A view from the other side

In thinking about reincarnation, I decided to read some literature that's prepared to vigorously argue against it. I picked out a book that amazon.com recommended through it's pseudo-omniscient algorithm called "Reincarnation: a critical examination" by Paul Edwards. Leafing through, this is not meant to convert anyone. Rather it has the form of preaching to the choir, treating the views of his "opponents" contemptuously and impatiently. A section of the book that caught my eye is about karma. Here is an excerpt


Anybody not intimidated by the virulence with which the champions of Karma brush off objections to their theory will want to raise a very simple and, as it seems to me, utterly devastating question about the execution and more generally the "administration" of Karmic ordinances...

The claim that Karma operates autonomously invites the following questions: How, to begin with, are good and bad deeds registered? Is there some cosmic repository like a huge central social security office in which the relevant information is recorded and translated into some kind of balance? Next, how and where is it decided what will happen to a person in his next incarnation as a result of the balance of acts in his or her life?...

The believer in Karma,[...], must be prepared to claim that the earthquake was brought about in order to punish or reward the various people who suffered or benefited from the earthquake.


First off, I have to ask why this author's attack has such a personal quality to it. (Witness his first sentence which is a personal attack.) But let's accept that and try to get to his actual objections, which do not conform to my understanding of the Buddhist view of karma. Admittedly, there are many takes on karma, from Hindu to Jain to New Age, and some people in those schools may hold views that are susceptible to his attack, but maybe not. I will simply argue from the standpoint of my own understanding.

First, karma is indeed an autonomous process. I like to think of it as spiritual physics. There's no need for a cosmic moderator when it comes to the standard laws of physics such as gravity and quantum physics. So why should one be needed for karma? The author also refers to a "balance" revealing the common idea, which is not the Buddhist view, that karma reflects some kind of ledger with good deeds in one column, bad deeds in another, and then an overall balance. So if you kill someone and then save someone you are karmically neutral. This is not the Buddhist view at all. Put simply, virtuous actions will ripen beneficially in the future, negative actions will ripen negatively in the future, and this is essentially a definition of virtuous and unvirtuous. There's nothing about cancellation. In fact, karmic acts interact in complex ways, often having a snowball effect where one small deed will continue to magnify in importance as it informs your later actions. It is taught that these karmic seeds are embedded in our mindstream and flower when appropriate conditions arise. So it is not simply that karma causes things to happen, but that we encounter conditions based on our karma. So as for Edwards' question about how it is "decided" how one is reborn based on karma, there is no external agency that decides. Indeed, the bardo being is blown by the winds of karma (that is the tendencies embedded in its own mind) to a certain womb. One would think that coming from a critical scientific perspective, Edwards would not automatically criticize a theory based on anthropomorphizing it.

The final point I want to talk about is Edwards' describing karma as punishment and reward. In all three eastern religions, Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism, karma is regarded as an unconscious automatic process, not a process of punishment and reward. If we see someone who is suffering and don't help them because we think it's their own karma that got them their and hence they deserve what they are now getting, then we are abusing the teachings and will ourselves experience suffering in the future as a karmic ripening of our own miserliness. This attitude also neglects the fact that everyone has accumulated vast amounts of negative and positive karma, and we just happen to be in a relatively fortunate situation at the moment. So to accuse someone else of having negative karma is a case of the pot calling the kettle black. I'm not saying there is original sin, in fact, quite the opposite, all beings are Buddhas at their core, but by our very nature as sentient beings in the world of samsara, we are prone to act in ways nonbeneficial to ourselves. One further aspect about this I'd like to mention, and this is something I've brought up before, is that because the events which befall us are the result of our own past actions, that means we have the power to transform those circumstances. That doesn't mean we can wish really hard for something and it will come true. It is much more difficult than that. All the specialized practices taught by the Buddha are designed to transform one's mind. They work, but they require diligence and patience.

In a subsequent section Edwards points to the fact that the law of karma has no predictive value, and, as I understand him, is therefore of no practical use. His point is that when an earthquake happens, we can say after the fact that it was maturation of the karma of the people affected, but we could never predict the earthquake. Of course, I agree that karma has no specific predictive value, and so I will agree that it is not a scientific law, but that hardly closes the case on the matter. Karma has general predictive value, for if I kill someone, I will suffer as a result. Even if I get away with it, I will be tortured internally. I admit that there is no way to prove that everything that currently happens to me is a maturation of something I did in a previous life. Clearly I'm not going to be able to logically demonstrate this, but what I can say is that as I progress along the Buddhist path, as I gain more insight, those teachings of the Buddha and the Lama which I can check out for myself all turn out to be true, and this gives me increased faith that as I develop more, some of those items which I currently accept on faith will become evident.

To me, there is a fundamental wonder and mystery at the center of our ordinary, banal experience. This is our awareness, our consciousness. This is also the core of Buddhism, the star player as it were. Our own awareness, omnipresent and locationless. This is the mind of Buddhahood. (Do you think our awareness has a location? If so, doesn't that mean it has a physical shape? How can awareness have a physical shape?) So, as far as I'm concerned, Buddhism is homing in on exactly the right thing, and this view of mine is strengthened through my continued meditation practice. So even though karma is not a traditional scientific theory, I have faith that it is true nonetheless, and I certainly don't feel like Edwards has raised and "devastating" objections to it.

the hook of compassion

Just as one might need another's help to move a dresser
One might need another's help to realize happiness.
If the Buddha could snap his fingers and make samsara disappear
He would.

The Buddha's hook of compassion
Needs to catch our loop of faith
And once that connection is established
The blessings pour through,
And rest assured,
We will one day achieve Buddhahood,
Spontaneously helping countless sentient beings
Break through the veils obscuring their consciousness.

The more we call upon the Buddha and all enlightened beings for help,
The stronger our connection becomes,
The weaker the obscurations in our mind.
In the sky before me,
I see countless Buddhas and Bodhisattvas,
And in the plane around me,
Billions of people and other creatures
All reciting the prayer of refuge as one.

"I take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha.
By the virtuous merit that I collect,
By practicing giving and the other perfections,
May I attain the state of a Buddha,
To be able to liberate all sentient beings."

Untitled Mind

I am on a plane
The air is bright, brilliant spheres of light
Scattered tears, dark smoke filtering up
This dissolves, breaks, fades
There is darkness all around
And then I notice the smoke itself has a brilliant quality...

The emptiness of ideation

When I concentrate on a point I want to make,
It diffuses and grows ornamental curlicues,
Which themselves further elaborate,
Leaving the center empty.

Random thoughts about feelings

I'm sitting in my ole easy chair right now, a stick of juniper incense is burning in the holder behind me, and I begin to type a poem meant to capture my mood...


Worked up, a bit
Just gave a talk and had trouble articulating a point
Felt a bit uncomfortable
Traced the feeling back to defense of ego



In Buddhist psychology there are five skandhas.
Form, Feeling, Perception, Mental Formation, and Consciousness.
Form is the barest glimmer of structure.
Feeling is a sensation like heat or discomfort.
Perception begins to form judgments of desirable or undesirable.
Mental Formations are macroscopic thoughts.
Consciousness is the fundamental quality of awareness.

I would say that the discomfort that arose as I was talking was a feeling, a kind of tone, certainly not composed of gross verbalized thoughts, rooted in a judgment of the way the talk was going. I guess it's a little bit like a "growing sense of alarm," when you, for example, you wander into an unsafe neighborhood. There's this gradual buildup of a background feeling which informs the tenor of your thoughts, but which itself is not a word-level thought.

Mind sees an I

"I" is an expression of mind.
Who is it that perceives "I"?
Into what does "I" arise?

When thoughts of anger or confusion arise,
Who is it that experiences them?
Who is it that created them?
Who is it that looks to see?

When outer appearances arise,
Who is it that perceives them?
And when that one is perceived,
Who perceives it?

The mind is empty of unchanging solidity.
Yet awareness and appearances exist indivisibly.
The essence of mind is vast like space.

As the karmic shackles of conceptuality
One by one dissolve into awareness,
The mind of Buddhahood dawns
and the universe is illuminated.

