My Oregon softball obsession shows the pluses and minuses of attachment

For 35 years I belonged to an Eastern religion, Radha Soami Satsang Beas (RSSB), that was an offshoot of the broader Sant Mat movement. As I wrote about in 2013, RSSB had a decided renunciative focus, as contrasted with a life-affirming focus.

For about 35 years I was a member of an India-based organization headed up by a guru whose teachings were definitely in the renunciative camp.

The goal was to leave this physical world behind and find a better one in higher realms of reality. To do that, it was necessary to beware of the Five Deadly Foes, lust, anger, greed, attachment, egotism. So really serious stuff. Vows were taken of no sex outside of marriage, no use of alcohol or recreational drugs, no meat, fish, or eggs. 

Nothing wrong with all that if that's what you want in life. But I observed many instances of fellow initiates becoming rigid, moralistic, judgmental, holier-than-thou, and generally not pleasant to be around. Stifle normal urges and emotions and you've got a textbook renunciative theology.

Those Five Deadly Foes are basically the same as the six enemies of the mind in Hindu theology, which adds jealousy.

Moha, attachment, is described as want/desire, which definitely is my attitude when I watch the University of Oregon women's softball team compete in the current NCAA tournament that culminates in the Women's College World Series.

I wrote about the Oregon Ducks victory in the regional competition last weekend in "Oregon softball team was inspiring in winning regional over Stanford." (My granddaughter, who graduates from high school at the end of this month, will be attending the University of Oregon next fall, so this gives my Oregon sports obsession an extra burst.)

Now Oregon is hosting a super-regional. Their opponent is Liberty.

Yesterday Oregon beat Liberty in extra innings in an exciting fashion, the second game in a row that one of their players got a hit that earned them a "walkoff" win -- which means the team walked off the field with a victory after the hit because it led to their team leading and winning at the bottom of a final inning, either the 7th in a regular softball game or an extra inning if the game was tied after regulation.

I get really nervous when Oregon falls behind, especially when an error or bad play by the Ducks leads to runs being scored by the other team. I also get really happy when Oregon scores, and super happy when the team wins. Make that super duper happy if the win is dramatic, as it was last Sunday when Oregon trailed Stanford the entire game until a three-run walkoff home run gave them the victory.

I pump my fist in the air. I yell "Yes!" out loud if I'm by myself, silently inside my head if my wife is home (she's utterly uninterested in sports). For hours afterward, extending into the following day, I feel buoyant and optimistic. Everything may not be right with the world, but it definitely is in the little corner of the world that's my Oregon softball team obsession. 

Of course, the opposite is pretty much true if Oregon loses. A blowout doesn't disturb me as much as a narrow loss, because it is possible to think "If only..." with a one or two run victory by the other team. Thankfully, those losses don't bring me down emotionally to the same extent as the wins raise me up.

But there's no doubt that my attachment to having Oregon win affects my mood both positively and negatively. Which raises the question of whether I'd be better off not watching the Oregon softball team play at all. That way I'd avoid both the pleasure of victory and the agony of defeat. 

Well, my answer to that question is No way! I'd rather feel those ups and downs than not feel anything at all. And for me this is a general answer to the question of attachment. My attachment to my wife, better termed love, leads me to hurt when she hurts and to feel happy when she's happy. There's no way I'd prefer to be in some sort of permanent detached mental state where I didn't feel those emotions.

After starting to write this post earlier today, I just finished watching Oregon demolish Liberty 13-1 in the second game of the super regional. This wasn't a tense game for me, given the final score. Liberty did lead 1-0 after the first inning, but after that it was all Oregon. Watching the players celebrate made me feel happy also.

Without attachments and desire, life would barely be worth living. Sure, there are more important things than softball to be the object of desire, but I'll take my joys however they may appear. Now it's on to the Women's College World Series. I'll be glued to my television, feeling good when Oregon wins and bad when Oregon loses.

This might not be in accord with the teachings of RSSB and Hinduism. So what? Lust, anger, greed, attachment, egotism, and jealousy are natural aspects of being human. Godliness is an abstraction. I prefer concrete reality. 

Comments

[UM]

>> This might not be in accord with the teachings of RSSB and Hinduism. So what? Lust, anger, greed, attachment, egotism, and jealousy are natural aspects of being human. Godliness is an abstraction. I prefer concrete reality.<<

If one wants to ascent the mount Carmel as described by Saint John of the cross, one has to leave the valley behind, and in order to reach its peak one has to travel as "light" as possible.

Nobody is forced to take that journey. ...And .....there is no god that is interested in whether you do it or not,
NOR ....
Is there a God that does care whether you stuff yourself with animal food, intoxicating drink and drugs and enjoy the sexual pleasures of your liking. Let alone whether you fill your mind with memories and desires of the valley ... not at all he cannot care less, for heavens sake, why would he? He created you and these things himself .....[...for those that believe in a personal God]

BUT .. those that did climb the mountain successfully, over time found a safe route and way to follow in their footsteps.

