Detachment and depression

March 10, 2000

In a message dated 03/10/2000 12:50:31 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Robert_Weil writes:

<<

In Elizabethan times, when the four humours were regarded as the science of

the time, the Divine Melancholia was regarded as a prelude to illumination.

Being in pain of the world was the precursor to breaking through to a

higher understanding of the nature of reality. It ushered in a realignment

to identification with an awareness beyond the pain.

>>

Yes! Caroline Myss and Caroline Casey have both written about this in

their books on paths to enlightenment. Myss looks at Chakra-Astrology-

Qabalah. Casey is a metaphysicist. I've spoken with both women and

they have helped millions, very valuable contributions they are making

to the world.

L*L*L bo

March 10, 2000

Hi the two of you !

)

Thanks for starting a very interesting thread

Gil and thanks for your great input, Rob and

TG.

On the whole, I very much agree with Rob,

as per usual LOL !

Just wanted to add:

On Fri, 10 Mar 2000 17:42:27 Robert Weil wrote:

>Lack of desire to live is not, ime, the same as detachment. The feeling of

>lack of pleasure in life is not the same as liberation from being involved

>in the emotions, and the thoughts that generate them.

That "detachment" and lack of desire

equals lack of emotions such as joy, sadness

and fear, is a very common notion in Westerners

when hearing about Eastern traditions.

When I was in high school, we used to laugh

about this concept a lot in religion class.

For how can one stay detached and

have no desires unless one is completely dead

inside and / or repressing all your emotional responses ?

I choose to "blame"

(bang, bang, bang, blame, blame, blame )

Western culture for the ease

with which this view appears in us.

In Western culture, having no desires does

equal a malfunctioning of the emotions or

worse, a repressing of the emotions.

My personal view is that "detachment" does not

mean we should not feel any emotions or

have no desires as such.

To me, "detachment" and "no desire" means not

pushing emotions away when they arise in us

and not hang

onto emotions when they are not there.

(Not easy by far. )

To me desireless means not to

act headlessly when a desire pops up

(I'm not good at this though, I tend to suppress

instead of dissipate. )

but take time to consider if its worth

acting on. A way for the really lazy, eh ?

You can liken it to a very picky young woman or

man with many suitors / suiteresses trying to

charm the young woman / man into talking to

them and going out with them.

But the picky young woman or man considers

every suitor's motives very carefully.

If they're only out for you know what, they're

instantly rejected.

More seriously,

the muslim mystic Sufi likened the soul to a

house and emotions like guests knocking on the

door to the house.

He said we should welcome each guest inside

and sweep after them when they left, open the

windows and let the wind cleanse the rooms.

This way of accepting emotions when they arise

is also called "surrender".

The concepts of detachment and surrender

are to me two sides of the same coin.

Detachment is the result of surrender and

surrender is the result of detachment.

Watching the flowers of emotions bud, bloom

and wither as they appear on the field inside,

does not to me feel to be quite the same

as being emotionally paralyzed by depression.

>It is easy to look down

>rfom the detached viewpoint and claim that "all" one has to do is detach

>one's identification with one's desires.

Yes, you're right, all too easy.

It becomes washing one's hands.

However, in priods, it may be necessary to

distance oneself of others' pain.

(and please don't ask me who the others'

are )

In one way:

relief workers cannot do the job they have

been set to do if they get overwhelmed by

the misery around them, so they must feel

they have somewhat detached from the

suffering around them.

However, it is not "nice" to be detached from

the suffering of others, but we all in some

respects are.

I kept thinking about this tody when eating lunch

and watching two friends trying to wrench

sympathy for his own situation from the other,

which was in no situation to be able to

give the sympathy he was asked for.

I was sitting there wondering: who is it

asking for sympathy ? Who is it sitting there

feeling sorry for himself and asking the other

to feel sorry for him too, not being able to see

the other's distress and not being able to

give sympathy.

