Bodhisattva ethical restraints: Auxiliary vow 35

• Auxiliary vows 35-46 are to eliminate obstacles to the morality of benefiting others. Abandon:

• 35. Not helping those who are in need.

Again, we begin by rejoicing at our fortune to be here. Rejoicing in our fortune doesn’t mean that it’s going to be easy. Having good fortune and a situation being easy are different things. For example, to encounter the Dharma we need certain causes and conditions, so we have a lot of good fortune in that we’ve accumulated those. But when we meet the Dharma, actually immersing ourselves in it, learning it and practicing it is not necessarily easy because it presses all of our buttons. And when our buttons are pressed all of our alarms go off. So, learning to work with our buttons and the alarms that go off and not freaking out when that happens is very much a part of our Dharma practice. It’s very much a part of having a healthy life actually, because if we go nuts every time our buttons are pushed, we’re going to have a really hard time in our lives. 

Even generating bodhicitta can be a button-pusher because we think of being of great benefit to all living beings and then all sorts of doubts and fears and so forth can arise. But if we hang in there, go through them and use those doubts and fears to understand how our mind thinks, and then to release all sorts of unrealistic and unbeneficial thoughts and assumptions, then we can really get somewhere and gain a lot of clarity and compassion. With that kind of thought and really seeking the long-term benefit of self and others, let us listen and discuss the bodhisattva precepts.

Why the Dharma pushes our buttons

I often tell people that if what I say just goes down real easily, then I haven’t been very successful. Because the Dharma does push our buttons. Why does it push our buttons? Because our mind is filled with delusions and afflictions and the Dharma is the opposite of the delusions and the afflictions. But when we’re attached to our own pre-conceptions and assumptions then we don’t like anything or anybody that contradicts them. If we’re attached to ice cream and somebody says that it is high in fat and gives you bad cholesterol, we don’t like hearing that. Even if we know it’s true we will find all sorts of reasons to tell that person that what they’re saying is wrong. 

The same happens in the Dharma. We love our attachments; we even love our resentment because it’s part of us: “It’s who I am. If I give it up I won’t know who I am.” We’re so used to being jealous or arrogant or full of doubt or full of fear that if something is presented as an antidote to that, one part of our mind is interested but another part of our mind goes, “Hum, I don’t know. This is brainwashing.” We come up with all sorts of reasons why the Dharma is wrong or not good for you or something like that. I remember years ago somebody told me, “Oh, my family told me I was getting brainwashed.” We started talking and we both agreed, “Well actually, our brains need some washing. This is good. I need some brainwashing. I need to get rid of my anger and resentment. This is good.” But it’s very natural for there to be resistance to come up. 

Even when we’re going through the bodhisattva vows, and we’re talking about this one of when somebody asks for help, helping them; some of these situations we may just get the heebie-jeebies about. It’s like, “I don’t want to help these people. Why should I help them? Blah, blah, blah, blah.”  This is so natural that our minds react in this way. When our minds do, this means that the Dharma is having an effect. It means we’re taking what we’re listening to seriously and the self-centered mind is throwing a conniption fit. So, it’s natural. If the self-centered mind said, “Oh, yes, emptiness sounds so reasonable; oh yes, compassion is good and self-centeredness is bad, I accept that.” Do you think self-centeredness is really going to do that? No, it’s not. It’s not. It’s very sneaky, the way it comes up and makes all of its stories and weaves its webs about how the Buddha didn’t really understand things right and didn’t know what he was talking about and so on and so forth. This is the very ground stuff that we work with in our practice. 

When this stuff comes up it doesn’t mean we’re doing something wrong. It means the Dharma is starting to work. It’s like when you put some soap with your dirty clothes and the dirt starts to come up, it doesn’t mean that something is wrong, that’s what’s supposed to happen. It’s the same thing here, so let’s not freak out when our buttons are pushed. Just notice it and keep on with our investigation and our inquiry and our curiosity and not let the self-centered mind create a pandemonium or a three-ring circus. 