The science of reincarnation?

Attempting to provide evidence for reincarnation scientifically may seem like a fools' game, but if there is potential evidence for the phenomenon, it would certainly be foolish to ignore it. That is, it would be foolish to dismiss the evidence without first looking at it. It would be begging the question to accept whatever is offered uncritically. In any event, there is a little-known collection of case studies by Ian Stevenson, a medical doctor, collected in many books, which purports to bolster the case for reincarnation. The book I'm reading right now is called "Where reincarnation and biology intersect," so-called because of the occurence of birthmarks on supposedly reincarnated individuals which correspond to wounds sustained at death. The documentation is extremely careful, and there is no indication of deliberate falsification. Certainly Stevenson is sincere. He also frequently provides counterevidence in particular instances when not all evidence points to the same conclusion. On the other hand, there are passages where his thinking seems sloppy. There are a number of case studies that are extremely convincing, and I'd like to share one with you.


Necip Unlutaskiran was born in Adana, Turkey, in 1951. Necip's mother had a dream before he was born in which a man she did not recognize showed himself to her with bleeding wounds. She did not know how to interpret this dream, but it made some sense when she saw, after Necip's birth, that he had seven birthmarks. Some of these were more prominent than others, and a few had faded by the time I first examined Necip, when he was about 13 years old.

Necip was late in speaking and late also, compared to other subjects of these cases, about speaking of a previous life. From age 6 on he began to say that he had children and asked his mother to take him to them. He said that he had lived in Mersin (a city about 80 kilometers from Adana). He said that his name was Necip and that he had been stabbed; as he described the stabbing, he pointed to various parts of his body to indicate where he had been stabbed.

His parents at first paid little attention to these statements, which they found more annoying than interesting. Their stance changed when Necip was about 12 years old. His mother took him to meet her father, who was then living, with his second wife, in a village near Mersin. Necip had never met his grandfather's second wife before, but he suddenly said that he recognized her as from the previous life that he claimed to have lived in Mersin. She had known a man in Mersin named Necip Budak and was able to confirm the accuracy of Necip's statements. This meeting increased Necip's wish to go to Mersin, and his grandfather took him there. There he recognized several members of the family of Necip Budak. They further confirmed the accuracy of Necip's statements for the life of Necip Budak.

It seems that Necip Budak had been a quarrelsome sort of person, especially when drunk. One day he began teasing and then taunting an acquaintance, who, perhaps drunk himself, stabbed Necip Budak repeatedly with a knife. Necip Budak collapsed on the street and was taken to a hospital, where his wounds were noted and where he died the next day.

Among the statements that Necip made, the most impressive was his claim that he had once stabbed "his" (Necip Budak's) wife in the leg and that she thereafter had a scar on her leg. Necip Budak's widow admitted the truth of the statement, and, taking some ladies into the back room, she showed them the scar on her thigh.

Necip expressed great affection toward the children of Necip Budak and fond attachment toward his wife. Indeed, he manifested keen jealousy regarding her second husband and wanted to tear up a photograph of this man.

In the number of wounds matching birthmarks-six in all-Necip's case exceeds all other cases (having medical documents) that I have investigated. In the monograph [a different book] I give a tabular summary of these and show their correspondence to the wounds on Necip Budak recorded in the hospital where he died.

Attachment to Dharmas

The state of enlightenment is free of attachment. Yet foolish people remain attached. 'Foolish people' are empty of self-nature, and thus are not foolish people. `Enlightenment' is empty of self nature, and is thus not enlightenment.

I'm riffing here on the theme of the Diamond Sutra, the genesis of this blog, which I have been reading over the past several days. All things are empty of self nature, which is a startling way of saying something obvious. Namely, when you look closely at things, they lose their characteristics. When you look closely at a chair, you don't see little chairs, or elements of chair-nature. Looking closely at the chair, the chair completely disappears. It is the same with all concepts, including, very importantly, the self. When you look closely at the self, it disappears! This is true of everything, including enlightenment. However, this does not mean you can't sit in a chair or attain enlightenment. Indeed, the empty nature of things allows them to exist and be interacted with. If a chair had a core reality of chairness, then it could not be sit in, because it could not change. Nothing could penetrate the solid core, for if they could, it would not be solid. In the same way, if all of the seeming obstructions to Buddhahood (enlightenment) were inherently real, they could not be overcome. Since they are illusory, they can be overcome. If one pursues Buddhahood, attached to a goal, Buddhahood remains obscured. Thus one can say it doesn't really exist. Yet if one approaches it without a goal, without the thought that "I liberate beings," then it will be achieved.

The idea of being attached to dharmas came up for me last night while attending an A.A. meeting. The way the meeting works is that we go in order around the room and everyone shares. I realized that after I had shared, in my mind, I took ownership of what I shared, of the dharmas I had released into the room. As people after me started sharing their own stories and ideas, I noticed myself scrutinizing their words for approval or criticism of "my" dharmas. Yet I needn't be attached. In doing so, I am certainly attached to a self, which doesn't exist. So it is a pointless cause of suffering. In the room, we each share, but it is not for our own ego, but for the benefit of all in the room. In the A.A. rooms, there is no cross-talk, no arguments between people when sharing. One person may share, and later on someone may disgaree, but it is not a back-and-forth argument. Even if there is a misunderstanding, there is no pressure to resolve it. Everyone releases their dharmas to the room, weaving a tapestry of which no-one can claim ownership.

Happy August

I went to another meeting last night. I did run into the issue of self-censorship, although I did share as best I could. Talking with someone after the meeting, he pointed out that the eleventh step explicitly mentions meditation, and he encouraged me to share honestly. His point was maybe someone needs to hear my experience. This guy is really wonderful. He gave me a book by Sogyal Rinpoche several months ago, and he meditates during the meetings. I'll have to think more on it. If it feels right, at some point I may share more directly my thoughts and feelings, rooted as they are in Buddhism. I do want to make sure the motive is right. My motive could easily devolve into defense of intellectual territory. Indeed last night, as I was listening to a woman share about how her urge to drink was lifted almost instantaneously after praying to God, and how she ascribes this to her higher power working in her life, I was definitely moved. But, I noticed the wheels of my mind spinning, trying to reinterpret the event within a comfortable framework. (I.e. `Maybe that wasn't God working. Maybe it was a ripening of past good karma, etc etc.') However, my motive in this case was indeed defensive. Not content to let it be, I desired to interpret the world in my image. This is not Buddhist at all. It is a sign of attachment to concepts. So I decided I had no need to reinterpret. This woman had her experience, it helped her, she's sober, and that's that.

Another thing that struck me about last night's meeting is the amount of wisdom present there. As we went around the table, a lot of people said some very deep things. Simple but deep.

Quote from Khenpo Tsultrim Gyatso Rinpoche

Some people, who think of themselves as scientifically minded, believe that the mind is the brain or a function of the brain and that for this reason there is no essential mind/matter dichotomy. According to their view, everything can be explained in terms of the material world. They choose to overlook the qualities of the mind that have no relation to matter, such as subjective experience, thoughts and emotions. Although they would not take seriously the story of Pinocchio, where a simple piece of matter, a stick, inexplicably develops a mind experiencing hopes and fears, pleasures and pain, and so on, they would not find it strange if sub-atomic particles, atoms or molecules started to produce thoughts and feelings. However, not only is there no scientific evidence whatever that such a phenomenon is possible, but it represents a semantic confusion of categories. Linguistically there is a category `mind' and what is not mind i.e. matter. Matter, or the material world is what exists `out there' beyond the senses. If it does not exist independent of the senses, how can it be categorized as material? How can a material world that exists outside the senses also be the senses that sense and experience it? Such a theory does not answer anything. It does not even begin to address itself to the question of what conscious experience is, let alone to the question of what might or might not exist external to it. -from "Progressive Stages of Meditation on Emptiness"

