Non-Resistance versus Affecting Change

      How does one remain non-resistant to the moment and still work for change? On our way to answering this question let’s begin by exploring what it means to be “non-resistant” to the moment. To accept the moment as it is, without resisting, is not to necessarily agree or condone the actions contained therein. By way of example, I can thoroughly disagree with the opinion or action of another but still accept the fact that they think or act as they do. However, most of us are used to having negative thoughts about another’s ideas or behavior. And these negative thoughts are what usually come between us and skillful action in attempt to not be that other.
      In one of Scott Peck’s books he wrote something that has stayed with me over the years. I paraphrase here as, “The unsavory acts of another man relieves me of the burden of being him.” Or in the Buddhist writings, those who present us with dissatisfaction are the heavenly messengers offering the catalyst for change. And in my own life I am in constant want to remember that he who has the eye of the middle way sees not the man, but the suffering.
      I am always grateful when I can remember these thoughts in the midst of an all too familiar, disparaging, internal dialogue about something I don’t agree with. I’m not suggesting that I condone things like rape, racism, and man’s inhumanity to man in any form. However, I have come to realize that my mental diatribes do nothing to right any situation. And they are likely to cause me to act in a manner that is counter-productive to desired ends.
      In order to act in a manner conducive to change, I have to be open. I have to be accepting of all facets of the negativity that I desire to change. Acceptance here is not acceptance of the negativity itself but rather acceptance that it is a necessary aspect of the present moment as it is. This requires me to have a deep understanding of Impermanence and Dependent-Arising as a fact of human existence, right here, right now. This does not mean I shouldn’t feel great sadness or pain. These are endemic in human existence…..so just accept it, feel what you feel, and decide how to proceed. No pointing fingers, no verbal or physical outbursts, no eye-for-an-eye mentality; just be empty. And in the words of Dainin Katagiri, “Then this emptiness makes your life alive in the universe and you are ready to act.”
      We spend far too much time accusing and arguing over right and wrong, good and bad. Just accept that these are categories created by man pointing to supporting extremes in the natural process of dependent-arising. The existence of either depends on the other. The pendulum of impermanence knows nothing of such categories. It just swings with the force of our reactions to these extremes. Thus we can see the middle way of action. In Taoist terminology it's Wu-Wei; the non-action that leaves nothing undone.
      In answer to our question, Katagiri gives us insight derived from our practice on the cushion when he writes, "How can you do this? Just pat your ideas on the head and pass by......just become empty and flexible."

Non-Doing

      I must say that I spend a fair amount of time being confused by my readings in Philosophy and Zen literature. However, this exercise is preferable today to training for 10K races and various other sporting events. Some may call it 'old age' but I prefer something akin to wisdom - though I admit to feeling a twinge of ill-conceived hubris at the use of the term.  However, after hours of perplexity and furrowed brow, reward often comes with a sudden flash (and a rush of adrenaline equal to the runner's high). In a moment of direct experience, clarity descends upon a previously clouded understanding. And it's always exciting when something that seems so abstruse at first, becomes obvious once it is.....is what? Digested, understood, integrated... once again the inadequacy of words becomes clear.
      One of the most perplexing statements in Zen is the one below by Lao Tzu and comes from Taoist literature:

"Less and less is done
Until non-action is achieved
When nothing is done, nothing is left undone."

How, we ask ourselves; how can anything be left undone when nothing is done? It confounds rational thought.....and that is actually the point. But let's save that for another post. The point here is that I read this over and over throughout the years and while I grasped it intellectually....sort of....it wasn't until today that I realized that I had experienced it earlier in the day.
      Various writers had used any number of examples to help me "understand" what was being said, but it wasn't until my own experience embraced its truth that it was understood at a completely different level. One that I cannot seem to adequately express in words. Michael Jordan thrilling fans with aerial acrobatics on the baskeball court, gifted pianists performing feats of digital prowess that I can barely imagine even as I watch, or the archer who is said to have hit the target without having aimed because it, the arrow, shoots itself: these are everyday examples of what is being pointed to in the teachings on Non-Doing. 
      I was never able to pass the typing course in high school because of a combination of not caring enough to practice, and a tensing under pressure which also devastated my attempts at making a foul shot under pressure. My mind could never "let go" enough to allow a natural unfolding of the fruits of rigorous practice. The ego can be a daunting adversary. Suffice it to say that over the years I have learned to type well enough to handle anything I've needed to create with a computer keyboard. Typing while simultaneously reading the words from a book however became a laborious and time consuming task. Since this has become a necessary activity today, due to sheer repetition minus the dreaded competition with clock or man, things have changed.
     As I've looked for inspiring or heuristic quotes for our sangha's Thought for the Week emails, I've inadvertently improved my typing skills. Just this afternoon I read the following statement by Ray Grigg from his book The Tao of Zen:
"When non-doing appears as inaction it is peaceful, silent, and still; when it appears as action it is thoughtless, reflexive, and intuitive....This apersonal momentum is what moves the fingers of the pianist; it seems as if no one is deliberately playing the piano, as if the player has become the instrument and the music is making itself."
      At the very moment I read that passage I realized that I had been aware of that exact experience while typing. Though sporadic, there are moments when I am looking at the page of the book and, without thinking about or imagining the keys of the computer, my fingers find the letters that I am seeing on the page. When I realize that it is happening however, the thought causes a disconnect and the smooth non-typing aspect of the moment is lost in a flurry of mental interference. It reminds me of the intermittent reception we used to get with a television using the old "rabbit-ears" antenna. You would have neither picture nor no-picture. It was a jumble of static and a cacophony of distorted visual images. Suffice it to say that in those moments there are many words "undone" compared to when I am able to simply allow my fingers to work through my eyes.
      I am amazed that whenever I can settle into this "zone." It's as though something or someone else is doing the typing. My self-reflective consciousness must dissolve however, so that when I relax into non-doing, "nothing is left undone." Meaning nothing needs to be fixed later. The following quotations take on a new clarity.

"Real calmness should be found in activity itself." - Suzuki Roshi

and

"When an archer is shooting for nothing

He has all his skill.

If he shoots for a brass buckle

He is already nervous.

If he shoots for a prize of gold

He goes blind

Or sees two targets -- He is out of his mind!

His skill has not changed. But the prize

Divides him. He cares.

He thinks more of winning

Than of shooting --

And the need to win

Drains his power." - Chuang Tzu

      For anyone interested in reading further on the connection between Zen and Taoism, I recommend Ray Grigg's book The Tao of Zen. The following excerpt is found on page 294 and adds a cogent end to this post.

"Th[e] Taoist sense of virtue shares with Zen a standing aside from self so that things are left to do themselves. Detachment from doing permits doing to arise thoughtlessly and spontaneously, without the labored self-involvement that imparts ulterior motives. Such doing, consequently, becomes something more than ordinary doing because it is allowed to happen within the flow of a larger, selfless wisdom. The highest form of doing in Taoism and Zen occurs without any interference from a deliberate or contriving self. The doing is happening but no one is doing it."

