An expedition to find the edge of the earth

Naturalism

2009-07-24T15:52:00.003+01:00

Oops its been 6 months since I posted here. I have moved jobs and countries, (I guess I am a recession refugee) and have not really been reading as much stuff as I normally would. But yesterday I was browsing one of my favourite discussion groups - 'Applied Naturalism' http://groups.yahoo.com/group/appliednaturalism and got involved with free will references. So I got back some great quotes and decided to post here.

The brilliant Thich Nhat Hanh:

"When we hate someone, and are angry at her, it is because we do not understand her or the circumstances she comes from. By practicing deep looking, we realize that if we grew up like her, in her set of circumstances and in her environment, we would be just like her. That kind of understanding removes your anger, and suddenly that person is no longer your enemy. Then you can love her. As long as she remains an enemy, love is impossible."

Also some great points raised there about the common eastern approach to free will that asserts a possibility to transcend it...

Chândogya Upanishad:

"They who depart hence without having known the Self and those true desires, for them there is no freedom in all worlds. But they who depart hence after knowing the Self and those true desires, for them there is freedom in all worlds."

I am never sure how to interpret the common enlightenment descriptions of freedom. I sometimes think that it makes sense that from the perspective of Awareness/the great 'I AM', 'you' are free, as the sky is ultimately free of clouds - thoughts and decisions come and go just like clouds, without ever damaging the sky. But this 'free' identity is non-volitional, it cannot do anything, so there is no point in it being free or not.

Image by Nicolas Malinowski

Winter solstice

2008-12-22T01:34:00.003Z

So I was thinking about how to get the most of the holiday season, and I thought that it would be fun to look at it from an Integral point of view.

I googled it for a while, but didn't find much labelled 'integral'. Just a website for a life coach who is running a New Years intentions setting workshop. So what could we genuinely celebrate and take part in? For the pagans it was the winter solstice - at last they could see that the days were lengthening again, so they could happily feast on their supplies, knowing that summer was on its way. For the Christians, (who chose that date for their celebration to undermine the pagans), it is a great source of gratitude that God sent us our one and only saviour. Oh it just occurred to me that they represent a purple magic society and a blue mythic society. And then the orange commercial Christmas developed, featuring a central character designed by the Coca-Cola company. Perhaps a green Christmas is one that no longer honours the previous value systems and so rebels to create its own idea of meaning. The problem with that is that it throws the baby out with the bathwater. So what would an integral version look like?!

A year end event is actually a perfect structure to provide meaning in an Integral worldview. In a value system that finds meaning in development and progress, a much needed component is to take a step back occasionally to evaluate how far we've come and what lies ahead. To do this daily or weekly would be too often. I think an annual event is ideal. Development could be reviewed in several increasing structures - from personal, to family, peer group, community, nation, world and higher...

Here is a list of several existing practices and rituals that could be used to express these values, with a few more ideas added in:

Personal - New year resolutions, reading your journal, writing, shadow work (let go of events in the previous year, perhaps using techniques like the Sedona Method), health/fitness/body evaluation,
Family - Christmas cards, family newsletters, get togethers, presents, group shadow work, celebration of togetherness and love, gratitude, forgiveness, intentions for year ahead
Peer group - Christmas and new year parties, cards, presents,
Community - Local news yearly roundup, shared holiday period, decorations,
Nation - News and entertainment roundups (e.g. Best ___ of 2008), awards,
World - Yearly summary...

Also due to the fact that this development process we are all part of has no perceivable beginning or end in sight, it is important to take a step back as a source of inspiration and motivation. In Chinese Taoism, there is a period of 2 weeks between when the year ends and when the next one begins. In a largely dead tradition in Scotland, the twelve days of Christmas were called the 'Daft Days' - in which the population would en masse take leave of their responsibilities and sensibilities. It seems to me that a ritualised, symbolic holiday from the relentless development process could also be useful.

I can imagine a winter festival period where the value systems of the pagan solstice, the christian nativity, modern commercialism, and postmodern pluralism are transcended to celebrate 'development' on a large scale. It could be a truly precious and deeply meaningful period where people can come together to inspire each other, give gratitude, forgiveness, and promises. To take a break from their own relentless progress to get perspective and to rev up for the challenges ahead.

The illusion of being the driver

2008-12-11T15:30:00.009Z

Adyashanti transcribed from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bWOYbXS8Dgk

Great metaphor. You are not the driver of the car. 'You' are in the passenger seat.

"As long as you want to turn left when you want to turn left, apply the brakes when you want to apply the brakes, welcome to unenlightenment. Its funny that a lot of people are trying to get enlightenment by doing that very thing.

To such a person to be in the passenger seat doesnt seem interesting at all because in the passenger seat theres no illusion of control, and who wants that? But you only start to desire it when you've spent enough time at the steering wheel to realise that cars tend to go in actually pretty predictable patterns.

Its based on the fundamental misunderstanding that you are a seperate individual person, a human being, separate from the whole, separate from others, separate from life, and you need to make sure that your life and your car gets where you want it to get. If theres a prescription for suffering, i'd say thats about as accurate as you can get. The funny thing is that the very prescription for suffering is the very thing we think is a prescription for happiness....do that and you'll be happy, turn left now and you'll be happy, make your trip exactly what you want it to be and you'll be happy.

The problem is that because it is based on separation, it cant ultimately make one happy. Its not possible, ultimately. Moments, sure.....

When you explain things like this to people, egos think "well that would be kind of boring, being in the passenger seat, driven wherever it wants to drive you and you just sit there and watch the world go by". But of course that is the perspective of ego. From the perspective of wholeness, you are the car, the seat, the mysterious non-locatable driver of the car, you are the landscape in which you are driving, you are every experience which you will bump into.

So let yourself slip over into the passenger seat, not as an ego. All it requires is for us to drop our notion of ourselves."

Also by Adya:

"All of our thoughts are conditioned. We all are thinking exactly along the lines we are conditioned to think. Programmed like a computer. Anybody who thinks they are actually choosing of their own free will the line of thinking that they have is completely deluded by their thinking." (via blogger Tom Stine at http://tomstine.com/)

Image by the brilliant Michael Wandelmaier at http://www.wandelmaier.com/

I'd like to answer a few problems I've heard about 'being in the passenger seat':

1 - That without 'self-control' people would go wild and drink themselves to death, or just sit on the couch and watch TV all day.

2 - That it entails nihilism. That it would mean no-one was to blame for anything, and 'good' and 'bad' would become meaningless (and thats a bad thing).

3 - That it is only correct from the 'absolute' perspective. 'Relatively' they are still in control of the car.

In answer,

1 - 'Self-control' is a perfectly natural and evolutionary process not separate from 'self-indulgence'. The idea that the 'virtuous' qualities of a person are THEIR 'willpower' and the 'evil' ones are external 'temptations' is a false duality. There are positive and negative motivations, and they do not require a separate 'controller' to keep the system from collapsing into hedonism. However, to take on the idea that you are not in control whilst still really believing you are a separate ego, will lead to self-indulgence. "Ramana Maharshi, the great sage from Arunachala, was once asked whether one has free will. He answered that as long as one considers oneself to be an individual person, one has free will and has to use it well." However when one realises the 'individual' is an illusion, it is healthy to realise you are in the passenger seat.

2 - A virus does not have free-will. But that does not mean that its actions could not cause real suffering, or that it should not be held 'responsible' and taken action against. To see that nobody can do different than they are doing is a source of great compassion. How could you get angry at a virus? It is easy to sympathise with people with addiction problems, but when we think they did have the opportunity to change and didn't we harden to their fate. This cannot happen when we see that no-one ever has control. The only conclusion is inexhaustible compassion. Note this does not mean toleration of all behaviour, it would be discompassionate to allow people to cause themselves or others preventable harm.