AND .. As there is no God that is interested in what you do, nobody cares if you heed the words of these pioneers.

In order to be human, there nothing one needs to do and you are free to do with your life as it suits you ...and bear the consequences thereof.

Nobody should fool himself or others or be fooled by "glamourful succes stories" of OTHERS to take on the trip, if the pull to do so is not there ..a pull that "forces" you to do whatever is needed.

Why taking on that hardship of the ascend, if you can leasurely enjoy a softball match
that would be foolish

[Tej]

UM,
Nicely said.
But is it possible to have both, this world, the softball game, and the ascend, the more subtle realities?
Is it possible to enjoy both, the valley and the heights?
I quite resonate with the mystic Osho, who seemed to have taught that one could have it all, this world and the other.

[UM]

@ Tej

The answer that I can give, is only an personal opinion, as I am not an authority of sorts.

Yes it can.
It all depends on how a person is attached to the worldly pleasures.

In the west we have: some levels related to Christian spirituality.

- lay person
- oblate
- monk or nun in an order fe Trappists, Carthaginians
- recluse

They all are humans, all having the same human desires and needs but their focus is different ...for a recluse all these activities circle around is [burning] desire of divine communion.

There is nothing wrong IMO with people that have no other interest in the divine than to pray for the welfare of the world, their near and dear and themselves and otherwise try to live a moral live.

Writing this does reminds me of an evening session with the late MCS, during which an indian gentleman, obvious being a guest, asked whether he should educate his children Sant mat. To the great surprise of everybody present MCS with a very strong voice said ..."DEFINITELY ..NOT" and went on to say later ... BUT ... it is certainly the duty of the parents to inculcate in them[ the children] the spiritual values in life ...to be followed up with ...you can do that in any capcity that suits you ..he gave some examples in terms of sunday school, telling about nature etc etc.

Most of the time the meaning and value we attribute to life is related to the affairs of the world, the public domain , economy, ethics, politics, history, health care etc etc. all relate to humans as social- cultural beings.

Little attention, if at all is given to humans as natural beings..things that are addressed in let us say philosophical and spiritual narratives.

Most people, discover at the end of life, when we wake up from that cultural dream, hallucination, how they were lost in a movie almost all their days.

That too ..is alright.. what I wanted to stress is that almost nothing we do, think and feel the most part of our live is worth our precious attention in the way we do it .. as if our very existence depends on it

but maybe it is just an change of craving, grasping mentality into giving from ourselves freely to something we have chosen

I have read many Biographies over the recent years of well known spiritual practitioners and have come to the conclusion that they were not that much interested in teachings etc but they all loved what they practice and were willing and able out of that love to face the obstacles of life ..they were not fighting themselves ..they just loved what they did

The late MCS used to say that one should do neditation ..WITH LOVE AND DEVOTION

If you do not have it than do not do it...everybody knows the difference between food that is prepared with love and those who cook with a mental of necessity ..we have to do it, in order to stay alive, otherwise we would not do it, what a waste of time.

So, of course it can be done ... what matters is NOT what you get from it but what you give to it....If you cannot wash dishes with pleasure how can one meditate???

[UM]

>> .... .If you cannot wash dishes with pleasure how can one meditate???<<

hahaha ... have the machine doing it

and we, we have almost become machines.
How do I know?
It happened to me but you can also create it in a artificial way, not the same but it does help. Go to the cinema see to it that your phone wakes you ,... please do not use the sound function but something else ....than sit there, become aware of yourself, how you feel what you think, what you experience of your surroundings ..observe you fellow human beings, observe , observe .... what happens is a metaphor for how YOU live and all around you ..mesmerized by the "movie"... the mesmerizing outside cinema is deeper, its power is unimaginable

You cannot free yourselves with power, with effort ..you just do not have the strength

No crow can turn himself in an nightingale

It seems to me that Spence thinks it can and shouid be done ...hahaha
No offence Spence !!!

[sant64]

If there's anything more boring than the Sach Khand concept, it has to be watching girls' sports.

But does Sach Khand deserve to be labeled a consumption devoutly to NOT be wishes? It would seem so, given that it makes little sense to pine for a destiny where our disembodied selves exist without any of the pleasures of our earthly lives. How can such a state even be imagined?

Can Grok shed some light on this? Grok, why would anyone desire Sach Khand as their ultimate destiny?

Sach Khand, in Sikhism, is the ultimate spiritual realm, often described as the "Realm of Truth" or the eternal abode of God. It is considered the highest state of spiritual realization and union with the Divine, making it a desirable destiny for several reasons:

Union with the Divine: Sach Khand represents the ultimate goal of Sikh spirituality—complete oneness with Waheguru (God). It is a state of eternal bliss, free from the cycle of birth and death (samsara), where the soul merges with the Divine Truth.

Liberation from Ego: In Sach Khand, the ego (haumai) dissolves entirely. This liberation from self-centeredness allows the soul to experience pure consciousness and divine love, free from worldly attachments and suffering.