Student or Teacher

      We are, at once, both student and teacher. While showing an openness to someone with divergent views, I am the student learning about a new perspective, but to an observer I am teaching the art of listening with an open mind. I am always the teacher of what "I am being" in each moment. We get hung up on the roles of student and teacher and fail to recognize that we are always occupying a position of both these processes in everything we do. Even when I am standing in front of a group explaining some arcane teaching, humility dictates that I have a responsibility to be the student of audience reactions. Otherwise I am sure to find myself lost in a cul-de-sac of hubris.
      The simultaneity involved in this student/teacher process highlights our interconnectedness with whatever condition, or situation, in which we are involved.  Every human situation is made up of a plethora of varying causes or conditions that constitute our life in any given moment. Whether in a conversation or simply sitting on a park bench, we can never escape our responsibility as both student and teacher.
      It is in this way that we may recognize responsibility for our own karma. I am what I present to the world; and it is the condition to which others will respond. If I am feeling angry, I am that anger. My attitude, expressions, or behavior - that which I am - will teach or give birth to a response in those who come in contact with me. In this way anger or love is reborn in another, in the form appropriate to that student’s condition. Each cause (a lesson taught) is the expression of a condition (teaching) previously caused (taught and learned).
      How can I even imagine that there is a boundary between being student and teacher in human society? It is a multifarious ordeal; being human. And it is for this reason that the Buddha taught that we must be the “lamp unto ourselves” and “work out our own salvation with diligence.” It takes diligent effort to recognize the nuances of how this responsibility plays out in our individual lives and those of our unsuspecting students. But it is this for which I am responsible above all else.
        "Cause and effect, means and ends, seed and fruit, cannot be severed; for the effect already blooms in the cause, the end pre-exists in the means, the fruit in the seed." - Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882)

Reality and Truth: My Journey

"Truth is the understanding of what is from moment to moment without the burden or the residue of the past moment." - Krishnamurti, Commentaries on Living
      Growing up I was always skeptical of what others offered as reality and certainly what they deemed as truth though I was unable to express my own perspective on these slippery subjects. However, over the years and after long and very interesting discussions with friends, I came to a clearer understanding of what these terms mean to me. Simply stated reality is the way it is. It refers to the state or condition of each and every moment as it arises. It is my experience of the present without - and this is an important point - without any corruption by judgment, interpretation, definition, comparison, or any of the other dualistic manifestations available to human consciousness.
      As such, everything is reality as-it-is; the way it is before we mentally dissect it into discreet parts and make categories that separate them. As you can imagine, living one's life as though this is the truth about reality requires more than a "little bit of work."
      One might ask, “So what? Why should I even stretch myself to think about such things? It all sounds like stuff for philosophers and I need concrete things to help me with my everyday living.” And this is a perfectly valid question; one that I asked many times as I put down articles and walked away from books that broached similar subjects. This post is my attempt to offer some personal truths that have emerged as tools for me to see how, contrary to my initial assumptions, these ideas, deeply explored are valuable in finding our way through the tangled skein of illusions found in everyday life. We all must find our own way of course, and for me it has been through meditation, study, and endless discussions with fellow travelers. I share it with the reader as a tease; an introduction to what I hope will be his or her own search for…..Truth, happiness, peace, contentment, or just a better way to live.
      There is an endless number of far more qualified teachers, both lay and academic, to whom the reader might ultimately want to turn for long-term leadership. My intent is simply to offer my experiences, the strength that I have found along the way, and the hope it brings each day in support of my desire to become a better human being. And for this opportunity, I am truly grateful. I owe a debt of thanks to my friend Nadine who urged me to enter the 21st. century and create this blog. 
      Meditation stands as the foundation of my journey and while for some the lofty goal might be Enlightenment, for me the aim is to simply change through love, tolerance, compassion, and equanimity with all that life offers. A wide range of Eastern thought and meditation continues to support my search for meaning and an understanding of the world both inside and outside my body. It has been and will continue to be a journey with no end, for I am a human being biologically tethered to a limited field of possibilities. Welcome to the labyrinthine corridors of my mind.
      It is the nature of human consciousness to dissect and categorize the inherent oneness of which we are part, into discrete entities so they can be processed by our senses. This process is achieved by our dualistic apprehension of sense data and as a result, we suffer. We suffer because we are continually ill-at-ease with the changing nature of our world, be it physically, emotionally, or psychologically. We are always in a struggle with the nature of an ever-changing and therefore ambiguous, tentative, and frightening universe both in and outside our bodies. However, this existential dis-ease is not really due to the nature of a changing universe - it results from our perspective or posture in relation to it.
      As I’ve said, Truth or reality is for me, the present-as-it-is before the neuro-chemical nature of our bodies deconstruct it into manageable parts - and at the same time it is also our present-moment after it has been deconstructed. I suggest that there does exist a oneness or undifferentiated whole, as well as a dualistic world which we perceive through our senses. Just as the distant planet when seen through a telescope is bright and clear yet when we search for it with the naked eye, all we find is another patch of darkness; a void....though illusory. Regardless of which “truth” we are in touch with in any moment, it is the truth nonetheless, because it is true for us, as it is, in that moment – dualistic or One.
      All thoughts and ideas are merely illusions created by our dualistic mental processes. They are illusions in the sense that there is no separate, identifiable essence inherent in them. They are merely “fingers pointing to the moon” – thoughts or ideas that represent discreet parts of one, magnificent, on-going process. A process we see represented in our world by a coming and going, birth and death.
      Each day, minute, or second, the mind creates abstractions from sensory data culled out from the one ongoing present moment. When I was able to recognize this process as a fact, verification seemed to arise everywhere. Clarity flashed onto the scene at a friend’s house in Lakewood, Ohio. I was sitting quietly reading a book, the subject matter now far from recollection, and it burst upon me like a meteor. I remember yelling to my friend in the kitchen, “Oh my God I understand it!” This was one of those ideas I just hadn’t been able to get my head around and had put it in storage. “Hey, I’ve got it,” I yelled again, “there is just this moment - Now is all there is.” My friend was less than impressed with the exhuberance or my insight. But I was ecstatic and tossed the idea around for hours, looking at it from all directions and thrilled as a child at Christmas. From that “Aha” I was renewed in my belief that answers would come if I could just be patient and continue to walk my path.