A.A. and Buddhism: more thoughts

I went to an A.A. meeting tonight after a somewhat long hiatus. At some point, I decided to spend all my effort on Buddhist practices, and so stopped attending A.A. meetings. The Dharma Path program has been a real blessing, as I have made a formal commitment to practice a certain amount each day, and that has been very beneficial. Still, I know the capacity of the mind to delude, and in particular, I have seen and experienced the situation where someone stops coming to meetings and slowly the mind's awareness deteriorates until one day, there is no defense against the first drink. My situation is slightly different in that I was continually meditating and practicing, so that my mind was not spiraling into a web of self-delusion leading to disaster. Still, with this in mind, I did not want to completely sever my connection to the program. I'm glad I came tonight. I met several old friends, and I realized that not only is the program is useful for me, but also I can benefit others. This is, after all, the Bodhisattva ideal.
At the meeting, I started thinking about the relation between Buddhism and A.A. again. The goal of each is similar, although one is more limited. In fact, A.A.'s effectiveness is due in very large part to its extreme focus: alcoholism. There is a lot of discussion in A.A. circles about whether drugs other than alcohol are an appropriate topic, and the general consensus is that they are not. This is not out of lack of compassion for drug addicts, but because a meeting devoted to competing topics is of less benefit to alcoholics and drug addicts alike. A.A. is extremely open and welcoming, but definitely has a Christian, or at least, theistic focus. This is due in large part to the fact that the founders were seeing spirituality through the lense of their preexisting beliefs. Now one of the fundamental tenets of Buddhism is the lack of a supreme deity that created the Universe or who represents the ultimate nature of reality. However this is not traditional atheism, which usually carries a host of concomitant assumptions, including lack of belief in anything beyond scientific materialism. In the same way that a creator God is not supported by logical analysis, the self-existing independent solidity of the outside world does not hold up under logical analysis and introspection. Furthermore, Buddhism provides an answer to all of us under the power of afflictive emotions and ignorance. It is a path whereby we can unlock the potential of our mindstream, releasing us from the suffering we often don't realize we are experiencing. (This may sound like a contradiction, how can we be suffering without realizing it? It is nonetheless true. I can see instances in my own life, looking back, where I was definitely suffering, even though I was under the power of delusion, and did not see it.) So the goals of A.A. and Buddhism converge, they both represent a path out of suffering. There is also a lot of overlap in philosophy. A gentleman sharing at tonight's meeting echoed a common theme. When he was drinking, trouble followed him around, but he never noticed that he was its cause. Listening to this, I thought this was a perfect example of the working of karma. When bad things happen in our lives, through ignorance we often ascribe them to bad luck or malevolent forces. Some people even get the idea that God has turned against them and is punishing them. In the end though, this is the ripening of our own past actions. Of course, A.A. just looks at this from the viewpoint of a single lifetime, but the basic principle is there. Speaking of karma, some reading this might get the feeling that ascribing all negative events to past actions on the part of the experiencer is "blaming the victim." Well, first of all, there is no blame here. It is just description. Not helping someone or looking contemptuously on someone because their current misfortune is a ripening of their own past deeds is a huge abuse of the teachings and goes against the love and compassion which are core teachings of the Buddha. It also conveniently omits the fact that we are all guilty of countless past negative deeds (and positive ones). On the other hand, a hidden and beautiful facet of this teaching on karma is the fact that it implies our destiny is under our control. All of the things that happen to us are of our own making, so we have the power to eventually stop accumulating karma and achieve enlightenment. So anyway, A.A. and Buddhist teachings have points of convergence, but they also have points of divergence. As an attendee of meetings, I am happy to accept the points of divergence. After all, the Buddha gave 84,000 teachings, each one tailored to the dispositions and abilities of different sentient beings. The Buddha would give teachings that were appropriate to the listener, necessarily saying things that weren't ultimate truth, but which led the listener in that direction. The thing I've struggled with however, is how to reconcile my Buddhist beliefs with A.A. as a contributor. I have often found myself modifying what I'm saying to seem more in tune with Christian philosophy because I don't want to be divisive. But the more firmly rooted I become in my Buddhist practice, the more unnatural that seems. I guess I'll continue playing it by ear and see what happens.

The unexpected benefits of meditating

I recently was meditating outside when I saw a skink out of the corner of my eye, waddling along the porch. This is already a significant event, since skinks are very shy and will dash out of sight almost as soon as you see them usually. The fact that I was nearly motionless put the skink at ease I suppose. In any event, the skink proceeded to waddle up on to my meditation cushion and touch my knee! I almost expected it to start crawling on me, although it didn't. It then explored the porch some more, came back to touch my other knee for a few seconds and then left. Very cool. Last summer I meditated in by backyard quite a bit, where we have a couple of bird feeders. I recall one instance when I was very close to one of the feeders and so the birds were to scared to come and feed. However, when I closed my eyes for a while, I heard them on the feeder making quite a racket crunching the seeds in their beaks. Fascinating.

Healing words

Let go of choosing between friend and enemy.
Immediately drop thoughts that follow from passion or aggression.
Within the expanse of simply being, without judgment,
The sun of devotion spontaneously dawns.

-From "Spring's Flower: A Spontaneous Song of Experience" composed by Vidyadhara Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche

A thought about reincarnation

Imagine a planet coalescing from dust in space. That is like our body and mind coming into being. Imagine the planet breaking apart and dissolving. That is like when we die. Imagine it coalescing again and reforming. That is like when we are born in our next life. The new planet is completely different, but drawn together from the same basic stuff. So the essence of mind is the same, but it comes together in a new way. Our karmic seeds are stored in a particular mindstream, so it's not quite like we dissolve into the ground of existence, lose all personal identity, and then something else reforms. But, just as my self in the future of this life is different than my current self, so my future rebirths are different. But the fact that there is karma in common means that of all the individuals in the universe in all of the three times (past, present and future), the ones I can influence the most are the ones that are future manifestations of my mindstream. I was at a retreat this past weekend, where Lama Norlha Rinpoche advised us that when we call upon the Buddhas, we need not limit ourselves to those in the past and present. We can and should also call upon the Buddhas of the future. Now it occurs to me that the final destination of the mindstream which I am a part of is Buddha. Therefore that future Buddha at the end of this mindstream is someone to whom I can call for help. This brings new meaning for me to the idea that we all have Buddha nature. In any event, in the same way that we should take care of the planet for its future inhabitants, we should take care of our body for its future inhabitants (future instances of our mindstream), and this means physically, mentally and spiritually. By performing actions that get us closer to Buddhahood, we are being kind to our future selves as well as to the vast array of sentient beings who can rely on us when we have achieved perfect enlightenment.

I think the analogy of the planet being destroyed and reformed is useful because it really shows that reincarnation is subtle. If the personality, the mental apparatus of conceptualization gets destroyed in between lives, then in what way can we say the new individual is the "same" as the old one. There are certain tendencies that are carried over, habitual patterns of fixation, attachment and aversion. Conversely patterns of concentration and mental stability arising from meditation can carry over as well. But is it the same person? Again, I am not the same person as I was a second ago, so I am certainly a dramatically different person than the next incarnation of this mindstream.

I know one reader of this blog believes in reincarnation but certainly thinks I've gotten it wrong, whereas another reader (you people know who you are!) does not believe in reincarnation. Why do I believe that things work roughly the way I've outlined? My first thought when I was wrestling with this earlier is that it's very unlikely I could prove that reincarnation happens. But then by the same token, it seems unlikely that it could ever be disproven, especially given our current paltry knowledge of what consciousness is. So then I decided to search for an argument that would increase my confidence in reincarnation and this was what I came up with. It is quite reasonable to me because a fundamental teaching of Buddhism is that the essence of mind is clear, lucid and unaffected by particular thoughts or conditions. When one meditates and has certain experiences with the Lama, one begins to perceive this directly. Thus through direct observation one glimpses the essence of mind, like the ocean with thoughts appearing as waves. This sort of analogy gets at it a little bit, but to really understand what I mean, you need to have a comparable meditative experience. And once one accepts this underlying substrate of the mind, it becomes reasonable to imagine that it would continue after the body dies. It's like the planet that is made out of dust, our mind is "made" of this substrate.