That would be a great skit, wouldn’t it? I mean we know each other very well living together, don’t we? So we all have our own three-ring circuses that we dream up, we stay in one ring for a while and then go to another one and sometimes have all three going at once. Wouldn’t that make a great skit? To do our own personal three-ring circuses? Venerable Yeshe, you’re not smiling. [laughter]

Providing assistance if somebody asks

Okay, we were talking about these eight situations in which we should try and provide assistance if somebody asks. One is when the person is thinking about doing something; one is when they’re at the point of making a decision; third is if they’re traveling; fourth if they’re undertaking something worthwhile, some new project that’s worthwhile; five is helping them to protect their possessions; six to reconcile people who are having a dispute; seven is organizing commemorations or anniversaries. And eighth is helping in festive occasions. This is Dagpo Rinpoche:

These eight situations are all very familiar to us. We encounter them practically every day of our our lives so we should find these guidelines useful. Once we have committed ourselves to the bodhisattva way of life, neglecting to help others on these occasions contravenes our precepts.

There are a number of exceptions, cases in which there’s no fault in not helping. In terms of the subject —[which is ourselves]—we do not commit a misdeed for these reasons. First, if we’re sick.”

If somebody is asking for help and we’re sick, it’s okay.

If we’ve made another appointment in advance.

If it conflicts, it’s okay. If somebody asks us to do something and then we make the appointment with somebody else so that we don’t have to do it, that’s not so good.

Third is if we are presently occupied in very positive and beneficial spiritual practices.

So, this is if we’re doing our practice, if we’re doing retreat, if we’re working in the community or doing some worthwhile spiritual activity. The next is:

If we are not very intelligent and lack the ability, skills, and knowledge to explain things to others.

If somebody asks you for help and you don’t really know what you’re doing, it’s okay to decline.

Completely lacking experience, we are not good at arranging celebrations, for example, and would most likely be useless to the organizers.

Okay, those are good reasons.

One exception concerns the nature of activity. If the activity is harmful and contrary to the Dharma we should not do it.

If somebody is asking you to organize a party to celebrate the origination of the Ku Klux Klan, you can decline. 

Another exception has to do with the object of our assistance. The people asking for help are capable or managing on their own or already have potential helpers that they have yet to contact.

If the people who ask us for help also have other people that they can turn to then it’s okay if we decline. But if we’re the only person who can help at that particular time we should step forward.

Then there are three exceptions out of necessity. First, for their spiritual development it is better that the potential beneficiaries do not receive assistance for in the end it serves to reduce their incorrect attitudes or stimulate their good qualities.

Let’s say somebody asks us to do something that they have the ability to do, but they’re shaky in their self-confidence to do it. The previous one said it’s okay if they’re capable of managing on their own, here they’re capable but they feel really wobbly, don’t have the confidence and they’re afraid. Sometimes it can be very good if we decline but we give them encouragement so that they can find their own source of strength inside. If every time somebody needs something we feel, “Oh, I’ve got to rescue them,” then we never give other people a chance to grow up. So, sometimes it’s very good to step back and let somebody learn from their own experience. The other one is:

To avoid upsetting or irritating many people and giving them reason to criticize or reprove us.

If helping somebody would really disturb a great number of people it’s okay to decline. I’ll tell you the other one then I’ll bring something up. The last one is:

To respect monastic rules.

If helping somebody is going to contradict your or their monastic rules, it’s okay to decline.

Now, somebody told me yesterday that Gonzaga has asked Bishop Tutu to come and speak at their commemoration ceremony which is really fantastic, and he accepted. Then somebody told me yesterday that there’s some right-wing Catholic organization that is putting pressure on Gonzaga to cancel their invitation because Bishop Tutu seems to be okay with homosexual people in the clergy, and abortion, and some of these more controversial issues. Let’s say you’ve been asked to help organize Bishop Tutu’s visit. And you know if he visits, it’s going to upset all these different people. What are you going to do? Are you going to help or not help?

Audience: Help.

Venerable Thubten Chodron (VTC): Help? Why?

Audience: It’s the right thing to do.

VTC: Why is it the right thing to do? 

Audience: Because that group of people may be upset, but I think the majority of people are going to stand up and say, “Hey, this is a good thing.”

VTC: Yes, so some people may be upset but you’re doing what is beneficial in the long-term for more people. And if his visit is canceled a lot of other people are going to be upset.

Let’s have a little bit of discussion. Can you think of things in your life where you’ve been asked to help and you’ve been wondering whether you should engage or not engage or times when you’ve turned people down and have some doubt if you did the right thing?