      And then years later, I was again primed for an insight. It was New Years Eve as I recall, and if I hadn’t turned on my computer I wouldn’t have realized it. I was living at a meditation center in the Blue Ridge Mountains of North Carolina. I had little contact with worldly events for a number of months, save for a periodic email from friends. I was learning first hand how comforting it can be to just stay focused on the present versus the mental cacophony born of the world at large.
      In a rare excursion into Internet news, I read where President Ford had been laid to rest and it prompted thought once again about how life is but a continuous oneness. That it's the function our mind which creates, as Einstein said, the "optical illusion of separateness" and while it may seem as though there will always be time to create things, to do things, or go places, the fact is - we are in the future now.
      I realized with a new clarity that there will come a moment when I come face to face with death, when my time has really come to an end, and all options are exhausted. When this moment arrives (and this is a bit of a misnomer because it is not the moment that arrives, but rather a situation or set of circumstances that arises as the present moment), I will look back on what are recalled as previous moments, and recognize that there is not, actually, the distance between now and then that I had imagined. Every present moment, although seemingly separated from the previous one by some imaginary expression of time, actually cradles my entire life, beginning to end. There are no starting and stopping points in this present oneness. It's awe inspiring when recognized at our deepest level - I am but awareness. Or if one prefers, consciousness is at once me and, at the very same moment, that process by which this “I” is created, extracted, out of the vast ocean of is-ness.
      With the help of science, and a meditation practice, one can begin to see that boundaries are assumed to be present simply because we are unable to have a sensory experience of our actual connection to this Oneness. For instance, our ability to hear sounds or see colors is limited to a small number of wavelengths by our biology. Our bodies are biologically wired to work within specific parameters. Beyond these parameters, dictated by nature, we are unable to sense the fullness of data available. Rather than there being an end to color when we no longer see it, we have found that there are wavelengths we are just unable to process. We are unable to function at a multitude of sensory levels, and therefore have the illusion of a static boundary and so it appears there are actual, solid barriers, or boundaries between us and the rest of the world. We live our lives through this illusion of separateness. However, we do have the capacity to recognize our error (root of our suffering is after all - Ignorance) and we have the ability to transcend this limitation.
      To transcend is not to make this illusion go away, but to live in harmony with it. By recognizing my inability to process all the information available, I will not put an end to suffering in the world, and it will not make life easy by removing obstacles or painful times. But it does allow me to recognize that whatever this moment holds, it is not exactly as it is perceived. And since I can never be aware of the "whole picture" it is an indication that it is likely that “the world is unfolding as it should.” (Desiderata, Max Ehrman, 1927).
       I used to grapple with this idea, as though once attained it would shelter me from anxiety and stress; as though something would miraculously fall into place and all would be simplified. However I now see that this awareness is but a tool. A point of leverage allowing me to overturn the heavy burden of fear, disappointment, regret, and all manner of dissatisfaction that reside in my attachment to time and circumstance. It is then up to me to learn to accept life as it comes and not interpret whatever is happening, as somehow interfering with my life. This is my life - just as it is - now!.
       One day, while pondering the notion of a timeless present, an incident came to mind that frames a recurring pattern in my thinking over the years. I was forever imagining scenarios in which I was the hero. Whether I was on the football field scoring touchdowns, winning the high school state basketball championship in the final seconds, or writing the novel that would catapult me ahead of Hemmingway as an icon of American literature. And while somewhat adolescent, these desires are not far off the norm and probably quite achievable for more of us than we imagine……… if we are willing to pay the price to achieve them.
      It was after we had graduated from high school and a friend had joined the Air Force. His father was a commercial pilot and my friend loved everything about flying. We were close during those tumultuous high school years of male competition over everything from girls to who was the toughest. One spring when the annual carnival came to town he played a marching-song for our male bravado and foolishly, I allowed myself to be talked into going on a ride called The Bullet. It consisted of two bullet shaped, caged, seats that spun the riders laterally, and if that weren’t enough, these spinning bullets where attached to a long arm that fired them in a head-over-heels fashion at the same time. He loved it. I could hear him laughing and calling to me to join him in his revelry. I was petrified beyond explanation and if I had had the strength in my hands, my death grip on the bar in front of me would have been broken it in two. And years later, had he lived through the Air Force training mission in which his jet plane crashed into a ball of flames, it would have been one of the stories we repeated over and over at class reunions until others refused to listen.
      When I attended his funeral I was struck by the realization that he lived every minute of his short life with an energy and focus about which I knew nothing. And while at that time I didn’t have the ability to put it into words, forty years later I recognized that what he had and I did not, was the understanding that if you want something tomorrow you have to do more than imagine it today. Every dream or project he put his mind to, he worked for in the present, while I stood on the sidelines imagining what the game might be like. He was an active participant in his life and achieved many more dreams than I in the time he was allotted.
      Somehow I always assumed there would be time to do what I wanted to do..... in the future.  Today I am able to see just how mistaken a notion that was. Through meditative self-inquiry and stretching, reaching, for my own understanding of life, I recognize that the notion of discreet units of time is a construction of my thinking. It’s helpful and necessary in many ways, yet false beyond that window to the world within my mind. In the material world it helps to plan, create time-lines to assist in the accomplishment of goals and to mark progress. But in the realm of the spirit or in moral development it has become clear that if I want to be something tomorrow, I must be it today. For tomorrow never comes; it is always just this moment; here, now. The notion of time leads me astray. If I desire to be loving or kind in some future time and place, it is kindness and love I must embody today. And so it is with all that I wish to be.
      The one certainty, one Truth in life is change. The moments, hours, and years that we call our life is the stage upon which we, like Shakespearean actors, play out our part with the deluded certainty that our personal life and loves are special. That the suffering and betrayal we experience is somehow different than that experienced by all human beings….and this is simply not so. In the memorable words of Joseph Campbell;
        “Fill circle, from the womb of the tomb to the tomb of the womb we came; an ambiguous enigmatical incursion into a world of solid matter that is soon to melt from us like the substance of a dream. And looking back at what promised to be our unique, unpredictable, and dangerous adventure, all we find in the end is such a series of standard metamorphoses as men and women have undergone in every quarter of the world, in all recorded centuries, and under every odd disguise of civilization.” - The Hero With a Thousand Faces.