So-called violent protesting monks

The Chinese government seeks to portray Buddhist monks in Tibet as capable of violence, but apparently the only way they can do it is to actually impersonate them. As the Dalai Lama says, we should feel compassion for them, since they have some heavy karma coming their way.

The Ninth Symphony of Beethoven Understood at Last as a Sexual Message (Adrienne Rich)

A man in terror of impotence
of infertility, not knowing the difference
a man trying to tell something
howling from the climacteric
music for the entirely
isolated soul
yelling at Joy from the tunnel of the ego
music without the ghost
of another person in it, music
trying to tell something the man
does not want out, would keep if he could
gagged and bound and flogged with chords of Joy
where everything is silence and the
beating of a bloody fist upon
a splintered table

A crude comic I drew a while back

I drew this comic in an attempt to illustrate a certain manner of interaction between myself and another individual. See if you can figure out what I mean. I'll post an explanation of what I was thinking when I drew this at a later date. [Click on the image for a larger view.]

Spring

Dragging feet in the water
The nasal passage of time
Conspires and coalesces like music.
Monstrous membranes occlude my perception.

The wave of Spring is always welcome.
But it is not welcome in all ways.
Trees spew their particles into the wind
Awakening ancient cells of resistance.

A body wages war with a body,
Just as beauty battles pain.
Plants emerge from the soil,
And pollen falls like rain.

Of Gödel and Galaxies

I've been reading the book Gödel, Escher, Bach by Douglas Hofstadter again, and it's really an amazing book. I recommend it very highly. One of the book's centerpiece's is Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, which, in a nutshell, shows that there exist statements of number theory (such as "3^3=27," or "if you define a sequence a1=1 a2=1 and a3=2a2-a1, then no term is ever equal to 6.") which are true but cannot be proven within the context of number theory. The two examples I just gave are not of this form. One can prove them or prove there negation. The actual number theoretic statement constructed by Gödel is extremely complicated. The method of proof is brilliant, though. Because the laws governing the manipulation of numbers can be encoded as strings of numbers, one can actually connive to have number-theoretic statements have a secondary coded meaning which has something to say about the machinery of proofs. The coup de grace comes when you construct a statement whose coded meaning is "I cannot be proven in the system of number theory." Now let's consider whether the statement is true or false. If it is false, then it can be proven, which is to say it can't be proven. This is a contradiction, a version of the so-called Epimenides paradox: "Epimenides, a Cretan, says that all Cretans are liars." So the statement is not false, hence it is true. Since it is true it cannot be proven. Thus we have elegantly constructed a true statement of number theory which cannot be proven (within the system) precisely because that is what it asserts! Note that it can be proven outside the system, because we just did that. This is an awesome idea. The formal system of number theory can be utilized to show that it cannot adequately capture all true statements. One might say it contains the seeds of its own demise, but it might be better to say that it contains the seeds of its own limitation. Gödel's theorem doesn't destroy or invalidate number theory, it just shows that it is more subtle than any axiomatic treatment.

This whole story reminds me of an article I read in Scientific American which pointed out, that due to cosmic expansion, in 100 billion years all galaxies away from our local group will be traveling away from us at super-light speed, implying we cannot in principle see them or know anything about them. Inhabitants of the local group, now combined into a supergalaxy, will think that they are an island in infinite space. Furthermore, with all galaxies beyond our observable horizon, we won't be able to detect cosmic expansion, thus removing theoretical justification for a Big Bang. Our progeny, unless they have good records, will not have any reason to believe true physical facts about our Universe. In fact, future scientists might propose the existence of other galaxies or a Big Bang, and be shot down for unprovable junk science. So the current laws of Physics contain the seeds of their own limitation, just as with number theory. We can predict, using current Physics, that our progeny will not be able to detect facts about the Universe which we consider objective hard, facts. From here it's a small leap to realize that there are objective facts about our Universe that we will never be able to know because the information has already been lost.

Both these scenarios point to the fact that knowledge contains the seeds of its own limitation. This doesn't invalidate the reasoning process, but rather shows just how powerful and far-reaching reasoning can be. It is so powerful that it can even detect that it fails to completely capture all of reality!

The Lazy Poster

I just wrote a friend of mine in response to a letter he sent me essentially decrying theism. I'm reproducing the letter here since it is in the spirit of this blog, and also gets me off the hook for needing to post something.


Well, Jeff, I don't actually consider myself a theist. In fact, I'm committed to the principle of holding beliefs based on reasoning and evidence. I don't believe in an all-powerful deity. However, I don't necessarily agree that religion is dangerous. As I outlined in my email, there isn't much evidence that I can see that religion per se is destructive. I believe that many of humanity's current problems are caused by fundamental aspects of human psychology. For example, the instinct to band with a group of people and identify oneself as a member. I think this is why racism and sexism have been such problems, and why nations go to war. If the Israelis and the Palestinians weren't so concentrated on their labels as Israelis and Palestinians, then there would be no need for the continuing violence. Yes religion is present in the conflict, but I don't think it's the heart of the matter. I think it is a manifestation of the deep human instinct to band together and set oneself apart from some other group. (The atheist-theist dichotomy fits into this scheme too.)

I consider myself a Buddhist, and Buddhism is often considered an atheistic religion, though that is a gross oversimplification. I don't think you can really say Buddhism is either atheist or theist. The main point of Buddhism is not belief in a supreme deity, but rather the following of specific practices (like meditation) with which one can change one's perception, thinking and behavior for the better. I think there is much evidence that followers of Buddhism are a force for good in the world and not for evil. (The nonviolent protest by the monks of Burma against the reigning dictatorship is a good example.) However, even though I am partial to Buddhist thought, I think that there are good people in all religious traditions. (Gandhi, a Hindu, and Dr. Martin Luther King, a Christian, are really good examples.) People like Gandhi and King would no doubt have disagreed with the asinine pronouncements of many of the theists on the webpage you sent me. I agree that this sort of theism, the kind which is ill thought-out and intolerant is unacceptable. And our current politicians often appeal to this pseudo-religion, with stomach-turning results. That does need to be defended against I absolutely agree. But I don't think that labeling it as theist and therefore bad is the right way to go. I think that pointing out the immorality and injustice would be more effective and more accurate.

McCain Spoof video

Check out this spoof of the Obama "Yes We Can" video, in which McCain talks about how "the American people don't care if we're in Iraq for 100, 1000 or 10,000 years." I'd say that's not a fair assessment.

Happy New Year!

It's Losar, the Tibetan New Year. 2135. The year of the earth rat. (or earth mouse in one translation.)

Peace, happiness and prosperity to everyone reading this and to everyone else as well. May your day be as beautiful as an emerald mountain range at sunrise. May your mind be as tranquil as a crystal clear pond above the tree line. May your activity be as productive as the ribosomes in a single cell. May your metaphors be as outlandish as a peacock's tail made out of fiery stars.

Why I support Obama

I'm pretty sure all my readers are in Super Tuesday states, and I encourage you all to vote, no matter who you support. I actually already voted (early).

As far as I see it, Obama, Clinton, or even McCain, would be a huge improvement over Bush. After 9/11, I felt a spirit of hope, compassion and togetherness in the wake of the catastrophe. People seemed willing to help and support each other. It was like nothing I've ever experienced. A good leader would have capitalized on that oppurtunity to effect positive changes. He or she would have nurtured that spirit. Instead, Bush shabbily used the tragedy to promote his pre-existing agenda to attack Iraq. He completely squandered the good will in and outside the country, and tipped the balance from compassion to fear and hatred. It really felt awful in this country right around the time we attacked Iraq. I felt threatened for simply expressing my viewpoints.

Of the Democratic candidates, I think Obama has the potential to be most like the leader I envision. Certainly not an exact match. But he has the very useful skill to make impassioned and inspiring speeches that tend to bring people more toward the compassion side than the hatred side. Also, unlike Clinton, he did not vote for the Iraq war. Aside from that, their actual platforms are very very similar. Perhaps it's being unfair to Clinton, but she doesn't seem to have the same charisma. I also have been rather disillusioned with her for always making decisions based on whether she thinks it will maintain her electability. In other words, rather than trying to help the most, she is simply laying plans to get elected. Obama is certainly also guilty, but perhaps because of his shorter political career, less so.