3 - 'Relatively' it is correct that an illusuary 'I' does make choices. In the same way that 'relatively' a cloud makes rain. In reality the cloud does nothing at all, it is just a function of pressure, humidity and temperature changes in the global weather system. So if the cloud was conscious and said that 'relatively' I do make rain, you could say yes, but you have no control over it.

Ajahn Brahm

2008-11-28T10:11:00.003Z

I'd recommend this guy's podcasts. He is fun and doesnt take things seriously - although some of his stories have made tears run down my face. He also has some good vids on youtube.

I came across this essay of his the other day, so I thought to save my favourite parts here.

"If one takes any success in meditation to be because of one's own abilities, then one misunderstands the law of causality, the law of cause and effect. For example, any skill in meditation that I have is nothing to do with me, it's just because of causes. It's not one's abilities or inabilities that stop success in meditation. Never think, "I can" or "I can't", that is just coming from a sense of self. Create the causes.

People sometimes have such nice thoughts, they come and tell me later, and they call them 'insights'. They are just thought, that's all. Just leave the thoughts alone. Don't take them to be 'mine'. If one takes thoughts to be 'mine', then one will go and beat someone else over the head with them, and argue about who's right and who's wrong. Letting them go is far more peaceful, far more joyful. Thinking is one of the biggest hindrances to deep meditation. Thinking so often stops one from seeing the truth, from seeing the true nature of things.
Therefore, give thinking no value. Give it no interest. Instead, give that value and interest much more to the silence.

If one thinks "I am in charge", if that delusion is still there, that will be a major hindrance to one's meditation. This will create restlessness, and there will be craving for this, that and the other. However, one must understand that the 'doer' cannot let go of doing. This is like trying to eat your own head. That's what people often try and do. They try to do the non-doing. That's just more doing! It has to be like a change, a flip in the mind. It takes some wisdom to see that this 'doing' is just a conditioned process. Then one can let go. When one lets go, then this whole process just goes so beautifully, so smoothly, so effortlessly.

Sometimes people ask the question, "If the will is not yourself, if it's nothing to do with you, why bother? Why even bother to get up at four o'clock in the morning and meditate?" The answer is, "Because you've got no choice".

It's just causes and conditions. That's all it is, just a process. Then one will understand why the Buddha said that he doesn't teach annihilation. Annihilation means that there is some thing there that existed, which is now destroyed. Nor did he teach eternalism (that there is some thing there that is never destroyed). He taught the Middle Way, namely Dependent Origination.

The process that one has taken to be a self for all these lifetimes is just an empty process. Cause effect, cause effect, cause effect - just a process."

Engaged Buddhism

2008-11-18T09:42:00.003Z

Calligraphy by Jakusho Kwong-roshi

Found this quote from Thich Nhat Hanh on the 14 precepts of engaged buddhism...

"1 Do not be idolatrous about or bound to any doctrine, theory, or ideology, even Buddhist ones. Buddhist systems of thought are guiding means; they are not absolute truth.
2 Do not think the knowledge you presently possess is changeless, absolute truth. Avoid being narrow minded and bound to present views. Learn and practice nonattachment from views in order to be open to receive others' viewpoints. Truth is found in life and not merely in conceptual knowledge. Be ready to learn throughout your entire life and to observe reality in yourself and in the world at all times.
3 Do not force others, including children, by any means whatsoever, to adopt your views, whether by authority, threat, money, propaganda, or even education. However, through compassionate dialogue, help others renounce fanaticism and narrow-mindedness.
4 Do not avoid suffering or close your eyes before suffering. Do not lose awareness of the existence of suffering in the life of the world. Find ways to be with those who are suffering, including personal contact, visits, images and sounds. By such means, awaken yourself and others to the reality of suffering in the world.
5 Do not accumulate wealth while millions are hungry. Do not take as the aim of your life fame, profit, wealth, or sensual pleasure. Live simply and share time, energy, and material resources with those who are in need.
6 Do not maintain anger or hatred. Learn to penetrate and transform them when they are still seeds in your consciousness. As soon as they arise, turn your attention to your breath in order to see and understand the nature of your hatred.
7 Do not lose yourself in dispersion and in your surroundings. Practice mindful breathing to come back to what is happening in the present moment. Be in touch with what is wondrous, refreshing, and healing both inside and around you. Plant seeds of joy, peace, and understanding in yourself in order to facilitate the work of transformation in the depths of your consciousness.
8 Do not utter words that can create discord and cause the community to break. Make every effort to reconcile and resolve all conflicts, however small.
9 Do not say untruthful things for the sake of personal interest or to impress people. Do not utter words that cause division and hatred. Do not spread news that you do not know to be certain. Do not criticize or condemn things of which you are not sure. Always speak truthfully and constructively. Have the courage to speak out about situations of injustice, even when doing so may threaten your own safety.
10 Do not use the Buddhist community for personal gain or profit, or transform your community into a political party. A religious community, however, should take a clear stand against oppression and injustice and should strive to change the situation without engaging in partisan conflicts.
11 Do not live with a vocation that is harmful to humans and nature. Do not invest in companies that deprive others of their chance to live. Select a vocation that helps realise your ideal of compassion.
12 Do not kill. Do not let others kill. Find whatever means possible to protect life and prevent war.
13 Possess nothing that should belong to others. Respect the property of others, but prevent others from profiting from human suffering or the suffering of other species on Earth.
14 Do not mistreat your body. Learn to handle it with respect. Do not look on your body as only an instrument. Preserve vital energies (sexual, breath, spirit) for the realisation of the Way. (For brothers and sisters who are not monks and nuns:) Sexual expression should not take place without love and commitment. In sexual relations, be aware of future suffering that may be caused. To preserve the happiness of others, respect the rights and commitments of others. Be fully aware of the responsibility of bringing new lives into the world. Meditate on the world into which you are bringing new beings."

Found another resource on free will debate

2008-11-17T16:48:00.002Z

Scultpture by Nathan Sawaya
Quote below from http://nonduality.com/freew.htm

Greg Goode - Summed up nicely in his last line....