Eternal Peace and Bliss: It is described as a state of perfect peace, joy, and contentment, where the soul resides in harmony with the Divine Will (hukam). This contrasts with the temporary pleasures and pains of worldly existence.

Culmination of Spiritual Journey: Sikh teachings, particularly in the Guru Granth Sahib, outline a progressive spiritual journey through five khands (realms), with Sach Khand as the final destination. Reaching it signifies the completion of one’s spiritual evolution, living in truth, humility, and devotion.

Living in Divine Presence: In Sach Khand, the soul exists in the direct presence of God, experiencing boundless divine grace and love. This is seen as the ultimate fulfillment of human existence.

For Sikhs, attaining Sach Khand is desirable because it represents the purpose of life: to transcend worldly illusions, align with Divine Truth, and achieve eternal liberation. This is pursued through a life of meditation (Naam Simran), selfless service (seva), truthful living, and devotion to God, as taught by the Sikh Gurus.

-----------------------------

So that's the Sikh/Sant Mat boilerplate on heaven. Can I think of any arguments for why it's worth pursuing over the push pull drama of our lives? I'll take a few stabs at it:

1) We don't really enjoy drama, be it politics or passively watching a baseball game.

2) Drama isn't concrete reality. We know the baseball game isn't real in any way whatsoever. Similarly, our political opinions that the world is coming to an end? We clearly don't believe in them either, else we wouldn't be spending our time watching the fiction of baseball games.

3) There is nothing concretely real about any aspect of our lives. Except that we are leaving this plane in the not terribly distant future.

4) If this world is concretely real and to be enjoyed, then there's no need for the hundreds of books by various spiritual experts teaching us to let go of this supposed concrete reality. One should hold to one or the other worldview, but not both, for to hold to both would be a blatant contradiction.

5) The moments in life that bring us genuine happiness are based in love. To be precise, I suppose I should attempt to define such love, but I trust that with reflection, everyone will know what I mean.

6) Sach Khand is that love. That is what the path (and I don't mean just RSSB, but every religion) is about.

[sant64]

A ridiculous comedy ~ Ryokan

Where there is beauty, there is ugliness.
When something is right, something else is wrong.
Knowledge and ignorance depend on each other.
It has been like this since the beginning.
How could it be otherwise now?
Wanting to toss out one and hold onto the other
makes for a ridiculous comedy.
You must still deal with everything ever-changing,
even when you say it’s wonderful.

[Ron E.]

My understanding of non-attachment is to simply stop resisting reality, stop struggling with the way things are. This doesn’t mean sitting back and doing nothing but to work as appropriate with what’s arising at that moment. I don’t think non-attachment implies cutting oneself off from feelings and emotions.

With the instance of supporting a sports team, attachment could mean getting angry perhaps with the referee, sending hate mail to organisers, believing that your team was cheated or the match was thrown somehow etc. This is so much different to merely being a supporter where elation over a win or disappointment at a loss is quite natural and human.

Ideals and beliefs lend themselves to attachment leading one to assert that the vote was rigged, climate change is a hoax, covid was a political trick, the holocaust didn’t happen and so on. Where there is belief without facts it is often where there is an investment of the self, the ego and as we know, the self has a huge investment in maintain its illusory structure through such beliefs, views and opinions.

Impermanence, and emptiness are intricately linked with non-attachment. With the notion of emptiness, we are in the habit of investing people, nature and objects with intrinsic qualities they do not possess. In extreme cases we could invest in a celebrity or spiritual leader and feel devastated when they fall foul of expectations. With impermanence, we may baulk at the reality of aging and perhaps try to avoid the issue by having surgery, or invest in some belief in the survival of death.

Non-attachment then is more to do with recognising the many traps we fall into in trying to avoid ‘what is’ (life’s never-ending comings and goings, pains and pleasures) and little to do with normal human thoughts, emotions or passions in supporting a sports team, loving family along with the innumerable disappointments and satisfactions life brings to us.

[sant64]

The debate everyone's talking about -- Jordan Peterson vs. 25 atheists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwk5MPE_6zE

I have no problem admitting that Jordan gets his ass kicked by these atheists.

[Appreciative Reader]

Haha, yes, kind of sums it up. Softball on TV. Or a hot young wife, plus a whole bunch of hot young concubines on the side, with nary an eyebrow raised in censure at the excess, but on the contrary approving pats on the back from a doting father and faithful admiring subjects --- which was what was Sid's thing, back in the day. It's all good.

Except. When you actually see the insubstantiality of it all. The insubstantiality of the fun. And the insubstantiality of the self that's having fun. Then it all kind of ...fades away.

Agreed, that's no fun. Far more fun to immerse oneself in the softball. Or the other thing, whatever that may be in our specific case.

Also agreed, that expunction of desire, that kind of ...takes away the ...the engine, of the hundred and one things, meaningful and meaningless, big and small, that comprise life. Like I said, that's the part I struggle with, myself, that last. Even despite having walked only some of the way, not all of it.