What took you so long,

Ball?

I just found out that many of my principles and spiritual (secular) views in life fall in line with that of the 14th Dalai Lama's. He was someone I knew by 'name', but not by his teachings, views or quotes.... Til today. (WIKIPEDIA FTW!)
A couple of years back, I did a post talking about the difference between altruistic love and compassion towards people we are attached to, and strangers - How expectations and attachments can hinder us from showing true selfless compassion. And how difficult it is to separate the two.
After which i read an article that sort of reinforces what I was saying : 'The meaning of Compassion' 

"I would like to explain the meaning of compassion which is often misunderstood:
Genuine compassion is based not on our own projections and expectations, but rather on the rights of the other: irrespective of whether another person is a close friend or an enemy, as long as that person wishes for peace and happiness and wishes to overcome suffering, then on that basis we develop a genuine concern for his or her problems. This is genuine compassion. 

Usually when we are concerned about a close friend, we call this compassion. This is not compassion; it is attachment. Even in marriage, those marriages that last only a short time, do so because of attachment - although it is generally present - but because there is also compassion. Marriages that last only a short time do so because of a lack of compassion; there is only emotional attachment based on projection and expectation. When the only bond between close friends is attachment, then even a minor issue may cause one´s projections to change. As soon as our projections change, the attachment disappears, because that attachment was based solely on projection and expectation.  

It is possible to have compassion without attachement, and similarly, to have anger without hatred. Therefore we need to clarify the distinctions between compassion and attachment, and between anger and hatred. Such clarity is useful in our daily life and in our efforts toward world peace. I consider these to be basic spiritual values for the happiness of all human beings, regardless of whether one is a believer or a nonbeliever."
Tenzin Gyatso, The Dalai Lama 

SO IT WAS HIM. DUN DUN DUN DUN!! /respect


I respect him even more so now as I love how flexible and open-minded his social and religious stances are..That he/his 'teachings' do not necessarily stick to the book or traditions, but are instead based on his personal opinions - with moral and human values as a priority. That even though he is a 'religious dignitary', he believes "If you have a particular faith or religion, that is good. But you can survive without it."

I could go on and on about him, but I will not.
This was good for me to know. I feel understood, and supported.
Time to get more books.

Anyway, Wiki him up if you're interested. :)