"The question of free will is from the perspective of the person. Does the person have free will? Many of the person's actions are forced or determined by factors over which it has no control. Some of these actions are accompanied by the feeling of being lived, of being in the flow, in the "zone." People often count these as the best times. But are at least some of the person's decisions and actions freely chosen? To establish free will, as is discussed in Philosophy 101 classes everywhere, it is not necessary to show that every action is free. Even one free action would be sufficient. Case 1: "Will that be coffee or tea?" "Hmmm, let me think.... I'll have tea, thanks." Case 2: (Thought bubble rising:) "I'd love to take a walk in the beautiful woods. I'd like to surround myself with peace and serenity and inquire into my true nature." (Putting on hiking boots, opening the camper door and stepping out), "Here I go." From the perspective of the person, if the decision process is not analyzed, the actions and decisions in both cases above seem to be perfect examples of free will. Upon analysis however, a free action and a free chooser cannot be found. A thought comes, followed by a desire, followed by a decision, followed by an action. Tracing backwards, the action is controlled by the decision, the decision is controlled by the desire, the desire is prompted by the thought. The thought arises spontaneously, itself unbidden, un-asked-for, unchosen. First the thought is not there, then it is. Nowhere in this process can a free will be found. Nowhere can a freely-acting chooser be found. It is even too much to say that the actions, decisions, desires and thoughts can control or prompt each other. These cause-and-effect dynamics are not even observed. Rather, they arise as inferences and conclusions about what happened, that is, they arise as thoughts that rise and fall. In something like Case 1, the decision might even be accompanied by a small feeling of freedom, lightness, and spaciousness. And maybe also accompanied by a thought, "I'm choosing tea but I could freely choose coffee instead." But the feeling of freedom and the thought "I could" also arise unbidden. That is, the feeling of freedom is not freely chosen. The person is not the locus of freedom. The person and the rest of the world cannot be found apart from the awareness in which all things appear. The person, the mind, body and world arise as thoughts, feelings, and sensations. These are nothing other than objects in awareness, and are nothing other than awareness itself. The person does not experience; the person is experienced. As awareness, we are That to which these objects appear. Thoughts, feelings, sensations - these objects arise from the background of silent awareness, they subsist in awareness, and they slip back into awareness. The awareness in which they appear is not itself an object but the background of all objects. It is our true nature. But the objects come and go unbidden, without autonomy. They are powerless and cannot do anything on their own. Objects cannot possess or contain freedom. Is there freedom? The silent awareness in which all objects appear is the true nature of all things. Awareness says YES to everything. Even if a NO arises, awareness says YES to the NO. Awareness is without resistance, without limits or edges, without refusal and without obstruction. Awareness is not free, it is freedom itself. What we truly are is not the person but this awareness, this freedom. The person wants to co-opt this freedom, to own it, to behold it, to be present to use and enjoy it. But in spite of this desire from the perspective of the person, the person can never own That in which the person appears. What about teachings that emphasize free will? Entire religions and ethical systems are based on this idea. Ramana Maharshi told a questioner that all actions are determined except the ability to inquire into one's true nature. Isn't Case 2 above different from Case 1? Sometimes teachings and exhortations about personal freedom are a beautiful, effective and necessary step for freedom from the idea of being a person. A person who prematurely adopts a "no-free-will" teaching can lapse into depression and antinomian behavior. "You have to be someone before you can be no one." The teachings on free will borrow from the freedom that we are. Among the many objects that arise in the mirror of awareness, some objects arise as images of mirrors. These images are taken as representations of their source. Like a mirror appearing in a mirror, Ramana's teaching serves as a pointer to freedom. Case 2 is not different in this respect from Case 1. As objects, all cases and their characters, and all teachings and all discourse (even this one!) are not themselves free or self-powered, but they arise from freedom and consist in freedom.

The person is never free. As awareness, we are never bound."

Gospel of Mary

2008-11-07T10:40:00.004Z

From the Gospel of Mary some further evidence that Jesus was enlightened....

The Savior replied, "Every nature, every modeled form, every creature, exists in and with each other. They will dissolve again into their own proper root. For the nature of matter is dissolved into what belongs to its nature..... [Realisation of co-dependent arising]

...The soul answered 'I saw you. You did not see me nor did you know me. You mistook the garment I wore for my true self. And you did not recognize me.'

...We should clothe ourselves with the perfect Human, acquire it for ourselves, and announce the good news...

...When the Blessed One had said these things, he greeted them all. "Peace be with you!" he said. "Acquire my peace within yourselves! Be on your guard so that no one deceives you by saying, 'Look over here!' or 'Look over there!' For the child of true Humanity exists within you. Follow it! Those who search for it will find it. Go then, preach the good news about the Realm. Do not lay down any rule beyond what I determined for you, nor promulgate law like the lawgiver, or else you might be dominated by it." [Dominated by rules? Sounds like fundamentalist Christianity]

“What binds me has been slain, what surrounds me has been destroyed, my desire has been brought to an end, and ignorance has died. In the world, I was set loose from the world.....and set loose from the impotent bonds of knowledge - the existence of which is temporal. From this hour on, for eternity, I will receive rest in silence.” [Classic enlightenment experience description]

Spiritual one-upmanship

2008-10-03T09:51:00.002+01:00

"Yet just as there is no time but the present, and no one except the all-and-everything, there is never anything to be gained—though the zest of the game is to pretend that there is. Anyone who brags about knowing this doesn't understand it, for he is only using the theory as a trick to maintain his illusion of separateness, a gimmick in a game of spiritual one-upmanship. Moreover, such bragging is deeply offensive to those who do not understand, and who honestly believe themselves to be lonely, individual spirits in a desperate and agonizing struggle for life. For all such there must be deep and unpatronizing compassion, even a special kind of reverence and respect, because, after all, in them the Self is playing its most farout and daring game—the game of having lost Itself completely and of being in [the delicious] danger of some total and irremediable disaster." Alan Watts - The tabboo of knowing who you are

BRILLIANT

Blogs are great

2008-09-01T14:16:00.005+01:00

Image by Julie Rauer.. http://www.asianart.com/exhibitions/chimera/index.html

I was browsing around looking for info for our Integral workshop we are designing and I came across a great blog at
http://www.formlessmountain.com/blog.htm

It has great resources on the website - like interactive annotated AQAL diagrams at:http://www.formlessmountain.com/quads.htm

And a poster summarising AQAL:http://www.formlessmountain.com/aqal.htm

Also the blog has great stuff that resonates with me, like these...

"Then the vista deepens... I see that all my life I have been "in resistance" to the universe. I have been separated and in a subtle mode of protection from all-that-is. In fact, I can define myself as the accumulated resistance to the Universe. My relative self, IS resistance to Universal flow and rhythm. I relate to all the other relative selves around me from this shallow, separated, limited consciousness, and we all tacitly agree that this is normal. I have built a successful self within this narrow poor resistance. And nearly everybody buys it."

".....Rather than my small self running my life, I let go more into the unknown emptiness. Control is an illusion, a shallow fantasy the small self desperately clings to. Really, the Universal Ki flow and rhythm has been there all the time, I was doing all the contracted resistance. I was isolating myself and then noticing that within that isolation, I WAS SEPARATE and needed protection.

How refreshing to let it go and rest in Great Doubt and Great Trust. I can be responsible for myself and at the same time allow Universal Ki-Mind to move through. I can surrender control and let taiga move. I do not have to try and figure it out within my limited self's constrained thinking. I can open and allow things to move and develop and stay right on the moment with it all."

And in another entry....
"Green’s hubris (and all first 6 stages of development) is thinking they know better than all other perspectives.....At Integral-Teal we become fully aperspectival. We no longer grip our perspective so tightly.....We can listen for healthy expression at any level and authentically connect there....We no longer have a pluralistic values filter governing what we are willing to approve of and connect with."

Interviewing god

2008-08-28T10:36:00.006+01:00

Transcribed from Alan Watts video "God for 10 minutes"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1LzVN8nqg0

