Isolation

The world frowns greatly for people to isolate. This is at least partly because people are social animals by nature and without the many the collective will suffer.

There comes a point in an individual's evolution, IMHO, where isolation is necessary. It hurts, bad. The brain, body, heart and mind all rebel against our survival instinct to belong to the group. Rejection and not being loved, approved and accepted hurt all the same. We seem to be hard wired this way.

In isolation, I believe greatest of self and character can be achieved though. For me, it has been a necessary dark night of the soul. I have had to face my helplessness and dependence on others. My pain was very deep but through acceptance I feel I have transformed my need for others into deep self love and understanding to a level where I can be alone and happy when necessary.

So doing I have also become a great person to be around with a cheerful charisma. Well of course not everybody thinks so but as I understand myself in a profound way I can also now understand others.

Isolation is healthy so long as we do it appropriately, but I think a joy and power through unity of people is far greater. This interdependent family joy is not always available or easy to come by though.

Bro Neo,

This story Into the Wild may interest you, as it is a story of a young man renouncing society and seeking to find himself. He gives his trust fund to OXFAM, burns his ID and all his money, then goes on his greatest journey. He goes into the wild and ultimately dies there; ironically of starvation. The film suggests that in the end he discovers that happiness is only possible when it is shared. I imagine a bit like a smile, is reflected back by another smile. Confirmation of the experience and of our innate need for one another.

My one profound thought that I can share, is that there is no greater feeling of being alone (isolation), then to actually be in the company of another practicing "detachment". That is is some thing that BKs, ex-BKs and their family perhaps have a Ph.D. in, which many do not fully understand in the mainstream society. This site is so crucial to the survival of many that need to work things out, understand their experience and continue on their journey ...

I do declare I am a social animal at heart!

Your volley ...

"Into the Wild" is a nice film by Sean Penn.

However, given that the man was only 24 years old, just finished University, and then decided to go on an Alaskan trek probably does not really show much about what he was really searching for, the most likely was simply just angry at his parents and wanted to get away as a lost son. The film seems to protray him as a rebellious heroic adventurer. It is also not known actually how he died whether from starvation or from eating poisonous grasses and weeds. However, the man did protray an intense ascetic personality.

There are stories of folks going into the wilderness, but eventually returning to find that society is where they belong. An example of this is Buddha himself. However, it seems not all folks make their way back.

I agree with both of ya.

Bansy,

You don't miss a beat!

However, given that the man was only 24 years old, just finished University, and then decided to go on an Alaskan trek probably does not really show much about what he was really searching for, the most likely was simply just angry at his parents and wanted to get away as a lost son.

My silent point, which you picked up on so quickly, is that many of the early Westerners were younger or about this age when they stumbled upon Gyan. So, in my humble opinion, they still had things to work out, then were presented with Destruction (a form of going out into the wilderness ... permanently), lost crucial time, and are now busy building their lives (the ones that left). If some had the information of failed predictions, would they have taken the journey? I say maybe, as some knew/know now and still continue on.

So, yes, this young man was very young, trying to sort out family issues (some that were very painful and some that were a "secret"), torn by the lies that families often keep, and just wanted to search for a meaningful outlet of self reliance. Some speculate as to whether he was suffering from mental illness? On going on such journeys, I imagine you have to be just a little different or say unique.

Now, let's go further on down the quest to find ones self or as Erikson wrote about the search for self-identity. We all search for self-identity. The reason Native Americans go on Vision Quests is the very topic Bro Neo started off with (or did I miss some thing here) although not via that aspect. Many that have gone into the spiritual journey often go on vision quests, to be alone and find or come to peace with where they are today. Most vision quests have some mode of supervision so that they don't have complications and then there is the ritual at the end of the vision quest to assess the meaning and to process the experience.

Some folks do this through extended therapy sessions, retreats and self exploration trips. There are many roads to ''you". History is filled others others that go off and search for their meaning, their quest. I say chart your own way, trust yourself and if lost ask for help.

Cheers

My one profound thought that I can share, is that there is no greater feeling of being alone (isolation), then to actually be in the company of another practicing "detachment".

I think I know what you mean. I have experienced it myself but this is not what I call detachment. My understanding/experience of true detachment is that it is something where one feels a lot of love but is left totally free: no condition, subtle or gross, no chain attached to it.

What we are talking about here is rather some kind of a disease, a suppression of feelings in the name of virtue, a total absence of love. I don't know so much about ex-BKs but as far as BKs are concerned, you're right: they must have a PH.D. in it. I mean it can be common not to be able to have love for everyone but when it comes to the BKs, despite all the courses and lectures they give on self-realization, they have a good specialty of fooling themselves by thinking they are being detached whilst they really simply do not know how to love.

I have been hurt more than once with this but it eventually made me strong and less dependent on others whilst determined not to stop being loving myself.

I believe detachment, told to bkers who were hurt in a serious way, is a welcome item. An easy way out not to feel anything anymore. It is impossible to have not any attachment to anything. Although it seems the way it should be (by BK knowledge), you still hurt sometimes and that is OK!

It is possible to take a healthy distance from things, but if one wants to be completely detached from children, or lokik family? That is a serious mental problem. (Says a lot about the family as far as i am concerned). What if someone really loves you one day? Dump it?? Because you are so good in being detached??

Well, maybe i never got hurt that bad, or i am just a strong personality taking a healthy distance and move on counting my blessings!

It's better to be alone that spend your time in the company of less enlightened people ... especially those that don't realise it.

I think one has to be careful not to project upon the whole of BK, or on the practise of non-attachment, what one might have experienced oneself at the hands of someone that did not know how to practise it. Or had their own issues. Or may be who just did not happen to like you any more ...

The bottom line is that a BK just cannot have relationships with a non-BK ... so much more interesting equations arise within the intentional communities of small BK centers and how attachments and distaste are handled in within them.

I prefer the Buddhist term "non-attachment" to the term detachment used by the BKs. But if someone is overly-attached, or even needy, then even a healthy non-attachment is going to be a painful and challenging mirror. I am met some incredibly willful needy people that little short of a fire axe would have been practise enough to use to detach from them.

And, let's be honest, what has the majority of humanity got going for it that is worth so much as to be attached, envious or full of desire about?

Yes, periods of isolation are essential to refine one's center ... and chill out unhealthy relationships.

I also agree that it is not possible to not be attached to anything, because it is in our nature to attach. It is said that the deepest desire of the soul is to merge, to unite, or to have Yoga with, to link.

That's why it is said that we should be attached to BapDada. It is not that we should not be attached to anything, but we should be attached to only one thing and that way we automatically detach from everything else.

And when in isolation it does not mean we should not do anything, but like the scientists they close themselves in silence of experiment and devote all their time and effort to something and great result comes.

Genius andrey. I am attached to me .

Perhaps is the secret to become a conqueror of attachment.

I prefer the Buddhist term "non-attachment" to the term detachment used by the BKs.

What is the Buddhist (or a more friendly term) of dying alive?