I've recently been reading the book How to See Yourself As You Really Are, by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. In it, His Holiness comments on the value and meaning of compassion. As I read his thoughts, it strikes me that the definition of "compassion" I received growing up is not the same as the way His Holiness explains it.

His Holiness says, "Compassion opens our own inner life, reducing stress, distrust, and loneliness." Yet, the version of "activist compassion" I learned as a youth left me very stressed out for the poor and oppressed, and distrustful of power in most forms. I was left lonely too - like a lone visionary struggling against a larger society that valued only greed and destruction.

But that's not what His Holiness is recommending that we cultivate.

Many years of practice opened up a deeper compassion - com as in "shared with" and passion as in "desire or aspiration". I came to realize the shared aspirations of all people, and through that lens, I came to see that the awkwardness and even destruction sometimes created is truly a misdirected attempt at security and prosperity for those we love.

This view reduced stress ("the problems of this world are natural"), increased trust ("of course all people are trying to do the right thing, to their view"), and gave me a warm feeling of connection to all people - even the destructively confused.

From that humble but meaningful success I concluded that this must be what is meant by compassion in the Buddhist tradition. I also concluded that language, combined with our deep personality inclinations, can lead us astray.

What view are you cultivating? Does it open up your inner life, reducing stress, distrust, and loneliness?

Every path of personal growth will eventually take us through three forms of doubt. These types of doubt work like the barricades of a castle; each time we encounter one wall of doubt, we have the opportunity to pass through a gateway of deeper commitment to and connection with the path.

The first barrier is alienation. Any path of growth will surely challenge us. We will become aware of personal lacks in the process. When these lacks are revealed to us, we can respond in one of two ways. If we are afflicted by extreme self-grasping (the desire to remain just as we are and justify our current self), we will turn away from the path and declare it false or simply "not for us". If we can instead see the chance for self-improvement (the potential of a better self), then we can make the first inner commitment, which is identification with the path. That means we recognize that the path is for us, the other people on the path are like us, and we can come to relate to the practices.

The second barrier is inconvenience. Any path of growth will make logistical demands on us. It may take time, money, personal energy, or discomfort to pursue the path. The demands may grow over time, or our circumstances may change and make us feel like we have less resources available than when we first started. When this challenge moves into the foreground, we can respond in one of two ways. If we are under the influence of moderate self-grasping (the desire to control and protect myself and my resources, to remain free of obligation or struggle), we will declare that we intend to pursue the path later, just as soon as things get easier. We claim to still be on the path, but in reality, we cease to invest in it and cease to progress in it. If we can instead see the chance to become a more skilled and effective person via the growth the path offers, then we can see that we must pursue the path for ourselves, our friends and family, and the greater world. Any resources used for the path are a sound investment. This is the second inner commitment, when the path becomes a lifestyle.

The third barrier is frustration and confusion. As we go deeply into the path, and our unique understanding develops because of our history and the details of how we practice the path, we will realize that not everyone agrees with our interpretation of the goals and methods of the path. We will find that even among skilled and widely acknowledged practitioners, there are disagreements over the best way. Our own search for the best way drives us to want to find an answer. Again, we can respond in one of two ways. This barrier mixed with subtle self-grasping (the subconscious belief that my experiences and views are objectively and universally true) leads us to conclude that we have special or deeper insight, and the other experienced practitioners are incorrect, limited in understanding, or possibly even corrupt. We claim to be on the path even more than they are. In that case, our path actually diminishes because we are now closed to input from other views. If instead we can see that our deep understanding is necessarily unique because of the unique experiences that shaped our practice, and that others' deep understanding is also unique and valid, then we can make the third inner commitment, where our engagement with the path is a personal offering to others and not in competition with them.

If this is achieved, our connection to the path is total. We are the path, and the path is defined by our life.