I can only say, I do not know who is asking,

I'm not sure it is an individual.

>Being in pain of the world was the precursor to breaking through to a

>higher understanding of the nature of reality. It ushered in a realignment

>to identification with an awareness beyond the pain.

Well.... I do hope so. All too easy to get

mired down. Or rather, I suppose it depends

on degrees of freedom attained a lot.

>Whatever processes bring depression to a person, and they could be highly

>individual, one factor I keep finding is a sense of disempowerment. The

>person feels they cannot/should not/must not/does not deserve to achieve a

>heart's desire.

You describe the state of depression very well !

It is as with suicide: no one wants to die,

they just find it impossible to live.

Squeezed out of your own sense of hope by

circumstance / biology / whatever.

A horrible situation indeed.

>This is so different to the

>voluntary, gradual, letting go of attachment to joys and pleasures. "Let me

>*have* them first, then I'll let'em go!"

But does this voice ever stop asking for

more and more ? I do wonder about this.

I do understand your point, though, that to

be able to let go, one must be in a place

where one is felt that this is a choice,

not that one is forced.

>trying

>to get back to Eden, whatever. Cults work on this too. What would you do to

>regain Eden?

Yes, that has become another desire, a horse

someone else can put in front of their own

cart.

>That is why I am still a little sensitive to others' "inestimable

>certainties", as I call them. I see the liberation from this particular

>prison as a total permission to BE. A depressed person does not need a

>"pull yourself together" attitude, nor are they removed from spiritual

>discovery and awareness.

Yes ! No ! I don't know !

I only know emotions can be used as fuel for

something else.

>At a high level, nothing "really" matters. High indifference, as John C

>Lilly used to call it. But compassion is a magic tool, even if in the end

>it is another illusion. What a beautiful illusion!

My friend and I bought the latest record from

Prodigy at the same time, right when it

hit the shops.

We shared a flat and would both turn on the

same track and open the doors to our rooms,

so the loud noise from the thumping beats

could be synchronized throughout the flat.

I never forget it when my friend announced

ecstatically during one of these techno

sessions:

"My god, it sounds better the louder you turn

the volume up !" ))

Best regards,

Amanda.

Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com

March 10, 2000

>"Gill Collingwood" <gill

>

>hi y'all,

>

>Well, I guess after Rob Weil's welcome I'll hang around a while

>longer

>

>While I'm here I'd like to tie two threads together (sorry for the pun) -

>Tony's emphasis on detachment (A Whiff of Scent) and the

>discussion on mental illness and meds that Mike started.

>

>I tend to suffer from mild depression, and have had very severe

>depression in the past. One of the main symptoms is anhedonia,

>an inability to enjoy anything. Actually, in my case at least, it's

>more of a feeling that nothing will be enjoyable; I do actually enjoy

>things while they're happening but I can't 'look forward' to anything,

>so I end up not making plans to do anything that might be fun. This

>seems to be pretty much the same as the 'lack of desire' promoted

>by Tony. To me, this is something I have to fight, or lack of desire

>could turn into lack of desire to live...

>

>Is there a way for me to practice detachment which isn't going to

>make my life unlivable? Or do I need to find a different path?

>

>gill

>

Dear Gill,

So glad you are going to hang around with us, I have been the long time

recipient of your most excellent spiritual quotes and poetry and I must say you

have an eye for beauty and subtlety of expression.

I also know from my own long time experience with depression the sort of state

of mind you described. I believe that with a correct medical diagnoses and

treatment by medication, we are simply brought up to what passes for normal,

sort of an even footing with others. Science has now found genetic markers for

inheriting bipolar for example. This illness is already difficult enough without

carrying any burden of guilt that one has somehow caused the

condition or ought to be able to manage it without help.. Why not treat this in

exactly the manor you would treat if you had

some other handicapping condition..why be blind if glasses can help you to

see..like that?