Audience: I was working in an anti-racism campaign in Portland once and some skinheads had come to town and they actually had murdered a black man in Portland. We were doing these workshops, processing with people and looking how you challenge prejudice and then there was this young group of skinheads called Skinheads Against Racial Prejudice. They called themselves SARP; they were dressed just like skinheads with tattoos and shaved heads, and they were white kids, but they were fighting literally sometimes physically, with the racist skinheads. And they called and wanted some help to organize themselves and stuff. I stayed out of it because it just seemed very messy. I talked with the guy on the phone for a while to figure them out but I just couldn’t. I don’t know if I had any skills to do it and it was very strange, the way they were proceeding. But they were anti-racist, they were against racism. It was very complicated and confusing.

VTC: And so you had some doubt if you made the right decision or not?

Audience: Yes, either way. Maybe I could have helped them and maybe got other help for them. But I felt like, I don’t know, mostly because I heard about their violence. Some other people said they weren’t violent and others said they were violent.

VTC: That’s actually a good example, you’re trying to do some social activism and you want to help a group, but you hear they’re violent or that they’re discriminatory, then other people say something different, so you’re getting very contradictory information about different people. That seems to me like it would be a pretty good reason not to get involved when somebody asks you for help. That’s very unclear. Because that would fall into the category if you’re not sure if what they’re doing is beneficial or not.

Audience: Right, and there were clear beneficial things to do with other groups on the same issue, so it’s like, “Well, busy enough over here and don’t need to really…”

VTC: Get involved over there.

Audience: I think this falls in that category, I’ve never resolved it. I was on the board of the North Idaho Aids Coalition when I was in Portland and their principal fundraising event was a wine-tasting. We did do work, we did some fundraising but I had this responsibility and they needed help for somebody to be involved with the wine-tasting. So I raised money and the support for people with aids in Idaho. It was just appalling and so it was a really viable, valuable way of raising funds. In the end I agreed to be involved, but I would not pour the wine, I had another job but it was still a little bit of a… I don’t know.

VTC: Your situation was you were on the board of an aids organization and their chief fund-raising activity was wine-tasting and you felt that that was really inappropriate for you, even though you were still a lay person at that time, to get involved in. So the way you settled it was you would help because you were on the board, but you wouldn’t pour the wine.

Audience: Or procure it.

VTC: What do other people think? How would you apply this precept and the exceptions to that?

Audience: I think one thing I might try but it wouldn’t work in the short-term, in long-term it would, to sit with the fund-raising committee and figure out a new different way. Although I’m sure there would be resistance because they knew how to do it. 

VTC: Yes, that it was a very good fundraiser for a worthy cause.

Audience: Maybe trying to brainstorm a just as good one but not doing that.

VTC: Yes.

Audience: I feel like I would agree to do it as long as people were still thinking of new ways to do the fundraising. Like I would participate in it as long as I knew that this wasn’t going to be the only way in the future that we were going to be doing it. 

Audience: But since we recently saw that video, I think if you had said, “No” and told them why you had to say no, for ethical reasons and your own integrity, it might start getting them thinking that this isn’t the greatest way to go about getting fast money.

VTC: So the thing in NVC: learning how to say no and to say what our need is that prevents us from saying yes. You’re saying that doing that in this situation would get them thinking themselves, about their own choice of fund-raisers.

And your story?

Audience: This came up a lot for me when I was overseeing judicial cases, disciplinary cases at the college because we were always trying to balance the environment of the school and the students’ rights to learn versus the behavior of another student who was disrupting that learning environment but also was often sincere about wanting to go through college. I always had to look and ask if I trusted the person. It was very difficult to weigh in the two sides because I was in a position of trying to help both “sides.” Those cases posed challenges. I never really knew—I had doubts about some of the decisions I made, sometimes suspending students—whether that would send that person to just continue down that path of self-destructive behavior or whether it would actually wake them up. Sometimes there was just no way to tell and it was a very tough situation.

VTC: So, working on judiciary things in a college environment—do you take disciplinary actions against a student who is interfering with other students, to what extent do they have to be behaving in an improper way before you take action. Then what kind of action do you take, will that action of suspending somebody just make them quit college, never go back and start drinking or will it wake them up and make them realize that they have to change? And you don’t know. It’s hard. 