Letting Go of the Idea of Self

The Island,

An Anthology of the Buddha’s Teachings on Nirvana, by Ajahn Amaro and Ajahn Pasanno

Excerpts from Ch.14, Practices and Perspectives II

      “In order to utilize truly the legacy of the Buddha’s guidance, we need to apply the ways of practice as directly and immediately as we can. Although there are ’84,000 Dhamma doors’……being attentive to what will take us through directly is a necessary part of our practice…..we can wander along the Buddha’s path of practice in a way that is less than efficacious if we are not wisely considering how to implement that path directly and realize its true purpose.”
      I think it matters not if we are Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Muslim, or choose any combination of the myriad forms of religious belief available to the modern man and woman. Intellectually, we may know more than anyone on the planet about the concepts of all spiritual teachings, yet still be experientially ignorant. Having full and complete knowledge of the process involved in flying an airplane, sans actual experience in the air, does not a pilot make.....and certainly not one with whom I wish to fly.
      A very important aspect of understanding how to implement the teachings in my life is to pay close attention to terminology. In whatever way a two-thousand year old original manuscript may have been repeatedly translated, by dissimilar cultures in distant lands, my path seems clear. I must search for my own understanding of its essential meaning and traverse my own uncharted path with diligence. Just as the Buddha directed us to “be a lamp unto yourself,” I must take responsibility for my journey by testing every teaching against his admonition to the Kalamas:
             “Do not go by hearsay, nor by what is handed down by others, nor by what is stated on the authority of your traditional teachings. Do not go by reasons, nor by inference, nor by arguments as to method, nor by reflection on and approval of an opinion, nor out of respect, thinking a recluse must be deferred to….(rather) when these teachings, followed out and put into practice, conduce to loss and suffering – then reject them.” (Taken from the Introduction in the book by Christmas Humphreys, “Buddhism, An Introduction and Guide” and therein credited to Woodward, Some Saying of the Buddha, p. 283)
      Or in our common vernacular, check them out and if they work accept them, if not – move on.
      This morning I was paging through a Readers Digest magazine and came upon a cartoon that exemplified my point. It simply showed a curving mountain road, a broken guardrail, and a vehicle flying though the air toward the canyon below. The speech bubble coming from the vehicle read, “recalculating.” How might this be interpreted if seen by a person who is unfamiliar with motor-powered transportation, and the term “recalculating” had been translated into the language of this person living in a remote section of a vast, uncharted rain forest? I have exaggerated the situation so there is no hope of suggesting that this person could have possibly known the exact meaning of the original author. Nor would he have any familiarity with the culture in which that strange looking airborne object might belong.
      But I needn’t go as far as this to make my point. The humor would in fact, be lost even for a person living today if they had never had the experience of failing to follow the directions of a vehicles GPS navigation device. Personal experience is a necessary requisite. It is with this in mind that I offer for your own experimentation, the thoughts of those far more astute than I on the matter at hand.
      Ajahn Amaro writes, “A central part of the direct path of the Buddha is ‘letting go’ or ‘not clinging.’ This is something we must do in the present and recognize the result in the here and now. The degree to which we are able to let go, together with the correctness or appropriateness of that letting go, is what will determine its effect.” He goes on to explain that there are four types of clinging that are instrumental in our suffering and that “when we are able to relinquish these forms of clinging and the ignorance on which they are based, the heart has the opportunity to experience freedom.”
      The four types of clinging pointed to by the Buddhist teachings are clinging to (1) sensual pleasures, (2) views, (3) rules and observances, (4) the doctrine of self. Furthermore, the scripture states that when one does not cling, one is not agitated, and when one is not agitated then one personally attains Nirvana. So it seems quite clear that in order for one to attain Nirvana - release, freedom - one component in the process is to experience the letting go of the idea of self. Note: It is to "experience it for ourselves."
      He writes that there tends to be an assumption that the teachings regarding no-self are abstract and that we need someone more knowledgeable to enlighten us as to their real meaning. However they are a very practical assessment of how we can most successfully relate to the basic conditions of life as a human being. For instance, when we are able to see clearly how we cling to ideas, and in this case, that there is a separate entity called a self, we are able to recognize how these ideations are not in accord with reality; that the clinging to these misconceptions is the root of much of our suffering. He suggests that we can learn to, “step back, cool the ardor of our delusion and relax our grip in order to put down what really didn’t belong to us in the first place. Inextricably bound up with our sense of ourselves is our perception of the world outside ourselves. As the Buddha pointed out, our experience of the world is composed simply of sensate impressions making contact with sense organs; not something separate from ourselves.”
      Amaro tells us that we might see this aspect of the practice often translated under doctrines, and can be presented in very arcane or difficult to understand ways. However, he tells us that these habits of viewing the world all grow out of very common ways of framing issues in our mind and the “….permutations of clinging to the (idea) of self are…extensive.” Elsewhere he writes, “There is no distinct division between the four different forms of clinging. Having clung to sensual pleasures (or views, rites or self) doesn’t mean we are exempt from the other forms of clinging. One form of clinging can easily condition another. Similarly, unraveling one form can lead to the unraveling of others.”
      Here we are reminded of the idea of Dependent-Arising and the interconnectedness of all things. From the confluence of a sense organ with a sensation all of human experience arises and in reverse, with the extinction of any cause, the resulting condition is also extinguished. One might suggest here that when the sensual pleasures are in contact with views to which we are attached, all our beliefs arise regarding the truth or falsity of both, even though they may be in their entirety, improvable and without substance – the idea of self may come to mind here.
      He writes, “True letting go does not come about only by repeating the words of Buddha’s teaching. There needs to be an unambiguous understanding of the difficulties that ensue from grasping or clinging, and an unwavering discernment that can let go of whatever clinging leads to suffering. The mind that generates mental formations continues to create the causes for its entanglements, whether they are pleasant or unpleasant.”
      The real question then becomes “how do we let go?” and the answer is in his next statement. He says. “With wisdom as the foundation (“wisdom” being the operational term), the mind can dwell with non-clinging as its base and realize true peace by not generating any volitional formations" (mental habits, opinions, compulsions).
      He goes on to clarify further, “This ability is not a void, empty state resembling a vacuum. Instead, it is a dynamic state of equipoise that relies on a balance of faculties and discernment rooted in non-clinging.”
      It is at this juncture that I would like to reinforce the need to go into the words of another and find our own perspective within them. In the above quote he refers to “an unambiguous understanding” which we need to find concerning “our own difficulties” that arise out of grasping or clinging to ideas. This process is what the Buddha, I believe, had in mind when he admonished us be a lamp unto ourselves and to “Work out (y) our own salvation with diligence.” So, since in my experience the only thing that is ambiguous is what is proposed by others - it seems reasonable to understand the path out of ambiguity into clarity, is to put it in my own words. This however takes a commitment to the work of finding one’s own perspective on any matter. And in this particular case he tells us that the subject of our inquiry is “our own personal experiential difficulties with the process of clinging” and “the manner in which we personally suffer as a result.” No one else’s words or perspectives will suffice as the ground for our liberation. As it is often said, “It’s an inside job.”
      In addition to this personal inventory, I hear him saying there needs to be an, “unwavering discernment.” The opposite might be a “one-time” inspection. But I read “unwavering” as pointing to an abiding discernment, or awareness - that is, on-going; and it is the repetitive nature of this search for the personal suffering which arises from our clinging to ideas, that we can understand what is pointed to by his use of the term wisdom coming two sentences later.
      He is telling us that the secret to “letting go” rests in our continued commitment to looking deeply at our own experiences, now and in the past, so that we may achieve the wisdom that comes from seeing clearly, the present reality of our human condition. Furthermore, he points out that by seeing clearly, exactly how it is that our perceptions are simply the conditional interaction of sense datum with our neuro-chemical physiology, we are afforded a freedom (i.e. Wisdom) from the constraints of delusory ideations. But the last sentence is of immense importance. He reminds us not to understand the result (Wisdom, enlightenment, nirvana, bliss, etc.) as if it were a void or vacuum. Rather, that it is a dynamic state, occurring within our material existence, wherein our release from clinging and attachment is directly related to an “equipoise that relies on a balance of faculties and discernment rooted in non-clinging.” In other words we find a point of equanimity between the senses and the use of those senses to understand ourselves; the equanimity being grounded or rooted in an ongoing desire or intention to see life with the eye of (Buddha) Wisdom.
      Amaro cautions us further when he writes, "Even the right view that induces non-clinging cannot be clung to as an end in and of itself. Although it forms a central part of the path of practice – keeping us on course and focused in the present – it has to be abandoned when it has done its work, so that true release can follow.” This theme is echoed in the Sutta Nipatta as translated by Venerable H. Saddhatissa; “As a drop of water does not stick to a lotus leaf or as a lotus flower is untainted by the water, so the sage does not cling to anything –seen, heard, or thought.”
      And as to the question “Why?” let me borrow from Christmas Humphreys once again, “The ephemeral self must die, so much is clear: but what shall attain salvation, become enlightened, reach Nirvana, when this unreal, separative, misery-causing self is dead? The answer is man.”
      So now some thoughts from a previous post: Ego is a term that designates an "enduring and conscious element that knows experience," (Philosophical definition based on Random House Dictionary 2010). This definition leads us to imagine an enduring and conscious "self" refuted in the Buddhist teaching of Anatta (No-self). Robert Kennedy says, in his book Zen Gifts to Christians,“The self is the sum of its functions in the present moment.” When I imagine a function as an experience, it allows me to understand the essence of ego or self, not as an entity but rather, as a verb. A verb which denotes a mental construct (perhaps we might read as "illusion") manifested in physical behavior commonly referred to as an act of grasping, wanting, desiring, or evading.
      Now this is an important statement so let me repeat it: When I imagine a function as an experience, it allows me to understand the essence of ego or self, not as an entity but rather, as a verb. A verb which denotes a mental construct (perhaps we might read as "illusion") manifested in physical behavior commonly referred to as an act of grasping, wanting, desiring, or evading.
      In this way it becomes quite easy, in light of dependent-arising, to understand ego as an action arising out of attraction or aversion which arises out of sensory contact. Think about it - the brain, working with its biologically determined functions, responds to sensory contact, and from this arises wanting and the result is dissatisfaction or suffering.
      It stands to reason then if we stop wanting, being attached, and grasping after things, the ego or “I” will no longer arise. In the absence of wanting, this thing thought of as "me" will simply be one with whatever is, in each moment. The Buddha told us that life is suffering because of this grasping; our tendency to strive for more and more and never be satisfied. We find ourselves dissatisfied with life; we suffer from want. We tend toward becoming covetous of that which we don't have, neurotically attached to what we do, and in fear of losing it once obtained. Ego, desire, suffer; they are one and the same. We get off track when we think that ego is an actual entity. Release is in "letting-go."
      To be free from want we must disentangle the threads of "I" in the myriad tapestry of self arising from the world of form that plays behind our eyes.



Why Do I Believe That?

      In our next discussion group my friends and I will be looking at the question "Why do we believe what we do?" Not as simple a question as one might think....if one really thinks about it. And since I haven't really accepted anything at face value since I was in grade school - at least not for long - I'm going to explore this question here in the hope that it will enable me to bring more than confusion to our next meeting.
       The following is one translation of what the Buddha is reported to have said to his followers;
            "Do not believe anything simply because you have heard it.  Do not believe anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many.  Do not believe anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.  Do not believe anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.  Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.  But after observation and analysis when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it."