If I may offer a point of view here on detachment and desires, I have learned

that the lack of desire to even live or participate fully in living, which

occurs in a depressed state is vastly different from detachment. One is in fact

disabled from practicing true detachment precisely because unable to freely

choose this path. There is no virtue in needless suffering either. That is more

correctly classified with the ignorance which promotes suffering. Looking at

causation is important here, Gill. Is the source or cause actually anything you

chose or have control over? Buddha was more about showing us how to let go of

our own self-created suffering and to discover the true cause of suffering. ..so

as to end it! If you know the cause, why keep it?

Lack of attachment may be thought of rather as a kind of freedom, a relaxed easy

come easy go equanimity, an openness to other's views and to choose appropriate

response to

whatever is here in the moment. Detachment is not a cold indifference to

suffering... that would be a lack of compassion! I do not think you need to

ignore symptoms of your illness, anymore than you would ignore a hurting,

injured child before you. There is nothing wrong with taking appropriate action

to the circumstances, it would be cruel not to act. Practicing detachment is not

to actually literally "do nothing" as it is to be free of attachment to

controlling outcomes of our actions in a manipulative way, insisting on the one

we want. Buddha also spoke of the risks of becoming overly attached to

emptiness, subsiding into nihilism, the other extreme of clinging.

Without a "desire" for liberation, who would practice anything? There is

sometimes a confusion of means with end states. The raft is needed to get to the

other shore and then may be discarded when one is ready, able and willing and

not before. Someone made this cart before the horse analogy about this same

insight. Detachment is a very useful, skillful means..when correctly understood

and used for what it is meant to do. Perhaps some more exploration of the

concept would be helpful.

I hear what Annette is saying about drug companies profits, yet overlooking the

correct diagnoses in her

mother's case does not justify that people do not need medicines. More than half

the people suffering from depression are still not getting treatment. Drugs have

saved my life, my sanity and helped immeasurably to improve the quality of my

life. They can be adjusted to the severity or mildness of your depression, tho I

seriously question if not wanting to make any plans or to imagine pleasure from

activities is mild. I have 17 years of experience with this under my belt, and I

have learned how in many ways I am my own worst enemy when it comes to judging

what I can handle and how severe it really is. Overcoming denial and becoming

100% truthful when talking to my doctor took years. Becoming undepressed makes

me more capable of doing the spiritual work, it is not a substitute for it. The

image of blissed out zombies on tranquilizers is left over from long ago, the

valium decade. A person who does not "need" antidepresssants will simply

experience no major reaction to them, no lift in their mood. I think it is

important to remove barriers to seeking treatment. Wheww.. off my soapbox.

With love,

Glo

March 10, 2000

Hi Gill,

Glad to see you here!

>While I'm here I'd like to tie two threads together (sorry for the pun) -

>Tony's emphasis on detachment (A Whiff of Scent) and the

>discussion on mental illness and meds that Mike started.

>

>I tend to suffer from mild depression, and have had very severe

>depression in the past. One of the main symptoms is anhedonia,

>an inability to enjoy anything. Actually, in my case at least, it's

>more of a feeling that nothing will be enjoyable; I do actually enjoy

>things while they're happening but I can't 'look forward' to anything,

>so I end up not making plans to do anything that might be fun.

I'm glad your depression is mild enough that it doesn't actually prevent

you from enjoying yourself. I can understand how, with a low-level

depression, you don't make plans because at the time you feel that you

won't enjoy yourself. Even if your mind tells you that you do enjoy

yourself when you do something, that doesn't always change how you feel.

I used to have a chronic illness known as myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) or

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS), and I was sometimes depressed. My

depression was caused by the physical illness, by inflammation in the brain

and spine (that's what encephalomyelitis means). Some ME people even have

punctate lesions - holes - in the brain, which are not permanent but may

come and go. At first when I was depressed, I looked for the cause of it

and settled on something in my life at the time. But then I realized that

I wasn't depressed _about_ anything! - just depressed. When I had a

relapse and was sicker, I was depressed. And all I had to do was wait it

out... as my physical condition improved, so did the depression... and

when the relapse was over, the depression was gone. If you look hard

enough, you can always find something in your life that you might be

depressed about, but it doesn't always work that way. Sometimes the

depression comes first... and then you pin it on something external.