Alan's text is green and the various members of the audience are in blue

Let us suppose that I am the patient and you are the students and the doctors and I suffer from what you would call the delusion that I am god. And therefore you might want to do something about me or with me or humour me or ask me questions. And so I am perfectly willing to submit to your examination and your treatment.
When did you become god?
now
Will you marry me?
No
Laughter
Do you sleep on your stomach or your back?
Sleeping is like politics. One sleeps on the right side and then when you are tired of that you sleep on the left. When you are tired of that you sleep on your back, and when you are tired of that you sleep on your stomach. And it is thus that the world goes round.
Laughter
If you are god now what were you yesterday?
Now
how do you become god?
you dont become god
am i also god?
yes
are we then the same person?
no. remember 3 persons but 1 god
can you tell us a little about satan?
yes....although the matter is a little esoteric..I told you all about it in the book of Job...you will see that in the court of heaven Satan is the district attorney...//...Before all this started, this little stage play, there was an arrangement in the green room before coming on stage. In which certain things were understood, only to be revealed when the curtain comes down at the end of the play.
Is Job god too?
yes but he doesnt know it
Why do you hide from the sight of so many?
Why do you hide? Its for the same reason you're hiding.
Does man have free will?
Man has free will to the extent that he knows who he is - not otherwise.
Where does he get free will from?
Where I got it from
Does woman have free will too?
Yes, to the extent that she knows who she is.
If man has free will, and you are god, then you are saying you are no more than any god or any man in this room?
Yes thats correct. I am no more god than any of you.
And you only have the power to know who you are?
....Yes thats saying quite a bit, yes
What is not god?
There is nothing that is not god
How do you learn who you are?
Its like waking up from a dream. After a while one's experience begins to have what I call a "havent I been here before" feeling. Going round and round and round. And then you begin wondering "where am I going?" and to answer that question you have to try and find out what you want. And so I went into that very thoroughly - what do I want to happen? And of course as soon as you begin to ask yourself that you being to fantasise....So I simply set myself to thinking through, to how far we could go. So I soon found myself at a great push-button place, where I had a fantastic mechanism with buttons available for every conceivable thing I could wish. So I spent quite a bit of time playing with those...You know, you go 'boing!' like that and here is Cleopatra. And so on you know, you press this button for symphonic music..in 4 channel sound...16 channel sound..anything! You know all possible pleasures are available. And when you know, like everybodies dream of the Sultan in the palace, you suddenly notice there is a button labelled surprise. You push that. And here we are.
Laughter
Is boredom a problem?
Yes of course boredom is thee problem.....Ah...Boredom is the other side of creativity, and the energy of creation - that is the yang - the ying side of that energy is called boredom. Everything is of course yang and yin. If you understand that you really dont need to understand anything else.
Why do you think we are supposed to love one another because if we get to that point, there wont be any up and down or black and white.
Correct but that is not a teaching it is a koan
A what?
A koan is a japanese word for a spiritual problem used in zen buddhism such as 'what is the sound of one hand'. And these problems are given to students who ask questions concerning their spiritual development. And sometimes, as St Paul pointed out, that commandments are given not in the expectation that they will be obeyed, but in the expectation that they will reveal something to those that hear them. That was St Pauls comment on the whole messianic law.
Is there a hell, is there a purgatory, is there a heaven?
The hereafter is of course now. Because if you examine it closely there is no-when else than now. If you want to make hell of it you can make hell of it. If you want to make heaven of it you can make heaven of it. Pergutary, pergutary. it was always here, always will be.
What is death?
Death is an undulation in consciousness. How would you know you were alive unless you had once been dead
Why was it unnecessary for Jesus to have material possessions yet they are necessary for you?
It wasnt unnecessary for him to have material possessions. They said of St John the baptist that he was an ascetic but of Jesus this man consorts with gluttoners and wine bibbers, eating and drinking, and when the Lady Mary poured precious ointment on his feet they said the same thing that the members of the vestry say to the minister today - why this great expense, couldnt it all have been sold and given to the poor
But this is a problem?
It is a problem, sure, but you see in many ways when you get down to these very deep ethical problems where there sure is no easy decision one easy way or the other, you must look at the problem from the point of view of an artist - 'Which way of doing this is in some sense greater?' It may be better to go off with a bang than a whimper.

Bodhisattva Vows

2008-08-22T16:12:00.003+01:00

The passions of delusion are inexhaustible. I vow to extinguish them.
The number of beings is endless. I vow to help save them all.
The Truth cannot be told. I vow to tell it.
The Way cannot be followed. I vow to follow it.

And from Krishnamurti to Vimala (an Indian teacher) in the 1950's:
"Why don't you explode? Why don't you put bombs under all these old people who follow the wrong line? Why don't you go around India? Is anyone doing this? If there were half a dozen, I would not say a word to you. There is not time. . . . Go—shout from the housetops, 'You are on the wrong track! This is not the way to peace!' . . . Go out and set them on fire! There is none who is doing this. Not even one. . . . What are you waiting for?"

And from the legend Alan Watts:
"My wish would be to tell, not how things ought to be, but how they are, and how and why we ignore them as they are. You cannot teach an ego to be anything but egotistic, even though egos have the subtlest ways of pretending to be reformed. The basic thing is therefore to dispel, by experiment and experience, the illusion of oneself as a separate ego."

"If, then, I am not saying that you ought to awaken from the ego illusion and help save the world from disaster, why [do I write this] book? Why not sit back and let things take their course? Simply that it is part of "things taking their course" that I write. As a human being it is just my nature to enjoy and share philosophy. I do this in the same way that some birds are eagles and some doves, some flowers lilies and some roses. I realize, too, that the less I preach, the more likely I am to be heard."

Exhausted by ideas

2008-08-21T12:30:00.004+01:00

Image by Tim Parish

My mind is exhausted with ideologies. all those bits of information flowing around, combining, negating, evolving. looking for answers in ideologies is like looking for 'solutions' in evolution or like trying to put wind in a box. there is no final truth, just a process, naturally, perfectly processing. there can be no escape from it, and nothing can be added to or subtracted from it, nothing can be speeded up or slowed down. naturally it will go through periods of swift change and slow change, of course in spring some branches grow short, others long. unfortunately this is an ideology too.

consequently i doubt that i can be objective anymore. i guess i used to be driven by a need for it, to see the truth and not just my filtered perception of it. but now i can appreciate that my opinions arise and are not 'mine' i see that i cannot escape, as i am not a separate 'knower' from the arising present. this is not nihilism. suffering happens and this arising process naturally can and does use its power to mitigate it as much as it can, producing great saints..........and great sinners.

Man vs Nature

2008-08-21T11:08:00.004+01:00

Artwork above by Simon Williams. Copied below an interesting essay about free will [with my comments] by Charles Eisenstein from www.realitysandwich.com (Brilliant articles).

"Almost universally, the effort at self-control is a program of reward and punishment, incentive and threat. Experience tells us that it does not work. [Disagree]. And the reason it does not work is that human beings are not meant to be slaves. [Totally disagree - humans are not 'meant' to be anything].
....In other words, the methods most people use to control themselves [dualistic fallacy] draw on a primal threat to survival and leverage our deepest fear. We seek to enforce good behavior through the threat of self-rejection and the reward of self-acceptance. Because this program is in constant, relentless operation, we are subject to an omnipresent anxiety that is usually beneath conscious awareness. [Agree] We notice it only in its absence -- in those powerful moments when we experience the deep serenity, ease, and homecoming of All is Well. [Agree]
...I was astonished to find actual scientific backing for my idea that we make the real choice long, long before we appear to. In a study published this year in Nature Neuroscience, European researchers found that the outcomes of simple decisions can be detected in the brain up to ten seconds before the subject is aware of them. They conclude that we make choices ten seconds before we think we do,...the researchers could not help but say that their experiment seems to prove that free will is an illusion. Actually, they are looking for free will in the wrong place. [Oh?] Free will only operates in our self-creation, and it is from this that we make predetermined "choices" that are really just manifestations and symptoms of our self-creation. [Sounds fishy]
So, how do we create ourselves? [Good bloody question] We create ourselves through the one and only choice we actually do have at any given moment. It is our only power as human beings; it is the entirety of our free will. Our only choice, our only power, our only means of self-creation and world-creation, is our power of attention. In other words, at any given moment the only thing we are actually choosing is where to place our attention. Everything else is automatic. [Interesting concept, but not biting yet]
....Even if you do nothing else, simply noticing the self-control program of threat and incentive in constant operation is a powerful step. [Yes] It is, in fact, a revolutionary step, in the sense that our dominant culture is predicated upon the same control writ large. Civilization's adversarial relationship to nature mirrors an adversarial relationship to our own nature, which is to follow desire and seek pleasure.
The dominant (though often euphemized) ideology of civilization says that nature is a foe, and that the ascent of humanity is a series of triumphs. First we controlled the plant and animal world with agriculture, imposing human design onto nature. Then we built megaliths and pyramids, objects of unnatural geometric precision to transform the very earth. We reworked and transformed matter itself with metallurgy and other material technologies, and today our medical science reengineers the body and alters genes, bending the elements of biology to our will.
...Nature is not opposed to humanity's higher evolution, and Mother Nature does want us to know the mystery.... Even more: nature, in its incarnation as desire and pleasure, is the gateway to healing and the gateway to the sacred and the gateway to the fulfillment of human potential. It is not an adversary we must overcome, internally or externally; it is not the guardian of the higher estate we all sense, but the gateway. "[Good stuff. Our goal for too long has been the conquest of nature, and the demonisation of our natural drives in opposition to our 'higher', 'spiritual' control. In truth we are all on the same team. We are nature through and through, there is no dualistic battle between 'higher' and 'lower'. To take credit for the control of our virtuous actions and disown the bad ones as belonging to our lower, natural drives is a dualistic arrogancy and a terribly unfair portrayal of nature. Also one of the most damning condemnations of behaviour is to be compared to an animal. There are more logical errors with this than I can be bothered listing. But back to the main point, the belief that you are outside nature, controlling it as best you can, gets right to the heart of spirituality as it is none other than the concept of ego - that you are a separate self - a concept shown to be false by all the great teachers of enlightenment.]

