Barry Richman,
Berkeley, California
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dear Peter Ralston,
Here are two questions:
1. You have said you facilitate others discovering truth for themselves. However, if there is such a thing as delusion, or whatever word we might use to express a false experience as the truth, how can I distinguish between delusion and truth? (In the case of physical experience, it seems relatively simple. If I am certain I can fly through the air like a bird, I might easily persuade myself otherwise by jumping off a cliff. On the other hand, that might just be a rapidly terminated experience of flying. Ontologically, I have trouble coming up with a good test. Especially since we know that in contemplation intensives, for example, we generate some very compelling delusions to avoid whatever it is wants avoiding. So how about a little guidance in distinguishing truth from delusion.)
2. Does compassion have a place in your teaching? If so what is its place? If not, why not? Without making the slightest claim that I'm capable of it, I'll define compassion as an authentic caring for every other thing than myself that exists. Maybe myself too.
Barry
Barry,
1. Discerning between true and false is never an easy task, especially when we look for absolutes. One significant obstacle, however, is to stand behind the argument that we do not or cannot know the truth, and so make no movement in any direction at all. This, I believe, is a mistake. It is useful to make the distinction of "direction" and move in the direction of what's true as far as is discernible.
Call an apple an apple. If you're lying about something, stop. If you can speak more honestly, do. Admit when something is just a belief rather than actual experience. Practices such as these move us so far from where we would otherwise be, the question of absolute truth can become a silly abstraction. Regarding absolutes, we need to understand that we do not know what they are, and yet we must still remain open to the possibility of experiencing what they are.
In considering what is true, one danger is familiarity. We have so much background and dogma built up, upon which assumptions abound, that we reflexively call something true simply because it is familiar and has been accepted as true. (For example, it is widely accepted that the use of muscular strength is the only way to physical power, but Cheng Hsin contradicts that notion.)
Looking to our feelings to distinguish "true" may or may not be an accurate test either. It all depends on what bases the feeling. Rationality, common sense, perceptive sensitivity, can all be useful to create a starting point to discern true from false. But they can also fail us. We must continually investigate, digging up assumptions. Separating from personal bias, value or threat is always a good idea and usually furthers our efforts to make distinctions in what is true and what is not. If none of this works to clarify what's true, then I guess the question must remain open.
On the other hand, in some cases it's not a matter of something being "true" or "not true," it is a matter ofmaking a decision or taking a stand.
Lastly, sometimes the truth is simply "I don't know." This is not a defect or sign of disrepair, it is the truth.
2. Regarding your question about compassion:
I think the place to start is your definition. It may be an "ideal" or ultimate description of compassion, but it might be too selfless and too absolute for being a useful distinction. If, on the other hand, compassion shows up as a genuine commitment to another's welfare or growth (perhaps"empowerment") then to answer your question, yes. Notice how the word "commitment" implies action, not merely a wish or feelings of empathy. Without action, the sentiment of compassion is rather useless to others, isn't it? Can it be called compassion when one sits by and merely desires good things for others or simply feels sad when others fail to make realwhat's empowering for them? Am I suggesting that we make the personal growth of every other being our business, or be arrogant enough to think we know what's good for others? Not really. But when appropriate or requested, perhaps a practical compassion is to take action in relation to another'sempowerment. This is a constant principle within the Cheng Hsin work.
Peter Ralston
More Info