I have a small suggestion. How about making a list of things you enjoy?

Every time you enjoy yourself, add to the list... the date and what it was

you enjoyed doing. If the list begins to look as if there are one or two

things that you always enjoy, maybe that will help you in making plans.

Or... could you decide that it's good to do things on the spur of the

moment... when you feel like it? No planning necessary. Look at the

movie ads, and if there's something you'd like to see, just say, "Let's go

to the movie... right now!" Or "Let's go out to dinner... now!" Or

whatever you do enjoy.

Did you know that chocolate or coffee or red pepper will make you feel good

for a little while? They cause the release of endorphins... the

"feel-good" chemicals... in the brain. Even smelling an open can of pure

chocolate or coffee will do it.

They say exercise also causes the release of endorphins. I know when

you're feeling down, it isn't easy to push yourself to exercise. Is there

some kind of music you like that has a good beat to it? Maybe you could

just put on some music... and if you begin to feel like moving, stand up

and move with the beat... you can dance yourself into an endorphin high!

))

Some people feel like there's something wrong with taking medicine for

depression. But if you told those people that they needed more calcium or

more potassium, they wouldn't think there was anything wrong with taking

minerals. If I gave them an herbal tea and said their bodies needed it,

they probably would think that was all right. Many of our medicines are

made from herbs and minerals... I can't see any difference... if the body

needs something, why not take it?

>This

>seems to be pretty much the same as the 'lack of desire' promoted

>by Tony.

You know, sometimes the books are talking about what you should do to reach

a higher level temporarily... in meditation... and we take it to mean

that we're supposed to live that way all the time! A misunderstanding.

When I teach meditation (Raja Yoga), I teach people how to completely rise

above the level of emotions... completely withdraw attention from all

astral/emotional stuff. And we meditate... and I bring them back down...

back into the mental body... back into the emotional body... back into

the physical body. I certainly _don't_ tell them they should never have

feelings.

>To me, this is something I have to fight, or lack of desire

>could turn into lack of desire to live...

You're quite right! People need healthy emotional bodies just as much as

they need healthy physical bodies. Desire is not a bad word. If you want

to help someone, is that bad? Of course not. Do you think Mother

Teresa didn't want anything? I'm glad she did... and glad that Einstein

wanted to do something... and Jonas Salk... and Martin Luther King Jr...

The healthy use of desire is important for making things happen. True

white magic... add some desire and stir! ))))

I'll send you a copy of Lynea Weatherly's 10 hand positions for clearing

the various fear-based or negative emotions. They are not a one-time cure

and may need to be repeated at other times, but they are very effective and

something you can do easily and immediately when you need to. (If anyone

else would like to have the hand positions, drop me a private email.)

>Is there a way for me to practice detachment which isn't going to

>make my life unlivable?

Detachment doesn't mean having no feelings or emotions... It means not

being attached... tied... to some particular emotion or pleasure or way

of doing something... not being _hung up_ on anything. If you're hung

up on something, then you've got karmic stuff that is blocking the free

flow of your energies. If there's something you want very much... can't

do without it... you may have a hang-up... a block. If there's something

that always upsets you... or makes you angry, you may have a block. The

trick is to stop and ask yourself: why? Why do I _care_ so much about

that? What does it relate to in my memories? When did I first feel that

way? And maybe you can understand the block better and how deep it goes.

And then you can clear it, get rid of it... there are various methods to

do that.