Levels of awareness

2008-05-29T16:31:00.007+01:00

Having googled "Robert Kegan" for a while I have taken a shot at summarising his version of the levels of development of awareness, where the object is the subject of the preceding stage. I prefer it to the "Ego-ethno-world-kosmic" terminology. He labels them 1st, 2nd, 3rd... so I added my own labels and colours from sprial dynamics.

1st - Magenta: Subject = SENSORY WORLD

i.e. Babies / primitive animals. Everything is subject. Nothing exists outside of sensory perception.

2nd - Red: Object = sensory world, subject = PERSONAL AGENCY

Sensations become objects of our awareness. Identity with personal control to satisfy our hungers. Very self-centered.

3rd - Amber: Object = Personal agency (in relation to other peoples agency), subject = 'SOCIALISED MIND'

Awareness of your personal control relative to other people's control. Identity becomes relationships/ownership/competition.

3.5th - Orange: Object = Social behaviour, subject = PRINCIPLES, values 'the right thing to do"

4th - Yellow: Object = Principles, subject = ABSTRACT CONCEPTS

Values become objects of awareness, identity with conceptual thinking.

4.5th - Green: Object = Abstract concepts (in relation to other peoples abstract concepts), subject = 'SELF AUTHORING SELF'

Identity becomes free of low order conditioning. "So we are not just made up by or written on by a culture, but we ourselves become the writer of a reality that we then are faithful to." "Very few people reach this stage before the age of 40."

5th - Teal: Object = Self authoring self (in relation to other selves), subject = SELF TRANSFORMING SELF

"you start to build a way of constructing the world that is much more friendly to contradiction, to oppositeness, to being able to hold on to multiple systems of thinking. You begin to see that the life project is not about continuing to defend one formation of the self"

5.5th - Turquiose: Object = Self transforming self, subject = THE THINKER OF THE THOUGHTS

Conceptual thinking becomes an object of awareness. "notion of individuality loses any sense of ultimate meaning. It is not that self no longer exists but rather that the self is pure object of a transcendent witness."

* 6th - Indigo: Object = The illusion of the thinker, subject = OBJECT

In non-dualism, there is no thinker of the thoughts, just thoughts.

* I stuck this one in myself. Seems fair?

Dreams

2008-05-29T13:23:00.003+01:00

Again another brilliant cartoon from slowwave.com
"With reference to thought, awareness assume two statuses, corresponding to two types of thought in mind—subject thought and object thought. These two types of thought can be seen in the dream, where you are both the subject and the object of the dream. You are the object in that you are the one who participates in the dream world. And you are the subject, the one whose dream it is. The subject and the object are therefore one and the same. Both types of thought—Subject thought and object thought exist—in awareness and are, in fact, nothing but awareness." - Sri Swami Pratyagbodhananda Saraswati

Wow. The paradox in non-dualism of being both subject and object is nicely illustrated in the dreamworld. Never realised that before.

A major evolutionary transition?

2008-05-28T16:36:00.004+01:00

This is one of the brilliant comics based on people's actual dreams at www.slowwave.com
This one reminds me of the subject of this post - the inescapability of the conditioned mind.

I found a scientific paper on psychology that is similar in message to 'evolutionary enlightenment' at http://www.goertzel.org/dynapsyc/2001/PsyEv.htm

"Humanity is on the threshold of a major evolutionary transition.

Before the transition humans are organisms whose behavioural goals are set ultimately by their internal reward and motivation system. The internal rewards have been established and tuned by natural selection and conditioning processes. As a result, humans spend their lives pursuing proxies for evolutionary success...
...If humans make the evolutionary transition, they will no longer blindly pursue internal rewards and motivations as ends in themselves. They will use their mental models to identify and implement the actions that will contribute most to the evolutionary success of humanity. By consciously managing their pre-existing adaptive systems, they will ensure that they find satisfaction and motivation in pursuing evolutionary objectives....
...We will need to develop a new “I” or master that can manage our physical, emotional, and mental adaptive systems to align their goals with evolutionary objectives. This would enable us to revise the operation of these pre-existing processes so that we could adapt in whatever ways are needed for evolutionary success. Humans would become self-evolving beings, able to consciously choose to change our adaptive goals, relatively unfettered by our biological past or by our conditioning."

OK, sounds good. But it fails to take a step back from the system to see that everything is still part of the same system. There is no new breakaway from the way it has always worked. Organisms have always made 'decisions' dependent on their perception of the environmental pressures of their future. And always as he says "set ultimately by their internal reward and motivation system".

So what is new? Is not the desire to save the planets ecosytem for our grandchildren just a healthy product of a conditioned internal reward system? The author claims decisions will be "relatively unfettered by our biological past or by our conditioning". On what basis would they be made then? Would he think that logical, reasoned solutions to provide "evolutionary success" were a break free of conditioning? Or is that just a perfect manifestation of conditioning?

It is clearer if we see that we are not humans clinging onto a lonely planet in a battle for survival, but we are just the evolutionary process of the cosmos. We will never break free of it because we are not conditioned by it or produced by it, but we are it. Humans will continue to behave as they always did, seeking reward and avoiding punishment, however sophisticated the conditioning becomes.

Free thinker?

2008-05-24T12:23:00.003+01:00

Krishnamurti is on the money too. This website http://bol.sourceforge.net/on-line/BookOfLife.php sends me a quote of his a day...and this was todays...

"All thinking obviously is conditioned; there is no such thing as free thinking. Thinking can never be free, it is the outcome of our conditioning, of our background, of our culture, of our climate, of our social, economic, political background. The very books that you read and the very practices that you do are all established in the background, and any thinking must be the result of that background.

Does not the urge of the mind to free itself from its conditioning set going another pattern of resistance and conditioning? Having become aware of the pattern or mold in which you have grown up, you want to be free from it; but will not this desire to be free condition the mind again in a different manner? The old pattern insists that you conform to authority, and now you are developing a new one which maintains that you must not conform; so you have two patterns, one in conflict with the other. As long as there is this inner contradiction, further conditioning takes place....There is the urge that makes for conformity, and the urge to be free. However dissimilar these two urges may seem to be, are they not fundamentally similar? And if they are fundamentally similar, then your pursuit of freedom is vain, for you will only move from one pattern to another, endlessly. There is no noble or better conditioning, and it is this desire that has to be understood. "

Its good. There is no noble, holy aspiration to be free. That is just as conditioned as genocide. There is no doom and gloom in this though. To see you are a perfect expression of the universe, rather than an independent, lonely source of choices is beautiful. Also conditioning is always evolving. If it is able to recognise a reactive pattern it can modify the conditioning response to one with better results for the organism. For example it may condition itself to identify the onset of anger and redivert it. In which case it may make the organism think it is 'free' of that anger conditioning that all the other organisms are subject to. Its all just more sophisticated conditioning.

