user11674: Often I hear above mentioned phrase in regards to sex, music, entertainment and basically everything else that is or seems important.
Now the question is: Do we really have control whether we get attached to something or not? 
Isn't a little attachment good, i.e., attachment to the Dhamma or the five precepts in order to elicit faith and confidence?
Regards

user43: Leaving out the "Isn't a little attachment good" part, since that's kind of obvious, let me address "Do we have control whether we attach or not?"
Yes of course - and that is what Buddha has called "right attention" vs "wrong attention" or "upadana".
Say, you have a girlfriend. Let's assume that you like several "signs" (as Buddha called them) about her: you like how her eye whites shine when she looks sideways, you like how her hair curls around her ears, you like the movement of her hips when she walks, you like the raspy quality of her voice and her raising intonations, and perhaps you like her smell.
The wrong attention would be to keep reviewing these signs when she's present and remembering them when she's not, enjoying and taking pleasure in them. This will quickly lead to attachment.
The right mundane attention would be to NOT review the signs and instead to look at the entire situation objectively: yes sometimes there is attraction between some men and women; we two seem to enjoy each other's company, here are the PROS- and here are the CONS- for us being together, here are the positive and negative elements of this situation, here are good things that may await us in the future if we stay together, and here are the bad/problem/painful things that may await us if we stay together. Here are the potential joys and here are the potential sufferings. Here is how my spiritual path would look if I'm with her, and here is how my spiritual path would look like if I'm alone. -- This is the right mundane attention.
The right supramundane attention would be to not review either the signs, nor think objectively about the PROS- and CONS- of you two being together, but to look at the situation from the perspective of the Ultimate: Here is life, here is energy and information, here is time, here's gradual reification of entities, here's action based on that reification, here's identification with something as "self", here is attachment and suffering, here are the sentient beings getting born and dying, here's the path leading away from attachment, reification, identification, from suffering, from getting born and dying; here is enlightenment, here is suchness, here is peace. Looking at things this way is called the right supramundane atttention.
To the extent you have control over your attention, your perspective, and your frame of mind -- you have control of whether you get attached or not.

user2282: 
Isn't a little attachment good, i.e., attachment to the Dhamma or the five precepts in order to elicit faith and confidence?

Ven. Ananda's "going to the park" simile might be helpful in addressing this topic.
Regarding the question about control, of course there is for without it there'd be no Stream-enterer, Once-returners, Non-returners, nor Arahants.

11674: <p>Often I hear above mentioned phrase in regards to sex, music, entertainment and basically everything else that is or seems important.</p>

<p>Now the question is: Do we really have control whether we get attached to something or not? </p>

<p>Isn't a little attachment good, i.e., attachment to the Dhamma or the five precepts in order to elicit faith and confidence?</p>

<p>Regards</p>
 43: <p>Leaving out the "Isn't a little attachment good" part, since that's kind of obvious, let me address "Do we have control whether we attach or not?"</p>

<p>Yes of course - and that is what Buddha has called "right attention" vs "wrong attention" or "upadana".</p>

<p>Say, you have a girlfriend. Let's assume that you like several "signs" (as Buddha called them) about her: you like how her eye whites shine when she looks sideways, you like how her hair curls around her ears, you like the movement of her hips when she walks, you like the raspy quality of her voice and her raising intonations, and perhaps you like her smell.</p>

<p>The wrong attention would be to keep reviewing these signs when she's present and remembering them when she's not, enjoying and taking pleasure in them. This will quickly lead to attachment.</p>

<p>The right mundane attention would be to NOT review the signs and instead to look at the entire situation objectively: yes sometimes there is attraction between some men and women; we two seem to enjoy each other's company, here are the PROS- and here are the CONS- for us being together, here are the positive and negative elements of this situation, here are good things that may await us in the future if we stay together, and here are the bad/problem/painful things that may await us if we stay together. Here are the potential joys and here are the potential sufferings. Here is how my spiritual path would look if I'm with her, and here is how my spiritual path would look like if I'm alone. -- This is the right mundane attention.</p>

<p>The right supramundane attention would be to not review either the signs, nor think objectively about the PROS- and CONS- of you two being together, but to look at the situation from the perspective of the Ultimate: Here is life, here is energy and information, here is time, here's gradual reification of entities, here's action based on that reification, here's identification with something as "self", here is attachment and suffering, here are the sentient beings getting born and dying, here's the path leading away from attachment, reification, identification, from suffering, from getting born and dying; here is enlightenment, here is suchness, here is peace. Looking at things this way is called the right supramundane atttention.</p>

<p>To the extent you have control over your attention, your perspective, and your frame of mind -- you have control of whether you get attached or not.</p>
 2282: <blockquote>
<p>Isn't a little attachment good, i.e., attachment to the Dhamma or the five precepts in order to elicit faith and confidence?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ven. Ananda's <a href="https://accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn51/sn51.015.than.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">&quot;going to the park&quot; simile</a> might be helpful in addressing this topic.</p>
<p>Regarding the question about control, of course there is for without it there'd be no Stream-enterer, Once-returners, Non-returners, nor Arahants.</p>
