Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: "Self"less acts

Expand Messages
  • wills_ghost_of_christmas_future
    The selfless act is for the benefit of the person you are performing it for, of course! If you help an old lady across the road, it is for her benefit. If you
    Message 1 of 4 , May 13, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      The selfless act is for the benefit of the person you are performing
      it for, of course!
      If you help an old lady across the road, it is for her benefit.
      If you share a sandwich with a hungry person, it is for their benefit.
      If you give all your money to the needy, it is for the benefit of the
      needy.

      We do this because we recognise that everyone is equally important,
      and since there is only one of us, and millions of other people - we
      must spend most of our time helping other people in order not to be
      selfish. Make sense?


      --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@y..., eveneon <no_reply@y...> wrote:
      > -- When you do things for others, it is for one of two reasons:
      > 1)because it makes you feel good (which is actually a
      selfish
      > reason)
      > or
      > 2)because you recognize that your ego(self) is not who you are.
      > Your actions are truely in the service of others. They are
      true
      > selfless actions because there is no "self" motivated to do
      > the action.
      >
      > But then this lead me to ask, "Who" is the selfless act for?
    • eveneon
      ... meditationsocietyofamerica@y..., wills_ghost_of_christmas_future ... performing ... benefit. ... the ... Yes, the benefit to the receiver of the selfless
      Message 2 of 4 , May 13, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In
        meditationsocietyofamerica@y..., "wills_ghost_of_christmas_future"
        <yahooaccount@s...> wrote:
        > The selfless act is for the benefit of the person you are
        performing
        > it for, of course!
        > If you help an old lady across the road, it is for her benefit.
        > If you share a sandwich with a hungry person, it is for their
        benefit.
        > If you give all your money to the needy, it is for the benefit of
        the
        > needy.

        Yes, the benefit to the receiver of the selfless act is obvious. But
        it is the motivation behind the person doing the selfless act that
        could be questioned.


        >
        > We do this because we recognise that everyone is equally important,
        > and since there is only one of us, and millions of other people -
        we
        > must spend most of our time helping other people in order not to be
        > selfish. Make sense?

        Doesn't this imply that the selfless action is actually for the person
        doing the act?


        My question was really more about the "who", the "ego". "Who" is
        doing the act (and why) and "who" is it for? If both the doer and
        the receiver of the act are existing in a space of egolessness, who
        is it for? I would say it is for no one.



        >
        >
        > --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@y..., eveneon <no_reply@y...>
        wrote:
        > > -- When you do things for others, it is for one of two reasons:
        > > 1)because it makes you feel good (which is actually a
        > selfish
        > > reason)
        > > or
        > > 2)because you recognize that your ego(self) is not who you
        are.
        > > Your actions are truely in the service of others. They are
        > true
        > > selfless actions because there is no "self" motivated to do
        > > the action.
        > >
        > > But then this lead me to ask, "Who" is the selfless act for?
      • wills_ghost_of_christmas_future
        ... My motivation is the fact I care about the other person, and they need help. Of course some people only help others if they think they can get something in
        Message 3 of 4 , May 26, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In meditationsocietyofamerica@y..., eveneon <no_reply@y...> wrote:
          > Yes, the benefit to the receiver of the selfless act is obvious.But
          > it is the motivation behind the person doing the selfless act that
          > could be questioned.

          My motivation is the fact I care about the other person, and they
          need help. Of course some people only help others if they think they
          can get something in return, but that in itself is not selfish.

          If someone only helped people in order to get something in return,
          but never actually tried to get it, then there is no external
          difference between their actions and truly selfless actions.



          > My question was really more about the "who", the "ego". "Who" is
          > doing the act (and why) and "who" is it for? If both the doer and
          > the receiver of the act are existing in a space of egolessness, who
          > is it for? I would say it is for no one.

          If someone doesn't have an ego, that doesn't mean they don't exist.
          All it means is that their actions are not dictated by their personal
          needs.
          If I help someone, I am not doing it for their ego, or my ego. I am
          helping them because they need help. I am helping the part of them
          that is *them* - their essence or soul, or whatever. The "good them".
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.