Karma Yoga

2008-05-22T11:28:00.003+01:00

I have been googling 'karma yoga'. I found a great blog on it at:
http://karmayogini.wordpress.com/category/karma-yoga/

I filtered out my favourite part below:

"Here’s the link to the Karma Yoga Seminar: http://in.integralinstitute.org/live/view_karmayoga.aspx by Roger Walsh, M.D., professor of psychiatry, philosophy, and anthropology at the University of California at Irvine and one of the founding teachers at the Integral Spiritual Center. In summary, his 9 recommendations are:
1. Stopping what you are doing
2. Coming into the present moment
3. Setting your intention & dedicating the activity
4. Doing the activity as impeccably as you can (committing to impeccability – giving yourself 100% to the activity)
5. Bringing as much awareness at you can to your experience and monitoring all the reactions that come up
6. Consciously working with those reactions
7. Attempting to release attachment to how things are going (i.e., to results)
8. Taking time to reflect and learn about the whole process
9. Offering or dedicating the benefits

A point that Roger makes throughout his presentation is that one can practice karma yoga in all of life’s activities – at work, doing the dishes, through service work, in relationships, etc. This is an important mind shift for me as it’s much easier to be conscious of doing karma yoga when involved in meaningful service types of activities versus when I’m cleaning the house!"

Yeah I agree with the continuous service concept. There is nothing that you do at any time with any intention that is not 100% service. You can't take a break from it, you can't separate from it. If you are resting, you are serving by preparing to work. If you are destructive and violent, you are contributing that to the whole. That is your service, although not 'good'. There is no narrow avenue of 'karma yoga' in which is contained good service, and everything else is disconnected. Everything everybody does and thinks 100% of the time is karma. Karma Yoga I think is to realise that and so act as if your every thought is a humble offering to the whole.

Also on her blog....
"Andrew Harvey, author and mystic, says that service to oneself is essential on this path. He outlines four things needed if we want to do this work which he refers to as sacred activism.
1. A downhome-no-nonsense spiritual practice that you do absolutely every day in whatever way is natural to you.
2. Constant examination of your psyche to gain deep understanding of your shadow.
3. A proper health and exercise regiment. Because if you are going to do this work in the world, you are going to need to be strong and be able to call upon very deep reserves of energy.
4. Make sure you are always inspired in the course of your life. Harvey shares that he is inspired through music, dance (especially sacred), and a constant supply of mystical texts or spiritual poets (especially Rumi). He also talks about 5 types of service:
1. Service to the Divine through daily prayer. Get up early and spend an hour in a sacred practice. You must be fed by divine inspiration.
2. Service to oneself, as a living instrument of the Divine in action, through the fostering of emotional, physical, and spiritual health.
3. Service to all beings, including animals. Bring a consciousness of divine compassion to your daily encounters. Spread joy, honoring and cherishing everyone.
4. Service to your local community. Identify the two or three worldwide concerns that most break your heart. Work on these issues in your local community; even a couple hours a week will add meaning to your life.
5. Service to your global community. Americans, in particular, must accept the responsibility of being a global citizen, especially when it comes to choices with money and the resulting runaway consumption."

The Taboo of knowing who you are

2008-05-06T14:09:00.003+01:00

by Alan Watts.

"Most of us have the sensation that "I myself" is a separate center of feeling and action, living inside and bounded by the physical body—a center which "confronts" an "external" world of people and things, making contact through the senses with a universe both alien and strange. Everyday figures of speech reflect this illusion. "I came into this world." "You must face reality." "The conquest of nature." This feeling of being lonely and very temporary visitors in the universe is in flat contradiction to everything known about man (and all other living organisms) in the sciences. We do not "come into" this world; we come out of it, as leaves from a tree. As the ocean "waves," the universe "peoples." Every individual is an expression of the whole realm of nature, a unique action of the total universe. This fact is rarely, if ever, experienced by most individuals. Even those who know it to be true in theory do not sense or feel it, but continue to be aware of themselves as isolated "egos" inside bags of skin. The first result of this illusion is that our attitude to the world "outside" us is largely hostile. We are forever "conquering" nature, space, mountains, deserts, bacteria, and insects instead of learning to cooperate with them in a harmonious order."

"The sensation of "I" as a lonely and isolated center of being is so powerful and commonsensical, and so fundamental to our modes of speech and thought, to our laws and social institutions, that we cannot experience selfhood except as something superficial in the scheme of the universe. I seem to be a brief light that flashes but once in all the aeons of time—a rare, complicated, and all-too-delicate organism on the fringe of biological evolution, where the wave of life bursts into individual,
sparkling, and multicolored drops that gleam for a moment only to vanish forever. Under such conditioning it seems impossible and even absurd to realize that myself does not reside in the drop alone, but in the whole surge of energy which ranges from the galaxies to the nuclear fields in my body. At this level of existence "I" am immeasurably old; my forms are infinite and their comings and goings are simply the pulses or vibrations of a single and eternal flow of energy."

Read this book!

Free will, round 3

2008-05-06T10:25:00.003+01:00

Continuing the free will debate, I found this nugget from Maharshi via http://www.lifepositive.com/spirit/god/I_will.ASP

"Ramana Maharshi, the great sage from Arunachala, was once asked whether one has free will. He answered that as long as one considers oneself to be an individual person, one has free will and has to use it well. However, at another time, when the same question was put, he answered: “No.”

The questioner asked for clarification. He wanted to know whether this applies only to the big issues of his life, for example regarding marriage or job, or even to such minor things like taking a glass of water now. Ramana Maharshi said that it applies even to minor happenings like taking a glass of water or stretching one’s arm.

But then he explained that the whole discussion about free will is basically irrelevant. He gave an analogy: people stand around a transistor radio and listen to a song. Then they start discussing whether the person who is in the radio can sing as he wants or whether he has to sing as the station decides… There is no person in the radio and so the discussion has no basis. "

OK so my debate has no basis. Great. But in theory, we have the capability for free will that a radio has.

Anihilism

2008-05-01T15:55:00.002+01:00

Taken from http://www.catherineingram.com/interviews-poonja.htm

Question:

You say that this divine is playing itself out, but let's look at the suffering on this planet. For instance, there is an ecological destruction that is creating a living hell for people and other beings who are not awake in this dream, as we can easily see here in India. We are creating a desert of this Earth and poisoning our land, waters, and air. Many more people will face starvation and live in degraded circumstances. Worldwide tensions will increase, and so on. People who are primarily interested in spiritual matters, at this particular point in history, are sometimes accused of being selfish. What do you feel about rendering service to the world, and from where does the passion arise for service if this manifestation is seen as a dream?

Answer by Poonja:
Having known the supreme state, our own Self, from inside there arises compassion. Automatically we are compelled. It's not service. Service has to do with somebody else. When the command is compassion, there's no one doing any service for anybody else, as when you are hungry you eat. You are not in service to the stomach, nor are the hands the servant when they are putting food into the mouth. Like this we should live in the world. Service is the responsibility of the Self. Otherwise who is doing this service? When the action is coming from the ego, there is hypocrisy, jealousy, crisis. When the doer is not there, then compassion arises. If a person is realized, then all his actions are beautiful.

There is no separate self who chooses

2008-04-24T10:32:00.006+01:00

Even people who see the illusion of the ego, the illusion of being a separate self, can believe that they still have a part of themselves that is independent from the stream of life, that can drive their 'self'. That if the 'driver' does not make choices their world will fall apart. That the 'driver' can make free choices and change the stream without any influence by the stream. I don't get it. I don't understand how you can be non-separate from the stream of life, and yet still have independent volition from it. It makes sense that the ego would be terrified by this prospect, it removes all its pride and sense of superiority, of independent worth. It is a nail in its coffin. And it makes sense that people would feel like they had independent choice, as the choices we make appear in our awareness, often out of sub-conscious processes. But we don't lay claim to beating our heart, so why would we do so with a new idea we had? Anyway, I had a google and came up with these:

A myriad bubbles were floating on the surface of a stream.'What are you?' I cried to them as they drifted by. 'I am a bubble, of course' nearly a myriad bubbles answered, and there was surprise and indignation in their voices as they passed. But, here and there, a lonely bubble answered, 'We are this stream', and there was neither surprise nor indignation in their voices,but just a quiet certitude.