One down side to both candidates: neither has any plans to reduce the size of the military or the defense budget. (We spend something on the order of magnitude of ten times more on defense than any other country, and it makes up an astounding percentage of our budget. It rather belies our fundamentally violent, imperialist nature.) Kucinich was my man for that, but he has dropped out in order to concenrate on maintaining his current congressional seat. (I encourage you to donate to his congressional campaign. We need voices like his in congress!)

Please post a comment if I'm being unfair.

Title pending

I would like to try to maintain this blog's irregular regularity. So I thought I'd describe what I'm doing now in terms of my Buddhist practice. Last year I completed the Four Ordinary Preliminary Practices, which are contemplations on the four thoughts that turn the mind toward the dharma. These thoughts are on

1. Precious human birth. Our current status as humans with time and ability to practice the dharma is incredibly rare, so rare that it would be foolish not to take advantage of the current opportunity.

2. Impermanence. Everything is impermanent, and so cannot be relied on for lasting happiness. Our current bodies will dissolve back into their component elements, and once that happens, we will not be able to take any of our possessions with us. Furthermore, if we have not practiced virtue, in our next life we will probably be born in a situation where we cannot practice the dharma, thereby accumulating more negative karma and perpetuating a very difficult cycle to break. Hence, we should practice virtue at all times. We don't know when we will die. Indeed, there are two certainties in life. That we will die, and that we don't know when. As the Buddha said, death comes upon you like a thief in the night.

3. Karma. Our actions have results, and when we perform virtuous activities, we achieve positive results. When we perform non-virtuous activities, we suffer. The results of our actions often take several lifetimes to manifest, but sometimes we can clearly see how our actions have led to results. For example, the alcoholic who sees his life collapsing around him will often attribute all of the negative events to bad luck, or the fact that world is out to get him, but once his mind clears a bit, he sees how all of these events were actually caused by his negative behavior. Similarly, right now there are many things which happen to us which seem random, but once our mind gets closer to enlightenment, we can see how our own behavior (in this and previous lives) has caused them. So knowing that our actions have consequences, we resolve to live virtuously.

4. The defects of samsara. Samsara is the cycle of existence in which most beings are trapped. I alluded to this cycle before. Basically negative actions lead to negative results which lead to more negative actions. Activity which seems virtuous can also lead to negative results. For example, doing something virtuous with the hope of looking good, or of getting a pleasant rebirth-- i.e. motivated by attachment and clinging-- can lead to rebirth in a Gods realm. Here life is great but once your supply of virtue has been exhausted, you die, and the immense suffering you feel as a result of having to leave will often propel you into a miserable rebirth. So the idea is to move away from cyclic existence, practicing virtue while not being attached to future happiness. A quote from the Buddha, talking to the monk Subhuti, is helpful here:

"Subhuti, those who would now set forth on the Bodhisattva path should thus give birth to the thought: `However many beings there are in whatever realms of being might exist, whether they are born from an egg or born from a womb, born from water or born from the air, whether they have form or no form, perception or no perception or neither perception or no perception, in whatever conceivable realm of beings one might conceive of beings, in the realm of complete nirvana, I shall liberate them all. And though I thus liberate countless beings, not a single being is liberated."

In other words, the way to become liberated (from samsara) is to aspire to help others achieve the highest form of happiness, which is to be liberated themselves, but not to be attached to the idea of doing so. A Buddha is able to encompass all sentient beings with his compassion, whereas beings like us who are still progressing on the path can only have compassion for a (small) finite number of beings.


Okay, so those are the four thoughts that comprise the four ordinary preliminary practices. Now, under the instruction of Lama Norlha Rinpoche, I'm doing the four "extraordinary" preliminary practices (Tibetan: Ngondro). The four sections of this are

1. Prostrations
2. Vajrasattva mantra recitation
3. Mandala offerings
4. Guru yoga.

I've been doing prostrations and Vajrasattva recitations since last July, and I just learned how to do the Mandala offerings. I haven't yet started Guru yoga. For each section, one must to 111,111 repetitions, although Rinpoche has said we only have to do 10,000 each to go to the next stage. He has expressed the wish that we complete all 111,111 in our lifetimes. These four activities engage different aspects of our body, speech and mind. Mandala offering, which I'm just learning how to do, for example involves offering a visualized universe full of beautiful objects to the Buddhas, thereby accruing vast amounts of merit. When one does this, one drops piles of rice on a mandala plate as a symbolic representation of this visualized universe, and repeats this over and over while reciting the liturgy in Tibetan. It's a form of tactile meditation or mantra, I would say. (This doesn't replace sitting meditation, but complements it.)

Anyway, that's the state of my practice now!

The good stuff

May all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness.
May they be free from suffering and its causes.
May they not be parted from the true bliss that knows no suffering.
May they abide in equanimity, free from attachment and aversion, that hold some close and others distant.

Evidence based theology?

As a thought experiment, let's assume we know nothing of what a deity is, and then try to derive some properties. I feel, along with many other intelligent people, that there is a way to be spiritual and yet be consistent with logic and reason, so this could be a worthwhile experiment. One of the first difficulties we encounter is that there is no good definition of "God." If one goes the simplistic route and defines God to be an omnipotent being, one gets into trouble since omnipotence is a logically inconsistent concept. (If God can do anything, he can make a rock so heavy he can't lift it.) Notice how I used "he" to describe God. This shows a lot of preconceptions that people have: that God is an intentional agent, and moreover, can be assigned a human gender! In any event, this simple argument shows that God, should one exist, is not all-powerful in the most simplistic sense. Indeed, if that were the case, he would snap his fingers and dissolve the suffering of the world in an instant. But the force of God evidently cannot instantaneously dissolve the suffering of the world. (I don't believe there is a difference here between "cannot" and "doesn't choose to." Aside from the problem of assigning intention to an unknown quantity, there is also the conundrum of whether one can ever choose to do act in a way differently than one actually acts. ) This solves a lot of the questions people have, and the reasons that are frequently given about why faith is not an option. But notice that it does not prove or even, to my current way of thinking, make a dent in the possibility of a spiritual force that can dissolve suffering, just not instantaneously. In fact, I believe that one need to be open to help from a spiritual force, in order to receive help, at least efficiently. We are more powerful than that spiritual force, in a gross sense, because we can choose to ignore it. It cannot control us like automatons. Yet, in a subtle sense, we are not more powerful than it, and in fact, I believe it is our innermost nature.

Today I Mused About

a claim by Freeman Dyson that research into telepathy is very difficult, as scientific rigor is almost impossible to arrange. For example, if telepathy is more likely in individuals in a state of emotional excitation, then a laboratory is not the place to see it. And I mused that there is a researcher who claims to have circumvented such problems by studying dogs instead of humans, supposedly finding, though I remain skeptical, that dogs will spend more time at the door of the house from the moment their owner decides to come home until the owner arrives, even accounting for instances when the owner decides to come home at an irregular time. I further mused that psychic research will never say anything definitive until we understand the mind much better, since the experiments offer no hint of a mechanism, and that is what would be needed to convince scientists.

Today I Learned

that store-brand green tea is better than Twining's.

Note: In an attempt to keep this blog new and interesting, I am shamelessly stealing La Misma's idea. Maybe I should change the title so it's not so flagrant. Hmm.

Juvenile Cooper's Hawk

I snapped a shot of this Cooper's Hawk in our backyard the other day. It was harassing a squirrel, which appeared to be in no danger. I suspect the hawk still hadn't quite perfected its hunting skills. The hawk would go after the squirrel somewhat hesitantly, and the squirrel would run around to the other side of the tree, and they would circle around for a few cycles, the hawk would give up and perch for a bit. This picture was taken when the hawk was perching in between bouts of squirrel chasing.

A cartoon that will make you laugh and cry

Karma Ghost on youtube.