Audience: I say this in kind of vague terms. I once belonged to a Dharma center. It’s a similar story, their way of fundraising, making lots of money, was taking part in casinos. I didn’t know that in casinos there’s also drinking and smoking. I was very enthusiastic and knew that they really wanted to get the money to build a center so I volunteered, of course. And I had this experience of being there for hours on a school night, getting home at 2 AM and seeing everything that took place. It brought in a huge amount of money. The next time the opportunity came up I just said that I couldn’t because of my teaching schedule. I didn’t really disclose all of the reasons but I couldn’t possibly have those two things going at the same time, casino and that experience to raise money for a Dharma center.

VTC: So, your situation was a Dharma center raising money by having casino gambling and you volunteered because you thought it was a good way to raise money; and it was, it raised a lot of money. But after that experience when they asked you to help the next time, you said it was on a school night and you couldn’t go. Using NVC, what would you do now? 

Audience: I would say the reason why I can’t say yes to volunteer for this opportunity is because I feel that gambling harms the individual and their families, that we’re supporting people’s addiction, and I think that it is not beneficial for Dharma practitioners, to support addictive behavior.

VTC: You’d say that you don’t feel comfortable in doing it because it harms other living beings and that seems contradictory to what a Dharma center is all about. Would you have enough courage to say it? 

Audience: Would I now?

VTC: Yes.

Audience: Yes. But then, it was just, it was clearly a way to get a lot of money in a short amount of time.

VTC: Yes. This is the kind of thing. It’s a good way to make money in a short amount of time, a Dharma center is a good activity, why not do it? This is the kind of unclarity that Venerable Tarpa was talking about at lunch, when our minds are unclear and we can’t discriminate what is beneficial and what’s not beneficial. Often at the beginning of our Dharma practice we’re like that. Even later on, the short-term purpose of getting a lot of money seems to outweigh any kind of moral qualm we may have about it. And how strong that pull of the short-term purpose is, isn’t it? 

Audience: I have to think that in all these situations, if we use NVC and really get in touch with our feelings and needs it’s not like making a judgment about the activity in which you’re volunteering. It’s holding one’s own wisdom about what you feel comfortable doing. It takes the charge out of making all of these evaluations by just saying you do whatever you need to do. Right now I feel concerned and very clear that I need respect for family life and I need integrity in the way in which I participate. 

Ven. Chodron: You’re saying that when we’re clear we realize that we can say for ourselves: “I need integrity, I need respect for my own values, so I’m not going to participate in this.” But what often holds us back from saying that is the lack of clarity and the attachment to reputation. Isn’t that the big one? Why it’s so hard when people are doing something that is morally a little fuzzy but may seem like a good thing to do because it raises money—both of your situations—and how we can’t discriminate, our mind is cloudy, we don’t really know what to practice and abandon. In Ken’s case he didn’t know what the result was going to be, you’re not a Buddha so don’t know the result, but that’s quite different than these ones where it’s an ethical issue.

Audience: I have a question that relates to the example that I wanted to share. I had a teacher, I took part in a biology class that was about understanding ecosystems in Portland. Our teacher was telling us about biology of a particular area and about the invasive species that lived there including bullfrogs and starlings, that kind of common basic species. This class had a lot of field work, almost every day we were going out to this particular place, and she said if we find any bullfrogs or starlings to give them to her so that she could kill them or kill them ourselves. These are like real pests. I knew for myself because I had already been practicing Dharma that there was no way I was going to kill an animal or give her the animal in that particular situation; there was just no way I that I was going to do that. It was really clear. But I didn’t say anything and I had a strong relationship with the teacher. In this particular case by my not saying anything, I don’t know if that is a transgression. I feel like I should have said something to her, to the whole class, because it’s such a sticky situation.

VTC: So, you were taking a class on ecosystems, and they were talking about invasive species and when you were going out there, the prof said, “If you find any of these species give them to me or kill them yourself.” You knew you wouldn’t do either of those but you didn’t say anything.

Audience: Right, I feel like I should have said, “I don’t think that that’s how we should solve this problem.”

VTC: Yes, so you’re feeling that you would have liked to have been able to say. 

Audience: I feel like with my position with her, I could have said something, but I didn’t do anything or say anything because it was so foggy, unclear. I understand the problem about invasive species; it’s really challenging.

VTC: Yes, it is challenging in that kind of situation because you understand that these species also damage other living beings.

Audience: Right, and whole ecosystems.