      I think the first time I heard this admonition to "be a lamp unto oneself," I was a college freshman in a previous dimension of time, far, far away. It seemed to me to be of the utmost importance even then. However I had not yet gained the necessary mental acuity to flesh out the rest of my position. I think my friends might say that the jury is still out on this issue today, but I shall avoid that digression for now.

      Some might suggest that what they believe is truth. I have been searching for "what is true" since that early introduction to what turned out to be the severely limited annals of my experience with higher education. However, as my search widened and gained more depth over the years, I came to the realization that what I might believe at any moment had absolutely no necessary connection to what should be considered Truth. Surely whatever I believe is a truth for me, but Truth is another thing altogether (as evidenced by a previous post titled Chasing One's Tale). They are in most cases totally different animals. Or at least, we should be able to agree that no clear, absolute connection can be made between them. Personally, at some point I realized that if I knew the Truth I would have no need for a belief about it.
       "So," about now you're probably mumbling to yourself, "just get on with what you do think on this subject." Fine. Here goes.

        The results of my personal inquiry into "why I believe what I believe" to date, is that it resonates with what I have experienced and/or it is the result of my best thinking on the subject. Yes, it is purely subjective. How could it be otherwise? Without some form of Divine Intervention, (which, acceptable for some perhaps, has never met the two criteria I just mentioned), how could I imagine even a moment of successful, objective reasoning on any subject, without thought? That's just not reasonable since all human reasoning is subject to the limited capabilities of our brain. As the bumper sticker on my car says, "Don't trust everything you think."

       So, in an attempt to make the definitive statement you have been eagerly awaiting I will say, "My beliefs arise out of my particular history which includes, but is not necessarily limited to, all that I have learned from my own search as well as from those influences in my particular life experience which are so deeply embedded, that I am unaware of them as constitutional influences. In short I am referring to the historical aggregate named Bob, as he is at any moment in time. In addition, my beliefs are the result of visceral/emotional experiences as they arise in each moment. And these beliefs change in direct relation to my continued effort to be open to and mindful of them.....especially when they seem troublesome, painful, or in some manner disturbing to any beliefs presently held.
       My beliefs are as impermanent as anything else in this relative existence. They arise from memories of the past as well as the hopes or desires for an imagined future, and will function as a palliative to the fears and uncertainties endemic to the human condition. Whether or not I remain entrenched in any particular belief however, is contingent on my willingness to recognize that "what I believe" is not proof of any Universal or Ultimate Truth. It represents who I am at any point in the evolving history of Bob.
       At the very mundane level, beliefs allow us to function in this life with a modicum of psychological freedom since we don't have to process and determine our position on everything that arises. We can accept some things as factual, i.e. accurately depicting reality, and move on to making everyday decisions without the burden of doubt about the minutia of everyday life.
       Beliefs however, also have a dark side if we don't hold them lightly with an open mind. To do otherwise fosters hubris; a posture in which genocide and all of man's inhumanity to man is incubated. When mankind's need to feel safe from uncertainty and change becomes an obsession, beliefs can harden into unwavering preferences and prejudices. (If you are interested you can read more on this in the previous posts titled, The Three Shuns, and Preferences and Equanimity)
       The value of the Buddha's statement, "after observation and analysis when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it" would seem intuitive. And in order to assist us in the work of observation and analysis, he spoke to us about what I personally consider the fruits of his awakening: Dependent Arising, Impermanence, No-self, and Emptiness. With a deepening understanding of these four foundations of understanding, we are able to accept the uncertainties and ever-changing nature of our existence with equanimity.

       

The Illusion of Me

      One thing I have become painfully aware of as a result of my hours on the cushion is that there is a subjective experience of physical pain. No surprise there, right? At times this pain can be lessened by any one of several methods and will often disappear all together. But at other times there is just nothing I seem to be able to do but relax and be with the experience. It's during these trying times that I have recognized that there is also, for lack of a better term, an objective recognition in the form of an observer sans the subjective, painful experience. During meditation it's as though there is a part of me sitting up in a glass enclosure watching and knowing that the sitting-me is feeling pain, without however the experiencing the pain. I actually have this image in my mind.
      Now the way that I have depicted this mental splitting is not to be misconstrued. It should be understood only as the way I envisioned the experience during meditation. It seems that I was able to separate from the actual physical sensation but needed some sort of picture and metaphoric representation of a place "to go." For some reason, possibly attached to my years in law enforcement, I created a vision comparable to the common area in a prison with the glass enclosed watch-tower in the center. Metaphorically speaking we might say that when I was able to stay within the tower I was free of the experience of pain. I have often tried to stay with that observer. I am able to do so for only a short period of time and will fall back into focusing on the physical experience once the pain is avoided.
      So much for my introduction. What I want to talk about here is the fact that when I refer to a "part of me" it implies that this me to which I claim ownership, is able to shapeshift or in some other way separate into a second....what shall we say...."alternate me?" Like that entity we hear referred to as an alter-ego perhaps. Philosophically interesting - maybe; and while helpful in describing my experience, it may not be at all helpful in understanding the notions of impermanence and no-self in Buddhist teachings. Each of us must judge for ourselves in these matters.
      So now more to the point. Ego is a term that designates an "enduring and conscious element that knows experience," (Philosophical definition based on Random House Dictionary 2010). This definition leads us to imagine an enduring and conscious "self" refuted in the Buddhist teaching of Anatta (No-self). Robert Kennedy says, in his book Zen Gifts to Christians,“The self is the sum of its functions in the present moment.” When I imagine a function as an experience, it allows me to understand the essence of ego or self, not as an entity but rather, as a verb. A verb which denotes a mental construct (perhaps we might read as "illusion") manifested in physical behavior commonly referred to as an act of grasping, wanting, desiring, or evading. In this way it becomes quite easy, in light of dependent-arising, to understand ego as an action arising out of attraction or aversion which arises out of sensory contact. Think about it - the brain, working with its biologically determined functions, responds to sensory contact and from them arises wanting and the result is dissatisfaction or suffering.
      It stands to reason then if we stop wanting, being attached, and grasping after things, the ego or “I” will no longer arise. In the absence of wanting, this thing I think of as "me" will simply be one with whatever is at the moment. The Buddha told us that life is suffering because of this grasping; our tendency to strive for more and more and never be satisfied.  We find ourselves dissatisfied with life; we suffer from want. We tend toward becoming covetous of that which we don't have, neurotically attached to what we do, and in fear of losing it once obtained. Ego, desire, suffer; they are one and the same. We get off track when we think that ego is an actual entity.
        To be free from want we must disentangle the threads of "I" in the tapestry of self arising from the world of form that plays behind our eyes.