The purest doctrines, such as those of Ramana Maharshi, Padma Sambhava, Huang Po and Shen Hui, just teach that it is sufficient by analysis to comprehend that there is no entity which could have effective volition, that an apparent act of volition when in accord with the inevitable can only be a vain gesture and, when in discord, the fluttering of a caged bird against the bars of his cage. When he knows that, then at last he has peace and is glad.

As long as there is a 'you' doing or not-doing, thinking or not-thinking, 'meditating' or 'not-meditating' you are no closer to home than the day you were born.

by Wei Wu Wei

As long as you take yourself to be a person, a body and a mind, separate from the stream of life, having a will of its own, pursuing its own aims, you are living merely on the surface, and whatever you do will be short-lived and of little value, mere straw to feed the flames of vanity.
Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

From Wiki - Ramana Maharshi "said that after Self-realisation there is no thinker of thoughts, no performer of actions and no awareness of individual existence. When the thoughts arise, he said, the ‘I’-thought claims ownership of them- ‘I think’, ‘I believe’, ‘I want’, ‘I am acting’, but there really is no separate ‘I’-thought that exists independently of the objects that it is identifying with, only an incessant flow of misidentifications"

"As you become familiar with presence, you will "choose" presence more and more, rather than being identified with thought. Actually, the ability to choose presence depends on the degree of presence that's emerging in you. Ultimately, you are not choosing, there's nobody there to choose. When you think you are choosing, presence is simply emerging in that moment. But if I say, "There's nothing you can do," that is not helpful. I say you can choose presence, but I know presence is really choosing you." Eckhart Tolle

"Causation depends on the idea of an ego, of "someone" there to make something happen. The "I" is nothing more than an imaginary line dividing reality from Reality. Examine the "I" closely and it disappears (taking causation with it). " - Omkaradatta

Kill good and kill bad

2008-03-18T14:33:00.001Z

Is the concept of good and bad like the concept of a separate self (ego)?

Both only exist as a concept in your thoughts. Both cases can be helpful i.e. to have a concept of being a separate entity, or knowing what to avoid/attract, but problems arise when you lose yourself in them.

Like and dislike can buffet you around, creating aversion and attachment. In the same way the concept of ego can swallow your awareness and feel concrete, absolute and real.

Good and bad should be held lightly and suspiciously as a conditioned concept of your mind, and not an absolute truth. In this way you can be unattached to the constant demands of these processes, and only heed them as you choose. When faced with situations our mind tells us is 'bad', it is possible *in most cases!* to let go of that grip and just see its perfect suchness.

What would you change?

2008-02-23T11:30:00.005Z

Take a second to ask yourself this question. No cheating. It is worth it. The reason it is a good question is because it reveals what you identify with. Just asking what you identify with is too vague and ambiguous. Possible answers reveal identity with an ego, family, community, nation, species, planet or all of the universe - Ah crap I just burned my breakfast veggie sausages. They are shiny black and beautiful, but unlikely to taste nice.

In other unrelated news the Dharma talk I'm listening to just quoted a monk who said "whats done is finished" when asked about an unfinished project he was on. He didnt feel that he was 'in the middle of something' or harassed that he had work to do. He is always at the end of a project. mmm. I am always at the start. I have an inexhaustible supply of half-started projects which litter my house, my attic, my computer, my notepads, my head.

Anyway my answer to the top question was '....erm.....aha! I don't want to change anything. And thats what I would change'. I have left behind much of the cravings of the ego and with it a list of straightforward ambitions. Now I enjoy everything as it is and see the world as one perfectly formed unfolding of karma which rolls itself forward creating my life experience.

oh that dharma talk just hit me again. "You don't have to be the one who rights the wrongs....It is a natural process, it work out by itself. In spite of what you do and don't do justice happens." The speaker, Arjan Brahm, puts it down to a rather religious belief in karma, that administers justice to wrong-doers. I don't believe that. It's just the unfolding of ancient cause-and-effect (karma) acting on the singular consciousness, torturing and tickling itself.

As for my current lack of unsatisfaction, the Dalai Lama helps with:
"Life becomes useful when you confront a difficulty; it provides a kind of value for your life to have the kind of responsibility to confront it and overcome it. Whereas if you do not feel such difficulties, there's no such responsibility, no role for you to play in your life. . . . That challenge allows you to practice your ability. Basically, the purpose of life is to serve other people. From that point of view, a difficulty is really a great opportunity. "
OK roll on a great opportunity. mmm. Better be careful what I wish for.

Everyone is right?

2008-02-04T18:43:00.000Z

Last night we discussed Ken Wilber's phrase "Everyone is right" at our 'Integral' meetup group. It was difficult to separate it from "Everyone is good" and also "everyone has part of the absolute truth". I think neither of those can yield a useful answer. Perhaps it would be better formulated "everyone's view is correctly formed from their stage of development, which does not involve 'wrong' developments, just incomplete ones". mmm. Needs some work!

Is it too ambitious to sum it up - "the universe never makes a mistake"?

In any case the usefulness of the sentiment was also in disagreement. So I did some searching to try to back up how much I think of it. These are from the legend Alan Watts:

"The sense of wrong is simply failure to see where something fits in a pattern, to be confused as to the heirarchical level upon which an event belongs"

"To the individual thus enlightened it appears as a vivid and overwhelming certainty that the universe, precisely as it is at this moment, as a whole and in every one of its parts, is so completely right as to need no explanation or justification beyond what it simply is....the mind is so wonder-struck at the self-evident and self-sufficient fitness of things as they are, including what would ordinarily be thought the very worst, that it cannot find any word strong enough to express the perfection and beauty of the experience"

YES. I like it. It helps me let go of my condemnation of people and experiences which are 'wrong'.

How about this poem by Ram Tzu...

"Ram Tzu knows this -

You are perfect

Your every defect

is perfectly placed.

Your every absurd action

is perfectly timed.

Only God could make

Something this ridiculous

Work"

Not sure why the God line is necessary, but the rest illustrates another benefit of "everyone is right" - acceptance and forgiveness of your own actions.

(Note I am not condoning every action as 'good', it just helps to leave the past where it belongs)

Painting above found on http://www.newworldview.com/photos/kimathim/picture15825.aspx

Your seeking cannot end your seeking

2008-02-01T16:02:00.000Z

"Ram Tzu knows this...You are caughtIn a web of beliefs.You spin them fromYour own abdomenThey are made from The substance of your self.You believe inYour own power.You consider yourselfThe Source.Even though When under duressYou pay lip serviceTo an all powerful God.You believe in The supremacy of technique.You are convinced that ifYou can but manage...Your mindYour moneyYour breathYour energyYour bodyYour faithYour relationshipsYour prayersYou will unlock the doorTo peace, happiness and contentment.Guess again."

Image and quote from http://advaita.org/AFramtzu.htm

Ram Tzu is the pen name of Wayne Liquorman who says he uses a pen name because he "didn't want a bunch of miserable seekers cluttering up his living room." Ah thats funny.

Spirituality definition?

