourages vanity or a toy that induces
addiction to violence? There are a thousand subtle traps.
We can sum this up by saying that one must
examine the Benevolent Affect present in every action, for an act of
Benevolence may not have the value of the Widow’s Mite.
Then there is an Attentiveness that is very
important. It is to examine one’s GLADNESS that another is correctly GLAD. Now this is quite different than responding
to the happiness of another to your action and indeed is so subtle that it will require a clear explanation in
the discourse on the practices.
We have
presented then the requirement of a clear examination of internal experiences
of:
The question then arises as to whether the
presence of COMPASSION should be examined. The answer is yes, but in a very special way, for the human creature
really has little experience with the presence of True Compassion, having been
“brainwashed” with mental and emotional ideas as to what compassion is.
What we must distinguish is the difference
between EMPATHY, which is produced by
cognitive error, which we must term SOCIAL CONDITIONED EMPATHY, and the NATURAL
EMPATHY of the human system.
We can perhaps understand the difference if we
consider in more detail the GLADNESS OF GLADNESS which is correctly experienced.
You will see that the gladness of the other in experiencing a correct objective
is not the same as your gladness, which is not related to their objective.
It would then best be described as DELIGHT in
their GLADNESS.
Similarly, NATURAL EMPATHY in the SUFFERING of
others is best described as a RESONANCE with the SUFFERING of others that does not
accompany them in their SUFFERING, but is centered upon the COGNITIVE wish that
their present suffering and future suffering be relieved.
We are now then in a position of being able to
close Pandora’s box.
Socially conditioned EQUANIMITY and BENEVOLENT
AFFECT are mentally conditioned and socially conditioned GLADNESS and
EMPATHY are emotionally conditioned.
Each, of course, are then expected to be externally
observable and the absence of this expression may bring social condemnation.
The correct and natural experiences of these
four, which are accompanied by natural unconditioned expression, are VISCERAL
EXPERIENCES, completely devoid of EMOTIONAL EXPERIENCES and without MENTAL CONTROL.
Each is accompanied by the Cognitive wish that
natural positive experiences should continue, that experiences of both emotional and mental
Suffering should never appear, and that emotional and mental Happiness should
cease, being replaced by natural AFFECT.