Nirvana Here and Now

      Nirvana, like dharma, has a number of nuances in definition depending on the various schools of Buddhist thought. Some writings suggest nirvana is a place located outside the human body. However, if one takes the position that nirvana is a state or posture within one’s mind rather rather than at some distant location in time and space, then it sheds a different light on its relation to dharma and samsara.
      The meaning of the term dharma as I am using it here should be understood as the "present moment as-it-is." That is, each moment as it presents itself to the individual sans judgment, preference, or the critical analysis manifested in the process of dualistic apprehension.
       Samsara is a term used to identify the repetitive cycles of Dukkha, or suffering, each human being experiences concerning the unique nature of human consciousness; though for some, more easily identified as an omnipresent sense of dissatisfaction. In Buddhist writings it is often connected to the notion of Karma as it relates to the cycle of subsequent lifetimes reported to haunt the unenlightened.
However, my intent here is to confine my commentary to this life, and how these terms might be understood here and now.
      It is a neuro-biological function of the human senses to dissect and filter the interconnected oneness of the universe-as-it-is, into discrete entities which can then be processed by the brain. This process creates our dualistic apprehension of all sensations and as a result, we suffer. We suffer because we are continually ill-at-ease with the changing nature of this sensate world, be it physically, emotionally, or psychologically - inside or out. Or put another way, we continuously feel estranged from a deep sense of security in the face of the an ever-changing and therefore ambiguous, tentative, and frightening universe; both in and outside our bodies.
      What I am suggesting is that if nirvana is not interpreted as a location outside the mind, but rather a posture - here and now - resulting from the extinction of the root cause of our dis-ease (dualistic thinking), we will see clearly the path to liberation in this life. If we are able to undertand it as a new way of being-in-the-world, whereby we embrace or absorb the impact of the constant flow of data upon our senses with emotional and intellectual equanimity (the distinguishing characteristic of nirvana), we will be without judgment (attraction or aversion) and our suffering will be extinguished. This equanimity requires us to see deeply into the connection between four very important truths about our existence - Impermanence, Emptiness, No-self, and Dependent-Arising - and how they are manifested in our everyday life. Or in the words of Christmas Humphreys in his book, A Western Approach to Zen, (pg.182), “ Zen does not deliver us from the conditions of manifestation; it enables us to deal with them efficiently."
      If samsara is understood as simply the cyclical pattern of human suffering, ontological in nature and a main tenet of the Buddha’s teaching, then we arrive at a point where samsara can be recognized as the dharma. However, it is important as well to recognize that this existential dis-ease is not due to the nature of a changing universe, but results instead from our perspective or posture in relation to our world. Our suffering arises when we cling to our limited, myopic view of the nature of our universe. A perspective I gratefully found echoed by Professor Tucci, the authority on Tibetan Buddhism when he suggested that we, "Avoid the harshness of unyielding certainty.” If I am not awakened to the manner in which the aforementioned truths are in fact experiential facts, I will continue on the samsaric treadmill.
      That said, we must always be aware that the suffering about which the Buddha spoke is our birthright as recipients of human consciousness, and samsara is a necessary result. Nirvana however, the extinction and release from this suffering, is with us at all times. Or if I may once again quote Christmas Humphreys: “From the first moment of enlightenment the newly awakened mind uses distinction and discrimination as before but ceases to note the difference.” (ibid, pg.157)
      Nirvana, samsara, enlightenment – all these are illusions created by our dualistic mental processes. They are illusions in the sense that there is no separate, identifiable essence inherent in them (unless one chooses to identify this essence as their referents). They are as “fingers pointing to the moon” – thoughts or ideas that represent something, and in this case, a process; a path out of the woods.

  “Posture is everything.” - Japanese Zen master, Shunryu Suzuki

You Can't Love Something You Need

      At first light this may seem a bit confusing. However after I gave it some serious thought, it really made a lot of sense depending of course, on what you mean by love. Most people want to love, or be loved by another, in order to fulfill some need of their own. Perhaps the need is quite subtle and requires more than a wee bit of introspection.
      After considerable effort to be open to my own needs in past relationships, I was able to see the accuracy of the statement. I came to realize that my experience of love was tinged with more than a little selfishness, and that this is by definition, an attachment to self. I was able to see how it precludes us from allowing our beloved the freedom not only to be who they are today, but to grow and to change over time. To be needed means the beloved is needed in a particular way; they are required to fulfill the needs of their lover. This kind of loving is based on filling needs, wants, expectations, or desires for me rather than being based on my honoring and thereby loving you.
      More often than not this kind of relating requires you to complete me by assuaging my emptiness in order to receive love from me. It really isn’t love at all, but rather a dependency on my part, which will restrict your freedom as a human being based on my needs. In this situation attachment and need are synonymous. Krishnamurti made a similar pronouncement when he cautioned his readers that "One cannot love what one is attached to."
      Stewart Emery expressed a less self-sentered perspective when he wrote, "Love is when I am concerned with your relationship with your own life, rather than with your relationship to mine." Real love might similarly be understood as a state wherein one honors the beloved as a total package: as valuable just as they are. To care for another sans my need for feeling wanted, being taken care of, or in some way lifting me beyond the limits of my own abilities. This is not to desparage the fact that these may be secondary outcomes of any relationship. If so, all the better for it. But true love is not about an attachment to having my needs met in a relationship above the needs of my beloved. Through real love I am able to value my beloved's freedom to change or to grow over time.
      How does one nurture this posture within oneself? I think it all begins with cultivating an awareness of what those needs are for me and being committed to taking responsibility for an open dialogue with myself as well as the one I love regarding my feelings in spite of any fear of vulnerability. Anything less is an evasion of my own tacit attachments, precludes equanimity, and fosters dissatisfaction through the "rebirthing" of previous sufferings.
      And in the words of Walt Whitman, ".......re-examine all you have been told at school or church or in any book, dismiss whatever insults your soul, and your flesh shall be a great poem and have the richest fluency not only in its words but in the silent lines of its lips and face and between the lashes of your eyes and in every motion and joint of your body… You shall go directly to the creation. Your trust shall master the trust of everything you touch… and shall master all attachment."

An Insight Revisited

October 29, 2006 Sunday, SDRC

      The retreat ended today. Our final assignment was to divide into pairs and tell our partner what insight we were going to take away from this retreat. I spoke about my difficulty with compassion. I shared my realization that the righteous indignation I feel and the anger I project out at different people, and the ideas or views they support, is because I feel powerless, sad, angry, or in some way suffer because of it. The anger I feel toward the treatment of hunting dogs, or even the hunting itself, causes me to suffer as a result of the feelings that arise from the thoughts I have about these issues. And in order to avoid the suffering that arises from my aversion, I get angry. The result is that I get a false sense of power. It is a power derived from an attitude of righteous indignation and will always superimpose itself over an experience of sadness or painful emotions.
      I came to recognize that as long as I continue to operate in this manner I will be unable to have real compassion for the animals, the hunters, and even myself. And that any skillful action on my part will be out of range. To have real compassion one must stand in the middle between the two feelings and be able to feel for both sides; a posture of equanimity. Otherwise I am simply aligning myself with one side or the other. And I will be forever separated from being able extend loving-kindness or skillfully administer compassionate action . Compassion needs equanimity not self righteous anger which is actually an avoidance reaction.

Earlier Thoughts On That Illusory Tree (SDRC 2006)

      I’m not sure how it happened. I was just standing there leaning against the truck and I realized that I cannot describe a tree, for instance, without “me”. What do I mean when I say without “me?” I’m referring to that entity that all of us refer to as “me.” When we say, "It‘s you and me," "Do you want to go with me?" or "That’s just me."
      In Robert Kennedy’s book, Zen Gifts to Christians, he says, "The self is the sum of its functions in the present moment.” In similar fashion, I think when we refer to me, the mind is employing the sum total of all that we have learned, and this in turn manifests in our thoughts as the notion of  "I." This aggregate of experiences referred to as I or me is comprised of all that we have learned - memory - and we access this information (or stated another way - we have an awareness of “I”) when consciousness processes our past visceral and mental experience. It is the manifestation of a reflective consciousness; it is a metaphor of sorts. I become the actor in all those recalled experiential moments.
      So I then tried to imagine how would I describe the object commonly referred to as a tree without using previously learned words or ideas, and realized that I could not. This led immediately to the realization that in nature there is no such thing as a tree. There is that which we have labeled a tree but the word, the name, does not describe anything. It simply denotes an entity we commonly agree to call, or refer to as, a "tree." A valuable asset to be sure, but not the whole story.
      It further occurred to me that this is true of all things in our world. If we were to look out into a forest without our memories, words, and teachings, what would we see? There have been any number of words meant to represent just such a thing; “Suchness”, the “One” perhaps, or “No-Thing." And it seemed clear that without “me” the world is something quite different than the one into which the I is born, lives, and ultimately passes through. Therefore it is true that we, as human beings, create the world in which we live. Our world is created in and by our mind, and it is what is referred to in Buddhist literature as the Relative world. There is also, and at the same time, the Absolute world, and it includes all that is in our Relative world and more. However, this Absolute world is void of all the separate images created within a dualistic mind.
      While all this may seem rather trivial or obvious to some, for me it opened the door into asking, "Then what is beyond the limited, dualistic perception of the world around us?" It allowed me to see what the esoteric teachings in Zen were pointing toward. That all things are connected in “Oneness” and that in this regard, even the use of the word One is superfluous. It is perhaps more reasonable to say that all things are “part of the Oneness that has no name." There is nothing apart from that complete wholeness which would require a distinguishing label, so to do so makes no sense.
      Now all this is certainly not new to any student of Zen as I said, but what interested me was that I found a new way to grasp the idea of Emptiness. It was to attempt to describe all things in the universe without using the labels we have learned and agreed upon to communicate a description of reality. In truth all the descriptions which we accept as representing reality, are nothing more than illusions. Illusions because they are accurate only in the relative world of the human senses. In the absence of the human mind there are none of the separate things we call our world. Ultimate or absolute reality is empty of all the separating boundaries that our mind creates. The universe beyond the boundaries of our dissecting mind is empty - yet missing nothing. It is empty of us.

