Now I realize that being a slave to inclinations is an evolutionary advantage for some people.
I don't know if it is an evolutionary advantage but just an advantage, for as long as it's advanced by enough energy.
Thank you for being kind. I am fine with the fact that my mom died, she got 86 and had a long life and she was, as far as I can tell, ready to die. I talk to her sometimes or think of her when things remind me, as in this dialogue with you. I like to hear her voice inside my mind when she spreads her words of wisdom or otherwise:)
It was a terrible book :D -lol! But I think it wouldn't have appeared as terrible as it did, for I was totally under the influence of the weekend, spent with my friends and feeling nevertheless lonely and despaired.
You are right, I already read "Siddhartha" from Hesse :)
I am very much aware of the translation issues and how misunderstood things can be. "Detachment" is one of the terms which can be interpreted differently. I learned within the studies of Buddhism to follow the origin of words and not attach emotion to those terms which help me studying a teaching. For me, it simply means not to attach myself too strongly to an identification, so when I lose it, this will not shatter my life. Negatively, it can be understood as "careless" or "heartless" while it means the opposite:)
It really goes against our Western understanding of helpfulness and support, where I would say we tend to be very self-sacrificing, constantly pushing ourselves too far, and on top of that pushing ourselves too far, demanding that others push themselves and go beyond their limits, when that has already been done and is only stressing everyone out unnecessarily.
It is rather counterproductive if, for example, I spend all my energy to help someone, they then experience no self-efficacy and I end up sick and exhausted. I call this "dumb".
I saw a movie about a buddhist apprentice who gave up his life in the monastery for the life of a villager.
Yes, thank you for the reminder! I saw that movie, too!
Do you have an explanation for this? I mean, this over-emphasis on the non-domestic? Can the male be understood as "spirit" and the female as "body"? But when I formulate it in this way, I want to take it back. LOL
RE: WRATH - Beyond the eye-for-an-eye principle