Interesting interview with Ethan Nichtern

Follow
this link

to read an interview with Ethan Nichtern who makes a well-reasoned case in the short space available that one needs to combine the spirituality of Buddhism with political and community activism. He has some meditation groups in NYC, so listen up, you New Yorkers! :)

What's up with the weird writing at the top of the blog, anyway?

This is Tibetan, and it spells out the mantra "OM MANI PEME HUNG." What that means is a bit complicated because the idea of a mantra is not widely understood in the west. The mantra itself is Sanskrit, the ancient religious and scholarly language of India, but it doesn't have a meaning in the same way a normal sentence does. Often one meditates using a mantra, repeating it over and over, sometimes with an accompanying visualization. The mantra is said to be imbued with deep spiritual power. It is associated with the bodhisattva of compassion Chenrezi, or as he is referred to in Sanskrit, Avalokiteshvara. When you chant it, so it is said, you will receive his blessing. One of my favorite visualizations with regard to this mantra, taught by Bokar Rinpoche, actualizes Chenrezi's promise to free all beings from their suffering. Each of the mantra's six syllables represents a different realm of existence in the world of cyclic existence, and as one chants the mantra, one imagines that all the sentient beings in each of those realms becomes liberated as you say each syllable. (The realms are the hell realms, where hellish experiences and misery dominates, the yidak realms, where unsatisfied desire dominates, the animal realm, where confusion and ignorance dominates, the human realm, which has a curious mixture of mental afflictions, the jealous gods realm, in which the sentient beings are jealous of others despite their paradisical surroundings, and the Gods realm, who are usually blissful, but suffer immensely when they realize the party's almost over.) There are other visualizations one can do as well. One could very simply meditate that one wishes to save all sentient beings from their suffering, or just concentrate on the sounds of the syllables as you say them. It is said that the syllables are Chenrezi (no equivocating by saying they merely represent him.) ), so that merely saying them without understanding or recognition has the power to liberate!

A.A. and religion

I may be a good spokesman for A.A. since my religious views are, at a surface level anyway, not particularly consonant with the Judeo-Christian preconceptions that inform much of the spiritual discussion in A.A. literature. First let me say that belief in a God is not a requirement for membership in A.A. The only requirement for membership is a desire to stop drinking. The founders of the program were actually quite far advanced in their thinking when they decided the program shouldn't have any connection to any particular religion. To be fair, the program does mention God, and synonymously talks about a Spirit of the Universe, and also a Higher Power. But Bill Wilson makes clear that there are a wide variety of spiritual approaches, unique to each individual, not any one more correct than any other. He specifically references William James's book "Varieties of Spiritual Experience" in this regard. A.A. has no specific agenda to promote. It consists of people passing on the methods that worked for them to stay sober. The newcomer must then take these suggestions, use common sense, think about them, test them out, and apply what seems to fit in his or her life. One common suggestion which makes good sense to me is to find someone in the program who seems to have what you want. (Contentment, joyfulness? I guess that's up to you.) Then try to emulate them, and perhaps ask them to be your sponsor. (The term "sponsor" is a relic from the days when new members wouldn't be allowed into a group until someone (a sponsor) vouched for them. It's really a good thing that that tradition was scrapped decades ago.) A sponsor is kind of like a mentor. You can ask them for advice, and the good ones are willing to help you out in a moment of weakness. If you crave a drink, they can talk to you on the phone about it, or come over and hang with you until the urge abates.

Anyway, just a public service announcement in case anyone who thinks they might be an alcoholic is reading this. I'm happy to give more info to anyone who wants it!

A good A.A. video

There's a good
A.A. video here. I can really identify with the guy waking up miserable and retching into the toilet.

A.A. has really worked miracles for me, by the way. I know I'm an alcoholic, even though I never lost my job or had any gross external consequences. Internally, I was miserable and appalled at the way alcohol controlled my behavior. Many times I vowed to quit, many times successfully for a period of time, but I was never able to stay stopped. With the help of A.A. message and it members, I was able to finally do it. Achieve stable sobriety.

Cheers!

Two year birthday

Today is my 2 year birthday. Not a drop of alcohol in two years.

Good article

Slips and Human Nature

by William Duncan Silkworth, M.D.

The mystery of slips is not so deep as it may appear. While it does seem odd that an alcoholic, who has restored himself to a dignified place among his fellowmen and continues dry for years, should suddenly throw all his happiness overboard and find himself again in mortal peril of drowning in liquor, often the reason is simple.

People are inclined to say, "there is something peculiar about alcoholics. They seem to be well, yet at any moment they may turn back to their old ways. You can never be sure."

This is largely twaddle. The alcoholic is a sick person. Under the technique of Alcoholics Anonymous he gets well - that is to say, his disease is arrested. There is nothing unpredictable about him any more than there is anything weird about a person who has arrested diabetes.

Let's get it clear, once and for all, that alcoholics are human beings. Then we can safeguard ourselves intelligently against most slips.

In both professional and lay circles, there is a tendency to label everything that an alcoholic may do as "alcoholic behavior." The truth is, it is simple human nature.

It is very wrong to consider any of the personality traits observed in liquor addicts as peculiar to the alcoholic. Emotional and mental quirks are classified as symptoms of alcoholism merely because alcoholics have them, yet those same quirks can be found among non-alcoholics too. Actually they are symptoms of mankind!

Of course, the alcoholic himself tends to think of himself as different, somebody special, with unique tendencies and reactions. Many psychiatrists, doctors, and therapists carry the same idea to extremes in their analyses and treatment of alcoholics.

Sometimes they make a complicated mystery of a condition which is found in all human beings, whether they drink whiskey or buttermilk.

To be sure, alcoholism, like every other disease, does manifest itself in some unique ways. It does have a number of baffling peculiarities which differ from those of all other diseases.

At the same time, any of the symptoms and much of the behavior of alcoholism are closely paralleled and even duplicated in other diseases.

The slip is a relapse! It is a relapse that occurs after the alcoholic has stopped drinking and started on the A.A. program of recovery. Slips usually occur in the early states of the alcoholic's A.A. indoctrination, before he has had time to learn enough of the A.A. techniques and A.A. philosophy to give him a solid footing. But slips may also occur after an alcoholic has been a member of A.A. for many months or even several years, and it is in this kind, above all, that often finds a marked similarity between the alcoholic's behavior and that of "normal" victims of other diseases.

No one is startled by the fact that relapses are not uncommon among arrested tubercular patients. But here is a startling fact - the cause is often the same as the cause which leads to slips for the alcoholic.

It happens this way: When a tubercular patient recovers sufficiently to be released from the sanitarium, the doctor gives him careful instructions for the way he is to live when he gets home. He must get plenty of rest. He must drink plenty of milk. He must refrain from smoking. He must obey other stringent rules.

For the first several months, perhaps for several years, the patient follows directions. But as his strength increases and he feels fully recovered, he becomes slack. There may come the night when he decides he can stay up until ten o'clock. When he does this, nothing untoward happens. Soon he is disregarding the directions given him when he left the sanitarium. Eventually he has a relapse.

The same tragedy can be found in cardiac cases. After the heart attack, the patient is put on a strict rests schedule. Frightened, he naturally follows directions obediently for a long time. He, too, goes to bed early, avoids exercise such as walking upstairs, quits smoking, and leads a Spartan life. Eventually, though there comes a day, after he has been feeling good for months or several years, when he feels he has regained his strength, and has also recovered from his fright. If the elevator is out of repair one day, he walks up the three flights of stairs. Or he decides to go to a party - or do just a little smoking - or take a cocktail or two. If no serious aftereffects follow the first departure from the rigorous schedule prescribed, he may try it again, until he suffers a relapse.

In both cardiac and tubercular cases, the acts which led to the relapses were preceded by wrong thinking. The patient in each case rationalized himself out of a sense of his own perilous reality. He deliberately turned away from his knowledge of the fact that he had been the victim of a serious disease. He grew overconfident. He decided he didn't have to follow directions.