On Karma

      The following excerpts are from What The Buddha Taught, by Walpola Rahula. All italics, parentheses, and comments in red indicate my perspectives or additions, not the thoughts of the author.
      Rahula writes, “What we call death is the total non-functioning of the physical body. Do all these forces and energies stop altogether? ‘No.’ Will, volition, desire, thirst to exist, to continue, to become more and more, is a tremendous force that moves whole lives, whole existences, that even moves the whole world….According to Buddhism, this force does not stop with the non-functioning of the body, which is death; but it continues manifesting itself in another form, producing re-existence which is called rebirth.”
      My perspective on this, as I have noted before, is that the whole idea of an after-life is for me a non-issue since all queries into this matter are mediated by a physical brain that cannot process metaphysical data, as the definition would indicate. It is capable of imagining something however, and for that we have an extraordinary mind. We are masters of creation. We create theories about all those aspects of our existence about which we feel fear or uncertainty. We try to explain and make certain our understanding of all things about which we feel uncertain and therein make us fearful. Ambiguity is not our friend.
      The drawback to any certainty which arises from these speculations is that they do not necessarily reflect a natural fact. They are based on the proper and healthy functioning and the limitations of our physical mind. And they remain but mere speculation.
      This is not to say that our ability to create solutions to the physically based problems of our material existence isn't valuable. Surely we would not have evolved as we have to this point without this gift (which, in any case, may be argued as mere hubris on our part). In this arena we are the "great lord of all things" in the words of Alexander Pope. But when it comes to speculating on the imagined aspects of what is unknowable to the functioning of the human mind, we are "yet prey to all."
      It is for this reason that I suggest that the perspective put forth here by the Venerable Rahula is easily understood as a workable understanding of the process of karma in ones search for the cessation of suffering in this life. In short, I read the term “rebirth” here to be pointing to “a rebirth" of a series of forces or energies in future lives (of others) as a result of our interactions with those others.

      Rahula goes on to say, “Now another question arises: If there is no permanent, unchanging entity or substance like Self or Soul (atman), what is it that can re-exist or be reborn after death? Before we go on to the life after death, let us consider what this life is, and how it continues now. What we call life, as we have so often repeated, is the combination of the Five Aggregates, a combination of physical and mental energies. These are constantly changing; they do not remain the same for two consecutive moments. Every moment they are born and they die, ‘When the aggregates arise, decay and die, O bhikkhu, every moment you are born, decay, and die.’ Prmj I(PTS), p.78”
      “Thus, even now during this life time, every moment we are born and die, but we continue. If we can understand that in this life we can continue without a permanent, unchanging substance like Self or Soul, why can’t we understand that those forces themselves can continue without a Self or Soul behind them after the non-functioning of the body?”
      “When this physical body is no more capable of functioning, energies do not die with it, but continue to take some other shape or form, which we call another life….Physical and mental energies which constitute the so-called being have within themselves the power to take a new form, and grow gradually and gather force to the full.”
      Remember this is speaking to the notion of Karma contained in the Buddhist cosmology and in my opinion, needn’t be swallowed whole in order to be useful in this life in the battle over the recurring visitation by our human sufferings. Karma is the continuation of the person I am in each moment, as created by my actions, in this life.

      “As there is no permanent, unchanging substance, nothing passes from one moment to the next. So quite obviously, nothing permanent or unchanging can pass or transmigrate from one life to the next. It is a series that continues unbroken, but changes every moment. The series is, really speaking, nothing but movement. It is like a flame that burns through the night; it is not the same flame or is it another. A child grows up to be a man of sixty. Certainly the man of sixty is not the same as the child of sixty years ago, nor is he another person. Similarly, a person who dies here and is reborn elsewhere is neither the same person, nor another. It is the continuity of the same series. The difference between death and birth is only a thought-moment: the last in this life conditions the first thought-moment in the so-called next life….” -or next thought, feeling, perspective, or action in the person receiving our skillful or unskillful action.“…. which in fact, is the continuity of the same series. During this life itself…one thought-moment conditions the next thought-moment…..As long as there is this thirst to be and become, the cycle of continuity (samsara) goes on. It can stop only when its driving force, this thirst, is cut off through wisdom which sees Reality, Truth, Nirvana.”
      When I understand that my attitude in this thought-moment is the foundation for my next thought-moment it should come as no surprise that my posture toward other sentient beings in any given moment will have an effect on those with whom I come in contact. If I am angry over some rumination as I walk down the street, and without realizing it I sneer at a passerby, they are sure to have a change in attitude when they experience my expression even though it had nothing to do with them. Who among us has not experienced the ill-effect of someone elses frustration or fear; and likewise for a kindness or affection received through a simple smile on the face of another. And in these instances did we not pass on in some way, the result of such an encounter? Do not others bear witness to the attitudes or demeanor with which I touch them? And in the same way do I not breed more of the same for myself in the next thought/action-moment? I have found that I can be a cause or condition for the rebirthing of whatever I bring to each thought-moment. This is the only Karma with which I need be concerned.

     

Zen and Meister Eckhert

      Meister Eckhert was a German priest and theologian thought by some to be the greatest of Christian teachers whose views were condemned as heretical by Pope John XXII. The following is taken from The Enlightened Mind edited by Stephen Mitchell pg. 108-114; Titled – Impeccable and written by Meister Eckhert (1260-1327).
      While Eckhert is a Christian theologian I want to draw attention to the similarity of what he has written here to Zen or Buddhist writings. I will take excerpts from this sermon, typed in black, and note my comments in red. Let’s begin by reading “kingdom of heaven” as “enlightenment,” Nirvana, or the kingdom of the real-Self, as you may choose. (Italics and bold type in most cases are mine.) Let's begin with this familiar Christian statement:

“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Mathew 5:3)

      Meister Eckhert begins, “Certain people have asked me what poverty is in itself, and what a poor man is.….This is how we will answer…..a poor man is one who wants nothing and knows nothing and has nothing.”
      This sounds like Suzuki’s, Beginners Mind. Let's not forget that the "poor in spirit" in the Christian sense is blessed because that poverty of spirit allows the person to enter the kingdom of heaven. We might say that this is, at the very least a parallel if not identical with, what is pointed to when the Zen master directs his student to "become one with wanting, knowing, and having nothing," or the absence of judgment in equanimity; No-mind?

      Meister Eckhert continues, “We will now speak about these three points, and I beg you, for the love of God, to understand this truth if you can: but if you can’t understand it, don’t worry, because the truth I am going to speak about is such that only a few good people will understand it.”
      This sounds eerily similar to the idea that only an enlightened mind can truly comprehend the words (Koans, aphorisms, or even actions) of the one who speaks from an enlightened awareness. And as well, why the Buddha spoke to each man according to his ability to understand.