VTC: And whole ecosystems, but you also know that there’s no way you’re going to participate in taking the life of another living being. You held to your principles in not getting involved in that, but you’re wondering if you should have just said something to make it very clear to the class and to the professor.

Audience: It didn’t affect a large group of people, but when I was doing my horticulture classes at Community College, I did insect identification and one of the ways in which you get your pass or fail grade, is you go out and you capture insects and you stick them to these boards and you identify them.

VTC: I remember.

Audience: I hadn’t been in the Dharma that long, but I had this love of them anyway; it was very clear. This is where I appreciated the Dharma at that time, that I knew that killing was not an option so I created my own proposal which I then went and presented to my professor. I said, “I’m feeling very uncomfortable with what I’m being asked to do here, would you be willing to listen to options—I gave them specifically—I have a precept that I made because I am a Buddhist.” I went through the whole thing; he was so appreciative of my honesty and we put together a very creative alternative to that, so I didn’t have to judge everybody else sticking the insects on the boards and pointing fingers, but I presented something much different and it was fine.

VTC: Again, it was a situation in a class where you were asked to catch insects and pin them to the board. That was against your values, so you went to the professor and told him that and said, “Can we think of another way for me to fulfill the requirement?” And you brainstormed and found one.

Can you think of situations where somebody asked you to help and because of the two factors here laziness and animosity, you didn’t help out of those two motivations which make it a transgression?

Audience: When I was younger, my mom asked me to garden with her and I said no.

Audience: I was thinking, all through my teen years, whatever my mom asked I would say no. . .

VTC: Yes, especially relating to parents and authority figures, when you’re teenagers, out of anger, saying no when you’re asked to help.

How about out of laziness?

Audience: I know I’ve done it. I would describe it as a habit, not an incident.

VTC: Okay, so this is more a habit than a particular incident.

Audience: I’m sure there are occasions where someone told me they were moving…

VTC: And you didn’t help. It’s the same thing; somebody’s moving and you don’t help.

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: Or if you hear somebody say, “I can’t do lunch today. Can somebody help?”—“Ohh.”  It’s interesting to see, isn’t it?

Audience: I’m wondering about if you say you might be subjected to harm, if you didn’t help, if it was…

VTC: Oh, yes.

Audience: I remember one time going to Israel and they were in the middle of a war, and it seemed like not a great idea.

VTC: I would think that that would come in as an exception, if doing so would put you in harm’s way unless it was a type of harm that you could bear. Otherwise any small thing, when we’re lazy, puts us in harm’s way, doesn’t it? We might think, “Oh, I’ll have to work too hard,” or “I’ll miss my bedtime.” I would think too, if it’s really going to cause a lot of damage.

Okay, it’s an interesting thing to think about and look at this habit.

Audience: But it also raises the question for me that someone who maybe says yes more often than they ought to.

VTC: Um-hum.

Audience: To some things. This is a difficult place for me to still discern what’s laziness in not doing it and trying to understand.

VTC: Okay, what about the issue of being a people-pleaser? 

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: That’s a person who every time somebody asks for help doesn’t want them to think bad and says yes. Then they over-extend themselves, so that the things that other people are relying on them to do don’t get done because they’re doing things that are less important. But they couldn’t decline because they’re afraid of people thinking badly about them.

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: No, it may not always but sometimes. Your question is how to gain the clarity about when to say yes and when to say no.

Audience: Especially in the context of this.

VTC: Yes, in this kind of precept. What ideas do people have for what criteria somebody like this could use to evaluate whether to say yes or whether to say no when somebody asks them for help?

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: To establish priorities about your own activities.

Audience: Clear understanding of what exactly is involved in what they’re asking you to do so you know what you’re committing to.

VTC: Having a clear understanding of what you’re committing to, what is involved.

Audience: I see myself often triggered by people that know and express their needs. Myself, I see that I have difficulty to be clear with my needs, so I would be more on the yes-yes…

VTC: On the yes side like her. What are other criteria that people like this can use?

Audience: One thing is what the need is; if it’s something that’s really important like somebody is ill or something that needs attention versus something that’s just all the things that are on the list.

VTC: So, it’s important to really evaluate how strong the need is. And it’s important to evaluate it not only in terms of your personal priority, like she said, but in terms of how strong different needs are in terms of their importance or their urgency and in terms of time and so on. 