2008-01-30T23:33:00.000Z

"We are ONE, whether we realize it or not. You cannot be more ONE than someone else, and so you cannot be more spiritual than someone else. You can have a greater realization of your ultimate nature than someone else, but even that is mostly mind-stuff. The foundation of the Self, ALL SELVES, is perfect oneness (which many call "God", although this three letter word is usually a label for that divine unity externalized, which of course breaks that unity). And this perfect oneness at the foundation of our being is equally present for murderous tyrants as it is for compassionate saints — we are all equally spiritual because we are all equally part of the ONE, no matter what the choices we have ever made or ever will make.....

....So all we can really work on in our lives is to attain a greater realization of our spiritual nature, not a greater level of spirituality. This may seem a subtle difference but it has profound implications. If we are only able to work on our realization of spirituality, then the spiritual path is merely the ongoing removal of mental, emotional and physical blocks to that realization, all without trying to control or conceptualize what we uncover (which of course only serves to create further blocks). In other words, our spiritual development is a psychological, emotional and physical exercise — not ostensibly a spiritual exercise. If we understand this, we will be much more successful in letting go into the spiritual experience, which is actually the only way we can actually be "spiritual". But as soon as we try to directly develop or control spirituality, or think we have some idea what it is outside of an undefinable unity, we have conceptualized it, and this conceptualization removes us from a direct spiritual experience." - andrew p at

http://energygrid.com/spirit/2007/10ap-spirituality.html

"There is nothing to practise. To know yourself, be yourself. To be yourself, stop imagining yourself to be this or that. Just be. Let your true nature emerge. Don't disturb your mind with seeking.

A quiet mind is all you need. All else will happen rightly, once your mind is quiet. As the sun on rising makes the world active, so does self-awareness affect changes in the mind. In the light of calm and steady self-awareness inner energies wake up and work miracles without effort on your part."

Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj

2008-01-18T13:26:00.000Z

Each of the myriad things has its merit,expressed according to function and place.Phenomena exist; box and lid fit;principle responds; arrow points meet.

From "Harmony of Sameness and Difference" by Sekito Kisen

It is a common belief that you can somehow be outside the natural order of the universe. They might try to 'get in accordance with their true nature' or resist natural impulses or look out at nature. Dawkins says that you must resist the tyranny of memes (reproducing ideas/thoughts) as if there is an alternative. Certainly most people think they have free will. This would require an element in themselves that is not 'natural' - that operates outside the cause and effect of the universe. Through their books, Susan Blackmore and John Gray convinced me otherwise. Our 'true nature' is inescapable. Our 'free-will' a persistent illusion. And our throne as masters of our universe is seen just an arrogant trick of the ego.

Happily the consequences of this are boundlessly positive. It does not lead to fatalism, nihilism, or loss of liberation. Rather it leads to the appreciation of impermanence, connectivity, acceptance, forgiveness and compassion.

Having an opinion you are attached to

2008-01-14T23:02:00.000Z

"Seeing misery in views and opinions, without adopting any, I found inner peace and freedom. One who is free does not hold to views or dispute opinions. For a sage there is no higher, lower, nor equal, no places in which the mind can stick. But those who grasp after views and opinions only wander about the world annoying people." ---The Sutta Nipata.

Zen saying - "Dont seek the truth, just cease to cherish opinions"

I only wish it was that bloody easy.

Raiding my log of favourite quotations...

2008-01-14T21:35:00.000Z

Now that I can appreciate this point of view....I wonder if it is a good thing! It leaves me without the desire to change anything...

“Pahiya, when you see sights, just see; when you hear sounds, just hear; when you smell smells, just smell; when you taste tastes, just taste; when you feel something, just feel. If you can do all these things, Nirvana is not far from you.” - Buddha

"Our usual understanding of life is dualistic: you and I, this and that, good and bad. But actually these discriminations are themselves the awareness of the universal existance. "You" means to be aware of the universe in the form of you, and "I" means to be aware of it in the form of I. You and I are just swinging doors..." ~Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind.

"We live in illusion and the appearance of things. There is a reality. We are that reality. When you understand this, you see that you are nothing, and being nothing, you are everything. That is all." ~Kalu Rinpoche.

“When I see I am nothing, that is wisdom. When I see I am everything, that is love. Between these two my life moves.” Sri Nisargadatta.

"One thing is made up of many parts and in itself does not exist. There is nothing that is not made up of many parts. Without the idea of 'one thing' the many does not exist, and without the idea of existence there is no non-existence." Nagarjuna

Agents and operations

2007-11-27T10:06:00.000Z

"What's the difference between a thing and an event, I can't for the life of me tell! We say this is a fist, that's a noun. What happens to it when I open my hand, this thing is unaccountably dissapeared, so I should call this a fisting, and this is a handing....
...When we divide the world into operations and agents, doers and doings, then we ask such silly questions as 'who knows,' 'who does it,' what does it,' when the what that's supposed to do it is the same as the doing! You can very easily see that the whole universe may be understood as process....Giraffes are giraffing, trees are treeing, stars are starring, clouds are clouding...and people are peopling"

And I believe, God is Godding. There is no separate agent, just a verb.

A new model

2007-11-25T21:45:00.000Z

"You can never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete" - Bucky Fuller

"One can resist the invasion of armies, but one cannot stop the invasion of ideas" - Victor Hugo

OK so all we need now are some ideas. Got some?

Well the first thing that comes to mind is how egocentric that statement is. For some reason people normally identify with 'their' ideas as a part of themselves and as such feel proud about them, defending them with blind stubbornness. But in reality they have as much to do with their ideas as they have in growing their hair. You can run about taking credit for having beautiful long hair if you like, but that makes you a twat.

Michelangelo was on the right track there. He only signed one of his sculptures and later regretted it, calling it an abomination and a desecration. He knew that he deserved no credit for the sculpture. He believed the Christian 'God' was working through him. Perhaps not when he was going to work on his boyfriend's cock though.

The best description of the 'source' of creation I have come across is the Tao. If you are not familiar with this eastern philosophy get on wiki and swim about for a while.

A better map

2007-11-20T18:36:00.000Z

I find a far more complete and rigorous interpretation of reality in some eastern philosophy. This is an extract from a book by Alan Watts - Zen the supreme experience.

"You blame the circumstances, people, society and parents only to the degree that you experience yourself as something separate. But if you clarify your sense organs, you will see that the world and people around you are just as much 'you' as anything in your own body and brain. The whole thing is a unified, shifting organism or energy field.....If you pick out the self inside the skin and say it is you, then you ignore the fact that you are also outside your skin. The real you is simply the cosmos, the energy that is filling all these vast spaces. There are galaxies, billions and billions of light years away, that are just as much you as the pupil of your eye."

Check out the Alan Watts podcast on iTunes for more. You know it makes sense. Ha.

Looking for maps

2007-11-20T16:32:00.000Z

"Like most scientists I am not a dualist but ... even though I have learned to be an intellectual monist, I am a human animal and therefore evolved as an instinctive dualist. The idea that there is a me perched somewhere behind my eyes and capable, at least in fiction, of migrating into someone elses head, is deeply ingrained in me and in every other human being, whatever our intellectual pretentions to monism..."
Richard Dawkins - The God Delusion

How far does he take it I wonder? He makes a lot of noise attacking supernatural Christianity but this is the first I’ve heard from him on the indivisibility of self and other. His approach reminds me of the ‘War on Terror’. Attacking his opponents only serves to remind them of their ideology and strengthen their resolve to defend it. He tries to ‘make them wrong’ rather than ‘make them right’ – work with their ideology to demonstrate the real truth behind it.

But I suspect he enjoys making other people wrong so that he can feel superior, separate, individual (as most of us do). So perhaps he hasn’t taken the monism path very far. Let me know if I am wrong.

The Launch

2007-11-16T16:48:00.000Z

Apparently "a jouney of 1000 miles begins with a single step". Hopefully it starts with an idea of which direction to put the foot.

So. Which direction should it be....?