      “What is a poor man who wants nothing? I would answer in this way: As long as a man still has it as his (W)ill to want to do God’s will, he doesn’t have the poverty we are talking about; for this man has (a) will with which he wants to satisfy God’s will, and that is not true poverty. For if a man is to be truly poor, he must be as empty of his created will as he was when he didn’t exist.
       Is this not what is pointed to as “the true nature of mind?” As taught by Hui-Hai in the 8th Century, “Mind….is utterly serene. This is the form of our original mind…” Excerpted from The Enlightened Mind, (pg.57) by Stephen Mitchell.

      “For…as long as you have the will to do God’s will, and the desire for eternity and for God, you are not truly poor. For only he is a poor man who wants nothing and desires nothing.”
      Here, it would seem, we can see a connection between a lack of poverty in Eckhert’s terms, and grasping, and the ego or self (will) that clutches after all that is of this material world – wealth, fame, happiness, and life itself.
      And in the last sentence we can hear the master’s admonition to “let go” because the more we try to attain enlightenment the further we are from it. The more we try to achieve the poverty that will liberate us - give us enlightenment or the kingdom of heaven - the more that desire for it and the resultant reaching after it, confounds our acquisition of it.

      “Therefore let us pray to God that we may be empty of “God,” and that we may grasp the truth….(wherein) the highest angels and the fly and the soul are equal…..
      Here we are likely to find ourselves in familiar territory when, in these words we hear the echo of interconnectedness, oneness, and Thich Nhat Hanh's "inter-being."….“where I (am) pure being and wanted what I was and was what I wanted." 
      What do we hear in the statement, “I want what I am and I am what I want?” Equanimity? Balance? Emptiness? Perfection in being with what-is, as-it-is, perhaps? Eckhert seems to be suggesting that real poverty, Pure Being, or Pure Mind is being one with each moment without the discriminations that create the world of form, and are the source of our dissatisfaction or suffering to which the Buddha awakened.

      “So we say: if a man is to be poor in will, he must want and desire as little as he wanted and desired when he didn’t exist.”
      His "face before his mother and father were born" perhaps; or to desire as little as he wanted and desired before those pesky discriminations arose to which the everyday mind is heir.

      “And this is the kind of poverty the man has, who wants nothing.”
      I can hear the master telling his pupil that the only way to achieve enlightenment is to not want/grasp after it; letting go as well, of wanting not to want.

      “Next, a poor man is one who knows nothing. A man who is to have this poverty should live in such a way that he doesn’t even know that he isn’t living for himself or for the truth or for God: even more; he should be so empty of all knowing that he doesn’t know or understand that he doesn’t know or understand or feel that God lives in him: still more: he should be empty of all the understanding that live in him.”
      If we read “knowing” as thinking, intellectualization, ideation, in this piece - it sounds much like the kind of instruction given by all Buddhist teachers and is spoken to by Hui-Hai (in the same speech referenced above) when he talked about a “mind that remains in the state of non-dwelling.”

      “Therefore we say that a man should be as empty of his own knowing as he was when he didn’t exist, and he should let God (Life) act as he (it) wants, and he should be empty.” “….a man should be so free and empty that he neither knows nor understands that God is acting in him (no-self, an aspect of enlightened mind). This is how a man can possess poverty (beginners mind).
      “The masters say that God is a being and an intelligent being and understands all things. But we say: God is neither a being nor intelligent, nor does he understand this or that. Thus God is empty of all things, and thus he is all things.”
      In the words of Charlotte (Joko) Beck, “when nothing is special everything is special.”

      "Whoever is to be poor in spirit must be poor of all his own knowing, so that he knows nothing of God or of creatures or of himself. Thus it is necessary that a man desire to be unable to know and understand anything of the works of God. This is how a man can be poor of his own knowing."
      Is it any wonder that he was considered a heretic by Pope John XXII? He is suggesting that our “knowing” God is restricted to “each man’s own” knowing, and in terms of Zen is at best an illusion; a finger, born of our want, and pointing to the moon.

      “Third, a poor man is one who has nothing……one who doesn’t even want to do God’s will, but lives in such a way that he is as empty both of his own will and of God’s will as he was when he didn’t exist.”
      In this first sentence, the word want strikes me as the “desire” or “grasping after” (wanting) pointed to the second Noble Truth.

      “Next we said that a poor man is one who knows nothing even of God’s activity in him. When he is empty of all things, that is the purest poverty. But the third kind of poverty…..is the most intimate kind: this is when a man has nothing. For if he finds a man as poor as this, then God alone acts - and the man allows God to act in him, and God is his own place of activity, because God is acting in himself."
      Here we can hear that the Buddha is in each of us if we were but able to remove the hindrances.
      “It is here in this poverty that a man attains the eternal essence which he once was and which he now is and which he will forever remain.”
      It is here in this poverty of self where the Buddha in each of us can be made manifest, just as each of us has always been and will for ever be.

      “So we say that a man should be so poor that he neither is nor has in himself any place where God can act. Where a man keeps a place in himself, he keeps distinctions. Therefore I ask God to make me empty of God…."
      Here he speaks in a Christian way about what Buddhism says we must do in order to reach enlightenment and all that this entails. He is suggesting that the man who is truly poor is poor at the spiritual level and is above distinctions that separate him from his true essence….God, Buddha, Oneness – as you wish.

      “I am my own cause according to my being….and therefore I am unborn, and according to my unborn-ness I can never die. According to my unborn-ness, I have eternally existed and am now and will eternally remain…"
      And to offer again the words of Hui-Hai, “Mind …it was never born and can never die…” And for those interested in the notion of Unborn one might read Dogen and Bankei.

     “…..In my birth all things were born, and I was cause of myself and of all things; and if I had willed it, I would not exist nor would anything exist. I am the cause that God is “God;” if I didn’t exist, God would not be “God.”
      Or in the words of the Buddha “I alone am the World Honored One,” or
“He who is in the Sun and in the Fire and in the Heart of man is One. He who knows this is one with the One.” – Hindu.
Or perhaps we could look to Mencius who said “The way is one and only One." or
Dogen when he wrote “One fist is the entire universe.”
And let’s not slight Huang Po who is credited with saying, “There exists just the One Mind.”
Or Christ who, the Bible tells us, said “I and the Father are One.”
      Men of different times and perspectives seem to have experienced something which, in the words of Mr. Fields, meets his definition of Zen, i.e. “That final psychic fact that takes place when religious consciousness is heightened to extremity.”

      “When I flowed out of God (born into the material world), all things said: God exists…..by this (consciousness) I understand that I am a creature. When I break through and return where I am empty of my own will and of God’s will and of all his works and of God himself (our idea of God) then I am above all creatures and am neither God nor creature (Emptiness, Onenness)…..I am what I was and what I will remain now and forever (Pure Mind)…..Then I am what I was, and then I neither increase nor decrease, for I am an immoveable cause that moves all things.” (“I alone am the World Honored One.") Regarding this last sentence one should also reflect on the earlier words from Hui-Hai regarding Mind.

      “Whoever doesn’t understand this sermon shouldn’t trouble his heart about it. For as long as a man isn’t like this truth he will not understand this sermon…May God help us live in such a way that we experience it eternally."
      And here it seems to me to be an echo of the idea that one cannot comprehend the words of one who is enlightened unless he too has had his third eye opened or his no-thought has achieved a turning on the seat of consciousness.

      And in conclusion I offer this quote from I am That, Talks with Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj.


“When you demand nothing of the world, nor of God, when you want nothing, expect nothing then the Supreme State will come to you un-invited and unexpected.”