Now that is precisely what happens with the alcoholic - the arrested alcoholic, or the alcoholic in A.A. who has a slip. Obviously, he decides to take a drink again some time before he actually takes it. He starts thinking wrong before he actually embarks on the course that leads to a slip.

There is no reason to charge the slip to alcoholic behavior or a second heart attack to cardiac behavior. The alcoholic slip is not a symptom of a psychotic condition. There's nothing screwy about it at all. The patient simply didn't follow directions.

For the alcoholic, A.A. offers the directions. A vital factor, or ingredient of the preventive, especially for the alcoholic, is sustained emotion. The alcoholic who learns some of the techniques or the mechanics of A.A. but misses the philosophy or the spirit may get tired of following directions - not because he is alcoholic, but because he is human. Rules and regulations irk almost anyone, because they are restraining, prohibitive, negative. The philosophy of A.A. however, is positive and provides ample sustained emotion - a sustained desire to follow directions voluntarily.

In any event, the psychology of the alcoholic is not as different as some people try to make it. The disease has certain physical differences, yes, and the alcoholic has problems peculiar to him, perhaps, in that he has been put on the defensive and consequently has developed frustrations. But in many instances, there is no more reason to be talking about "the alcoholic mind" than there is to try to describe something called "the cardiac mind" or the "TB mind."

I think we'll help the alcoholic more if we can first recognize that he is primarily a human being - afflicted with human nature.

A dream

Every once in a while I have a lucid dream, a dream where conscious awareness is present. These are treasures for me, partly I suppose because they are a novel mental state, and I'm naturally curious about such things, but I think it's also because I think it is always good to become more aware and more conscious. Normally in the dream state and while sleeping, awareness is fettered, but in lucid dreams the chains are loosened. I had a lucid dream a while back where I suddenly found myself aware that I was dreaming, while driving a car. So, and this must be my mind's natural tendency, I decided I was going to control the dream and make something happen. I decided to make the car move straight up into the air. What actually happened was that the front end of the car moved slightly up in the air, the dream broke, and I woke up.

This morning I had another lucid dream of a similar character. While the dream was not lucid, I dreamt that I found a snake in my mala (string of prayer beads) which I thought was kind of neat, but when I went to remove it, I realized it was actually a giant earwig. So I went to brush the earwig away, and realized that there were three of them. When I went to brush them away, they started crawling and I realized each of them was also three smaller earwigs. Around this time, I had the insight "I'm probably dreaming right now." At this point, I was actually brushing away lots of dead insects from my text holder while sitting out on the front porch. I got rid of them all, which felt good, because it symbolized eliminating my negativities and obscurations, and true to form, decided to consciously do something in the dream. I thought that maybe I could see the Buddha, so I looked up into the sky, and I saw a roughly circular lighter area in the sky, which I though maybe was the Buddha, but not directly perceivable to me because of karmic obscurations. (Several stories like this appear in Buddhist texts, where Buddhas go unseen due to karmic obscuration.) But then the dream broke and I woke up.

I'd like to try to maintain the lucidity of such dreams longer than I have, and the idea seems to be that I shouldn't try to control the dream so much, but just enjoy the ride. These dreams occur so rarely for me that it's hard to practice having the right attitude. Ah well. I'm sure something will develop.

Taking Refuge

There is a ceremony which you go through when you become a Buddhist, called "Taking Refuge," and one repeats the refuge prayer often during one's continuing practice. But what does taking refuge mean? When one takes refuge, one is doing so in the so-called Three Jewels: Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. One is taking refuge as protection from the suffering of this world, and with the aspiration to eventually help all beings become enlightened. When I first heard about the concept of refuge, I found it difficult to understand and identify with. After all, how can the Buddha, who died 2600 years ago, offer me any protection? I've come to believe that, although the Buddha's body did in fact dissolve into its component elements, that the primordial mind of the Buddha, and of enlightened existence shines on, and pervades everything, particularly the layers of my own consciousness. Thus the Buddha is a real, solid support and source of protection. This past weekend I was at a retreat up in the mountains, and I had chosen to meditate outside on a back porch. As I meditated there, wrapped in a blanket at 6am, temperature below freezing, and gazing at the starry sky in front of me, I imagined the love and compassion of all the Buddhas surrounding me, offering me comfort and protection, just as the blanket offered me protection against the cold.

The Dharma is the living teaching of the Buddha, and is also a source of protection. It provides a means of progressing, of increasing our good deeds and reducing our negative actions. From personal experience, I can say that following the practices has helped to make me a kinder, gentler person. I'm certainly not anywhere near perfect, but I can see definite changes in the way I react to people and the way I react to my own emotions and thoughts.

Finally, the Sangha consists of those beings who have progressed further on the path to enlightenment than we have. If you think of the Buddha as the doctor, who prescribes us medicine, which is the Dharma, then one can think of the sangha as nurses and caregivers who help us take out medicine. In my own case, I've had the good fortune (i.e. karma) to come into contact with a wonderful practicing group in my hometown, and also to meet several teachers and Lamas, who, motivated by compassion, have helped to show me the way to progress.

By taking refuge, one recognizes that this world, driven by desire, hatred and ignorance, will not offer us lasting happiness, but that the Three Jewels offer us a true path to enlightenment.

I encourage you to take refuge. It has no risks, and even if you feel your commitment is not that strong, it will help to plant a seed.

Groundhog!

Saw this groundhog in our yard this morning. I've never seen one in the area before.

Lha Bap Du Chen

"Meanwhile, today (Thursday Nov 1) is Lha Bap Du Chen, the anniversary of the Buddha's descent from the gods' realm where he went to teach his mother. It's one of the most auspicious days in the Tibetan Buddhist calendar, and everything is magnified 10 million times. Good day to get in some extra practice! Or at least be as mindful as possible and refrain from harmful actions. (If you've had a bad day so far...just confess any harmful actions, and move on...)"

Sorry I didn't post this earlier. -Vacuous

My BDay Today

Hi all. Today's my birthday. I'm now 33 years old. Or is it 34? I'm pretty sure it's 33. Anyway, if you want to do something on my behalf for my birthday, how about rescuing some small animals? An easy thing to do would be to go to a bait or pet shop and buy some crickets and release them into the wild, or buy some bait fish and release them into a river. (Be sure you're matching the animal with an appropriate habitat. Don't release non-native fish species please!) The merit you accumulate from saving lives like this is vast, and it has the added benefit that you are training yourself to be kind to others.

Climate Catastrophe!?

Read this story. Scary, scary.

A poem

Orange and soft
Orangensaft
Idiom idiot idiolect idolatry izzitme
what am I trying to say,
scrawled
am I trying to stay sprawled
What is the difference between time and apes
Are apes like grapes, spherical, angelical, purple and perpendicular monstrosities of the idiolect idiot running water streaming careening and eating but I don't know why how them me you are we in this sentence together or what?
That's what I like a tense stream a careening tense stream a scream a word a feeling a new sentence into jail like that like house like me like you like the world spinning around a turd a turtle a tesseract a new amphibious encyclopedia spurning the vortex neutrinos nor eating the intense turgid meerkat like entities sprawled on the floor eating mice and singing aloud as though this were their last time on earth or perhaps the last time in the universe or the big crunch big bang bathsheeba beersheeba bear cat eat my hat no don't do that because it tastes like rat or maybe it doesn't these things are never clear to me though I pretend like the thoughts make sense careening sprawled on the dining room floor, naked as Alan Ginsburg Greenspan says though I am unsure of his intent, sprawled halfway between naked and illustrious and the words will flow a tense feeling in my heart but where did that go. Why is it gone? How come it's not there any more. It felt so good, but then I began editing the words. I began controlling the thoughts. I began channeling the flow, and gadzooks, it all petered... out...

The A.A. Promises

If we are painstaking about this phase of our development, we will be amazed before we are half way through.

We are going to know a new freedom and a new happiness.

We will not regret the past nor wish to shut the door on it.

We will comprehend the word serenity and we will know peace.

No matter how far down the scale we have gone, we will see how our experience can benefit others.

That feeling of uselessness and self-pity will disappear.

