Navigating Polarities

  Whenever there is a strong attachment or desire, there tends to be a polarity. I am convinced that language creates desire through strong polarities. During our Buddhist discussion group on Friday, we talked about the idea of how rhetoric tends to divide people into neat categories: either you are "with me" or "against me"; fight for "the people" as opposed to "those in power", and so on. These kinds of rhetoric reflect an us vs. them mentality, which can reinforce desires and suffering. Part of the process of looking into one's thoughts might consist of asking the question, "as opposed to what?" Are the stories we tell about what happens in life reinforcing absolutes? Or are these stories more about building bridges and befriending opposition?
   Polarity tends to create suffering on the inside. Although I believe that the opposition is in someone else, more often than not the opposition exists within me. If I am bothered by someone else's behavior and impute all kinds of reasons for their doing things, chances are that at one time or another I behaved in the same way. I am just having my chance to see my own behavior reflected in someone else. This is a bit of a hard teaching, but if I can relate to what I dislike in someone else to my own behavior, are there better reasons for looking at it? To give an example: someone jumps in front of me to catch the bus. I might feel irritated, thinking that the person is doing it on purpose to annoy me, but let's say that person were me. Are there other reasons for why they are behaving that way? Maybe that person is in a rush, or is just not being aware of the people around them because they are preoccupied, or are simply not in the mood to stand on the bus. If I think in this way, are these people any different from me? Deep down inside, they, like myself are striving to avoid suffering and be happy. Even when they may be behaving in a way that compromise the well being of others, maybe there are reasons for that as well. For example, they may have been let down by others in the past, so their mentality becomes about taking care of their own needs and not taking care of others'. But even then, this way of referring to the situation tends to polarize people. How do I know that they don't have loved ones that they cherish at home, school and work? So again, it's important to take a close look at the stories I construct around peoples' behavior.
   It's also important--or so I have found anyway--never to fall for the illusion that people do things "on purpose". There is no such thing as "on purpose". For example, a person might seem to have perfectly well formed, deliberated reasons for doing something, but these reasons are also based on conditions. People don't entirely act from reason alone: there are preconditioned desires operating there. A good example is seeing something fancy that I want to buy. I might rationalize that because this thing is on sale for "half price", I am getting a good deal and "saving money" by buying it. However, I am not realizing in that moment that I am still spending money by buying the thing. The fact that it is half price gives me the illusion that I am "saving money" by buying it. Here is an example of where one's reasons are really based on feelings. I feel as if something is benefiting me, but in fact it is only satisfying a feeling I have. But what controls that sense? Previous conditions have already been created which make the decision seem sensible to me.
    When we desire something, quite often we are under the illusion that there is something wonderful "over there" that we don't own in ourselves. We don't recognize that desires are in fact fleeting, and often lead to dissatisfaction even when we try to acquire them. Sometimes if a person is really aware of it, they will feel the pain of not having something that they want, and this can turn them away from that desire altogether. They will find that in fact the desire is so painful that its future satisfaction does not compensate for the pain of the present.