Right-action versus not-doing

2008.09.06 19:00 - Action Rooted in Emptiness  

Threedee Shepherd: is there difference meant between *right-action* and *doing*? No doing versus not-doing
Stim Morane: “right action” is indeed “action” sometimes. But it can include other things that may be considered non-action. The distinction requires introducing more topics, and can’t be made otherwise.
Stim Morane: “right action” begins with appropriate action, which is indeed a “doing”. But it can include things that look to a camera like action, but from the “actor’s” view are pure responsiveness, rooted in emptiness.
Solobill Laville: Yes, Stim, with no attachment to results
Stim Morane: “not-doing” = action rooted in emptiness.
Stim Morane: It can also mean doing little, but in a way that has huge influence. But this too is based on an intimate connection with both the surface and depth of things.
Threedee Shepherd: if there is no attachment to results, why care whether doing is right or wrong, given no attachment to the results?
Stim Morane: no attachment to results does not mean not caring about acting out of responsiveness (which requires a better connection than the selfish self allows)
Stim Morane: and also does not mean being indifferent to injurious consequences.It simply means one does not act to seek consequences in the sense the selfish self emphasizes.