The Logic of Cherishing

    I sometimes wonder what is the most effective way to practice and learn respect for all living beings.  In his commentary on Shantideva's teachings, Uncommon Happiness: Way of the Compassionate Warrior, Dzigar Kongstrul Rinpoche recommends a practice of rejoicing in the happiness of other beings (mudita) as well as wanting others to be free of suffering. Interestingly, Rinpoche refers to the 'logic' of cherishing others when he remarks:

"Our tendency to cherish the self, protect the self, and be exclusively focused on the self can be changed with a simple and effective method. We remove our self as the focus of cherishing and protection, and replace the self with others. When we do this, we're not getting rid of cherishing. We're not getting rid of protecting--just changing the focus from our self and putting others first. The new cherishing is developed through logic and reasoning." (p.11)

Reading this passage of Rinpoche's book, I begin to wonder, is logic and reason powerful enough to shift the center away from one's self and toward others? One of the more interesting aspects of this argument is that the feelings of cherishing and protecting don't go away if I shift away from a self-focus. Instead, these habits of mind simply shift in orientation by fanning outward toward all beings. Rinpoche's argument is built on the faith that we can learn to cherish others as long as we have a basic ability to cherish our own bodies. Hence, Rinpoche remarks:

"This can be reasoned from cause and from effect. Just as we desire happiness, so does everyone else. Just as we desire freedom from suffering, so does everyone else--so why discriminate? The logic here is to make everyone who desires happiness important, everyone who desires freedom from suffering important, and therefore put everyone in the center of our cherishing and protecting." (p.12)

Rinpoche's argument interests me, because it contrasts with certain Western philosophic presentations I have read related to 'cherishing others'. Some philosophers, such as Kant and the deontologists, tend to see morals as a question of what is most reasonable from a disinterested, duty-bound perspective. Rather than including emotions, Kant tends to downplay the role of emotions in cherishing human (typically rational) beings as something that is 'empirical' and therefore not subject to reason. For Kant, it is by virtue of being a rational being that human beings should be treated as ends, not as means. A reasonable being, under this view, would not be swayed by emotions into accepting the principle of what a human being is.

Rinpoche takes a different approach in his discussion of Shantideva's Buddhism. Rather than focusing purely on what's right, he focuses on what orientation is most conducive to human happiness. If my orientation is centered only on cherishing one being (namely, my own), I will suffer anger, greed, jealousy, and other vexations in wanting to protect 'this body.'. But if I expand my orientation to cherishing all beings, there is simply no need to develop grasping and vexations. It is not that I have stopped protecting, cherishing or even loving. It is more that I have shifted to love all beings. I don't need to throw away my feelings of love or respect, only transmute and expand such emotions so that they don't  create situations of anger and greed.

Rinpoche (and Shantideva's) instructions admittedly take a lot of time and cultivation. It isn't easy, and can sometimes be hard to stay motivated. One way that I find helpful is to remind myself that the beings I see around me are in a single totality. They are simply not separate beings. But it is most important to give all beings space to be what they are. For example, if I expect myself to always have only kind of emotion (such as cherishing or protecting others), I often feel distanced from that view and pressured to change how I feel to suit that emotion. A different way would be to cherish whatever is happening in the moment, rather than projecting onto that moment an ideal.

Even in fictional literature, I find examples of writers who grapple with what it means to truly cherish life. In W. Somerset Maugham's short story, "The Back of Beyond", he writes about a very devoted husband who finds out that his wife had been having an affair with one of his best friends. The man complains of his wife's 'ingratitude' toward him. The main character, George, tries to reconcile the man to his wife by telling him not to expect gratitude from others, but simply "do good because it gives you pleasure." (p.85) I think it's important that no matter what, practitioners find an intrinsic enjoyment in doing some kind of giving. If it's not enjoyable, it becomes ungratifying and can lead to a sense of wanting or needing thanks from others. And I think one thing most important is to develop a curiosity: something that "takes human nature as you find it"  (p.87) rather than trying to fit human nature into a romantic ideal of what it should look like. .

Dzigar Kongtrul Rinpoche (2009), uncommon happiness: The Path of the Compassionate Warrior.. Hong Kong: Rangjung Yeshe Publications
    
Maugham, W. Somerset (1961), Collected Short Stories, Volume 4. London: Pan Books