My Mom used to have an extreme reaction to men with long hair. When she

saw one on TV, she would say loudly, "Go cut your hair, buster!" I might

not have cared much for some guy's long, stringy hair, but it didn't upset

me. Live and let live. I used to say, "Why do you _care_, Mom?" She

didn't know... she just did. Karmic stuff... who knows where it came

from?

You may know someone that you have to talk carefully with... you know not

to mention certain topics because he'll be upset or angry if you do. So

you recognize that he's got a hang-up and you don't want to trigger it...

it's a block, and it's blocking the free flow of his energies.

A person can be attached to being detached, too. ) If he has a very

strong reaction to any emotion in himself or in others... or to any

behavior he considers "attached"... then he's hung up on being detached.

It's karmic stuff... that is, it's the result of past actions and

reactions... habit patterns... and it's blocking the free flow of his

energies.

It's okay to have emotions... let them come and go... in a free flow. If

you get hung up on any of them, then you've found something to clear.

The man with real detachment has no buttons left to push. Whatever comes,

comes... and goes. If it's enjoyable, that's good. If it's unpleasant,

that's okay too. If he finds a banquet in front of him, that's good. If

he finds some bread and water, that's good. If sex is there, that's good.

If sex isn't there, that's good. What can harm such a man? You know the

expression, "like water off a duck's back"? )

And it's certainly all right to enjoy this beautiful world and the miracle

of incarnation. You are a walking miracle! Every leaf is a miracle! What

man can make such a thing? Enjoy!

I wish I could give you a statue of Shiva Nataraja... Dancing Shiva.

Nietzsche said he could believe only in a god who dances. This whole

world is the dance of Shiva!

>Or do I need to find a different path?

What is your path, Gill?

>Harsha:

>Dr. Lee Sannella wrote on Kundalini and psychosis in his book

>in the 1970s. Dharma knows about that book and maybe can give us a

>reference.

Kundalini psychosis is not your problem, Gill. Not to worry. This is

getting kinda long, so I'll answer that separately.

Live long and dance!

Love,

Dharma

March 11, 2000

Dear Gill,

You asked:

>Is there a way for me to practice detachment which isn't going to

>make my life unlivable? Or do I need to find a different path?

~~(M)

The practice of detachment cannot but make one's life unlivable. That is,

not if one takes it seriously and really commits oneself to it. It must

lead to despair, simply because the practicing of detachment is a part of

the false/samsaric distortion.

Detachment is not the opposite of attachment. The opposite of attachment is

understanding, insight and clarity into the mechanisms of attachment. And

here we do dot have to look any further than the separate self-sense. In

its desparate quest to find the wholeness from which it feels itself

separate and separated, the self-sense cannot but search for things to which

it can attach itself so that it does not experience the anguish of its own

condition so acutely. So, through the act of identification, this self

attaches itself to just about anything, be it religioin, the guru, money,

status, ideals, the spiritual path, persons etc etc. This is the dilemma of

the reality of the separate state. In and of itself,it can never be whole,

so it deludes itself into wholeness by identifying with all these objects.

And identification brings in its wake the necessity of attachment.

So for the separate self-sense to start a practice of detachment is based

on an uninspected view of the matter. It tries to correct the error, by

committing another error. J. Krishnamurti often used the term : One

fragment of the mind tyrinising another fragment of the mind.". This is

what takes place when detachment is practiced while attachment is of

absolute importance to the self. While caught in the self, the practicing

of detachment cannot be other than to be seen by this self, as an injustice

and an insult .

The wise approach to the fact of attachment is to understand the necessity

of the I of its impulse towards identification and therefore attachment.

Such clarity and insight alone will relieve the being from the false

practice of attachment, and not the deluded attempt by the I to solve the

problem by creating an unsubstantiated opposite, and then enters the

hopeless field of trying to break down this thing through sheer force.

The truely detached position is the result, not of force, but of careful and

meticulous self-observation and progressive self-transcendence.

Love

Moller

Gill Collingwood <gill

< >

10 March 2000 03:24