Audience: look at our motivation?

VTC: Um-hum. Yes, to look at our motivation, why we would say yes or why we would say no.

Audience: Our capacity, it’s like if already looking at a full plate, then if the cat jumps out the window I’m going to go help, but I’m not if someone says “Can you edit another…?” Not right now until something moves off of here.

VTC: You’re saying looking at your capacity in terms of time; if something is urgent you may extend yourself, if it’s not urgent, you wouldn’t. Also looking at our capacity in terms of our ability. Somebody may ask us to do something that we could help them with but it would take us a really, really long time to do it as opposed to if they found somebody else who had that skill and could help them, and we have other things that are more pressing for us to do.

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: Yes, to help the person brainstorm for alternatives.

Audience: I think this relates to ability but just understanding your own, being really clear how much time you need to even do this kind of thing. I think sometimes you put on yourself that you have to do it quickly but you can say, “I can do this, but it won’t be now.”

VTC: Another thing, similar to what he said, is really looking at what’s being asked of you to do, in what kind of time period. Knowing that somebody else may say, “Oh, but it needs to be done immediately,” but when you look at the situation it’s okay if it takes a few days and you can say that.

Audience: I also think it’s important to measure whether you can really truly benefit a project. There was a situation where I was asked to participate in an event that was supporting homeless people. The event was actually going into a homeless community and spend the night there. When I evaluated my own ability I decided against because I wasn’t sure how strong I am in that kind of situation and I was concerned that I might be, I’m not sure how . . .

VTC: You’re saying if it’s a situation where you doubt your own ability even to emotionally handle it, in other words, you’re being asked to do something that is really a button-pusher for you and you’re not quite sure whether you can take that step. It’s an interesting thing because sometimes, what we need is to kick ourselves in the pants and take that step. And other times what we need to do is say, “Uuh, I’d like to go in that direction, but I’m not ready yet.” But then to at least take measures to go in that direction instead of spinning our protective cocoon. But it’s hard when we’re asked to do something that pushes our buttons.

Audience: I was thinking a little bit about NVC and how they talk about when we ask somebody to do something, is it a request or a demand. Sometimes if I hear it as a demand, I might do it because I get pulled into that, like “I have to.” So, I have to watch that.

VTC: You’re saying that sometimes we can’t discriminate when somebody else is making a request or a demand and we get pulled into it being a demand. Or even if it is being a demand we get pulled in feeling we have to, that we don’t have any ability to state our own needs and concerns. 

So you two feel like you have some criteria now? 

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: This is the kind of thing that is quite difficult and that really touches a lot of old patterns for us. It involves thinking about things quite deeply and changing some old patterns, so it’s something that’s done in each individual situation. In our meditation, we can go back and think of situations from the past and then use these criteria that we have now to evaluate decisions we made, which gives us some practice in knowing how to evaluate similar situations if they come up in the future. Of course we never really know until we do it when the situation’s there. So, we always do what we can and then later go back and evaluate and see, “I had these criteria, did I remember that at the time or did I simply go with my old habit?”

Audience: Are these to be seen as specific ideas but that the actual vow is more general? How about like, I was thinking of some of the people we know who’ve gone into Africa or places, working on social welfare projects. Some of them haven’t fared so well when they’ve come back. When I look at the list here, it’s not relating to any of those eight things or even some of the situations we run into in our families.

VTC: Oh, that’s a good idea. 

Audience: They seem like they’re not exactly a part of this list, so I’m wondering if the vow is more broad.

VTC: The question is are these eight the only things that would entail transgressing this precept or is the precept broader? I would think the precept would be broader. But these eight are specific things to point out to us to look at. 

What you were saying is often in a family we’re asked to get involved with certain family affairs. Especially as monastics, if we’re involved or even if you aren’t a monastic, to be able to evaluate what to get involved in and what not. Here there’s one about if it interferes with keeping your monastic precepts you can decline, so there’s a good reason for that. But I would think also if you know in a family situation that if you say yes—because of your own habits and your own lack of clarity—you’re going to get pulled into a situation that’s not going to be beneficial for yourself or for the other person.

You don’t have enough clarity to do the situation and avoid that, but you do have enough clarity to know that you can’t do that, then I would think it would be okay to say no because you see that in the long run you’re getting pulled into a situation that is really not good for yourself or the other person. Lots of times in a family somebody can do something on their own but they try and ask you to do it or guilt-trip you into doing it. So it’s perfectly all right to say no. Or if the person has other alternatives of people who they could ask. Or if it would be better for that person’s own growth for them to have to deal with the situation alone instead of somebody stepping in and rescuing them. All of those would be good reasons to decline if you’re asked for help.

It’s a thing of knowing these things and knowing the exceptions and then thinking of how to apply them in different situations.

Audience: [Inaudible]

VTC: Yes, so many lists of people to help. 

Audience: Yes.

These exceptions give useful indications for making the right choices, behaving well, and generally leading a happy life. It is therefore important to learn them thoroughly. At first the precepts may seem complex, but once we are familiar with them, they can truly help us to improve the quality of our lives. They were designed for that and I believe that they continue to serve that purpose.

Just to use another kind of criteria, Zopa and I were talking this afternoon. Some of you may be familiar with what they call the drama-triangle, of somebody being a victim, a perpetrator, and a rescuer and how three people or even two people can change these roles. Somebody’s a perpetrator, the other one’s a victim. Then the victim can become the one who saves the perpetrator who becomes the victim and these three spin around a lot. In looking at it I think this is this unclarity that we’ve been talking about that just comes up. People feeling that other people are pressuring them to do things or other people won’t like them if they make certain choices, and people guilt-tripping themselves because they are not able to think clearly about what is good to do and what’s not good to do in a certain situation. I would think that this would be another criteria, if you see that you’re involved in that kind of relationship, especially in this precept, where somebody’s playing the victim and you feel you need to step in and help them, because if you don’t you’re breaking your bodhisattva vow, but actually that’s not the case. 

Another example would be refusing out of animosity. In that case you’re playing the perpetrator and you’re inflicting harm on somebody else. It’s like, they asked me for help and now’s my time to say no and I can rationalize it by saying, “It’s good for you and it’ll make you grow,” but actually I’m doing it because I want vengeance; I want to retaliate. So, if you see that you’re involved in that kind of dynamic. 

Or sometimes just to be aware of how we play the victim. “Oh, poor helpless me, I can’t do this, can you help me with this?” We do it because we need attention or we need to feel that we have power, we get a feeling of power by manipulating people. So to pay attention to those kinds of things.

Audience: I would like to add to that because of the discussion we’ve had, that it’s very helpful when you point out that my inclination to go in to rescue is not beneficial for that other person. What you brought helped me get that “Oh, what I thought was going to be helping is really not helpful for this person.” I couldn’t see that; it’s this automatic helping thing comes up and it’s very murky. Like, “Oh, I must help, I must help this person,” and what help is becomes murky. That’s so interesting. Short-range it looked like help but then if you even think four days later, it can go, “Oh no, this would not be helpful.” It does feel like a pull from the other side. Like “Oh, I’m so helpless.”

VTC: You’re saying that sometimes it’s very helpful to have somebody who points out to you that what you think is help is not actually help. Because at that particular time you’ve gotten hooked into the other person playing the victim, “I’m helpless and I need you to rescue me.” And you feel, “Oh, I want to help, I want to be a good person and help,” but you’re not really clear about what’s helpful and what’s not. So you say yes to something that really isn’t going to help the other person or help the other people involved at all. So the process of developing some clarity to see what is helpful and what isn’t. Because sometimes this tendency to want to rescue somebody who seems to have an immediate problem comes up, without thinking that, “Oh, but that person brought that problem on themselves” in a situation that we had no knowledge of. Also, in a way, to trust that that person has some wisdom to be able to resolve the problem that they created. 

Audience: Venerable Samten helped too because she said that “Well, they’ve kind of gotten this far on their own.” It was what have they done before they came and said “we need to do all this?” They’ve been doing something and seeming basically okay, so it’s very interesting looking at that.

VTC: Yes. And just to see how easily we can get hooked and how there’s this kind of subtle guilt like, “Oh, if I don’t help them I’m a bad person, maybe I’m really lazy or maybe I’m really selfish, I don’t care enough.” Because I was thinking about that afterwards too, and then I thought “But what we’re asking this person to do is not climbing Mt. Everest, we’re asking them to do something that everybody does in their life in a very simple way.”

Okay, I feel this kind of discussion is quite helpful in really bringing it home.