We will lose interest in selfish things and gain interest in our fellows.

Self-seeking will slip away.

Our whole attitude and outlook upon life will change.

Fear of people and of economic insecurity will leave us.

We will intuitively know how to handle situations which used to baffle us.

We will suddenly realize that God is doing for us what we could not do for ourselves.



Are these extravagant promises? We think not.

They are being fulfilled among us - sometimes quickly, sometimes slowly.

They will always materialize if we work for them.

-Alcoholics Anonymous p83-84

An op-ed that makes the point well

Op-ed: Know thine enemy

Four things to contemplate

1. We have a great and rare opportunity to do good in the world, to practice a spiritual path, and to uncover our true spontaneous wondrous nature. This opportunity is easily lost, however. It can be lost through death, which comes like a thief in the night, or simply through inaction and distraction. To appreciate the rarity of our opportunity, think about how many life forms there are on the planet. Almost none of them have the cognitive ability to follow a spiritual path, and many of them are relegated to vast suffering and hellish experiences. Think of all the poor lobsters boiled alive in pots. None of them has had the opportunity to practice that we have. Think of all the people in the world who don't have the freedom to practice as they wish. For example, people who must work all day without stop and people living in countries with brutal governments. From this perspective, the number of people who can practice a spiritual path are as rare as a star in daytime.


2. Everything is impermanent. That which comes together must dissolve. In fact, the only two certainties in life are that we will die, and that we don't know when. Since we know that our time is limited, what better time to start practicing a spiritual path than right now!

3. Virtuous actions leads to happiness whereas negative actions (for example the 7 deadly sins) leads to suffering. This is the principle of karma.

4. The objects and people of the world cannot be relied upon for lasting happiness. Thus, if we wish to find lasting happiness, we need to look elsewhere.

On Doubt (Sogyal Rinpoche)

Doubts demand from us a real skillfulness in dealing with them, and I notice how few people have any idea how to pursue doubts or to use them. Isn't it ironic that in a civilization that so worships the power of deflation and doubt, hardly anyone has the courage to deflate the claims of doubt itself, to do as one Hindu master said: turn the dogs of doubt on doubt itself, to unmask cynicism and to uncover the fear, despair, hopelessness, and tired conditioning it springs from? Then doubt would no longer be an obstacle, but a door to realization, and whenever doubt appeared in the mind, a seeker would welcome it as a means of going deeper into the truth.

Traveling again

I'm going up to Ithaca, New York next week to see the Dalai Lama, and after that I'm heading down to Kagyu Thubten Chöling Monastery for a two day retreat. It's going to be awesome. :)

Buddhism on YouTube!?

A musical rendition of the Heart Sutra. (Prajnaparamita Hrdaya)

A talk by Sogyal Rinpoche

A talk by Tsem Tulku Rinpoche.

A Quote by Shantideva

Whatever joy there is in this world
All comes from desiring others to be happy,
And whatever suffering there is in this world
All comes from desiring myself to be happy.

Autobigraphy in 5 chapters (Portia Nelson)

I came across the following poem, which struck a real chord with me, while reading The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying by Sogyal Rinpoche. (An amazing book, by the way.)


1) I walk down the street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I fall in.
I am lost...I am hopeless.
It isn't my fault.
It takes me forever to find a way out.

2) I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I pretend I don't see it.
I fall in again.
I can't believe I'm in the same place.
But it isn't my fault.
It still takes a long time to get out.

3) I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I see it there.
I still fall in...it's a habit.
My eyes are open.
I know where I am.
It is my fault.
I get out immediately.

4) I walk down the same street.
There is a deep hole in the sidewalk.
I walk around it.

5) I walk down another street.

Bad dream

Last night, for the first time in about 10 years, I had a nightmare which woke me up and left me terrified. I'm not really sure why the dream occurred when it did. I was in a room, there were some alien greys on the stairs and bunch of people in the room. I felt no threat from these aliens, and I asked "Are these 'visitors?'" and the response was "no," although someone mentioned that "Jesus was a visitor." I got the distinct impression that "visitors" were a subset of the alien greys, a particularly powerful and dangerous subset. Then I dreamed I was in my bed, and I was being pulled up. I continuously recited the Buddhist refuge prayer as an antidote: "I take refuge in the Buddha, dharma and Sangha. By the virtuous merit that I collect, may I be attain Buddhahood, to benefit all sentient beings." My legs were being pulled upward, but my torso was staying in place. Then I dreamt I woke up, and I saw a tiny figure fleeing down the hall. I felt like I had the upper hand now, and I chased it. Then it became a rather menacing alien head which fell down the stairs where I chased it. I kicked it, and then picked it up, feeling like it was dead and defeated. I went outside, where there were some people in the parking lot. I showed them the alien head, and one of the people put it on top of her head as a joke. I began to get worried that it still had power, so I suggested we destroy it. I suggested we cut it up with scissors, but then I realized it had them under its control now, because they attacked me, although not in a particularly violent way. Then I woke up, terrified. Lying in my bed, I felt scared to open my eyes in case there was an alien there. As I was lying there, I came to the conclusion that this alien was an actual creature, perhaps not corporeal, with whom I had some kind of karmic debt. Like a good bodhisattva, I made the aspiration that the suffering I was experiencing be sufficient for all sentient beings. But then I became so frightened at that prospect, I started arguing with myself and part of my mind said "I was just joking." Anyway, it's pretty anticlimactic from there. I did eventually fall asleep.

The alien grey was always a very disturbing image to me, and I've had some nightmares before involving them, though as I mentioned this was many years ago. When I was really young, I had a dream about a giant glowing skeleton which scared me in exactly the same way. I think this skeleton and the grey are the same archetype in my unconscious mind. As for the question of why? What does it mean? What does the grey represent? I don't really know. It's a very powerful symbol in my mind, and I have some guesses, but I don't really know. Before I went to bed, I had been thinking about this alien symbol (not frightened at all) and I was wondering why I had found it so disturbing in the past. I thought it was something I could ask Lama Norlha Rinpoche. Then, lo and behold, I had a dream about it. Makes you think.

Meditation methods

There are many, many types of meditation. One major distinction is between calm, abiding meditation ( shinay or shamatha), and analytic meditation ( vipassana or insight meditation). Once one practices shinay for a while, one's mind is clear and stable enough to engage in insight meditation. The root is shinay, and I'd like to describe a few basic shinay techniques for the possible benefit of my readers.

The first type is called shinay with a focus. First sit in meditation posture if you can, or sit in a chair with your back upright and straight otherwise. You can have your hands rest on your knees, or in your lap, often with the right hand cradled in the left. Choose an object of your focus. For example, it can be a candle flame or a sacred image. Now keep your attention loosely on that object. Whenever you find your mind has wandered, bring it gently back to the object. Although this seems easy, it's not, because the mind very easily wanders away. The meditation trains us to be mindful. Whenever we notice our focus has been lost, we give our mind something concrete to do: bring it back to the focus. Do this or some form of shinay for at least 20 minutes a day. If you just do it sporadically, it will help on the day you do it, but will have no lasting effect. It would be like attempting to boil water by turning the burner on for a few minutes every few days.

The second type of meditation is called shinay without a focus. Sit in meditation posture as before, the only difference being that your eyes are half-open (as opposed to fully open.) They can be closed if you want. Now the idea is to let your mind rest in emptiness without conceptualization. Whenever you notice that you are thinking, let go of the thoughts and bring the mind back to a state of emptiness. This meditation also trains the mind in minfdulness, it trains us to be aware of our thoughts. When we see that we have a thought, that's the important point. Then we let it go, don't follow after it, don't let it carry us away in a dense conceptual web. Just let it go and repeat. Although experienced meditators can let their minds rest without distraction in a natural state of empty awareness for hours and days, beginners like us will find that thought arise almost continuously. Over time the gaps between thoughts will lengthen, however.

The third type of meditation lies somewhere in between the first two. Here you focus on the breath. Whenever your attention wanders, and you notice it has wandered, you gently bring it back to the breath. You can count breaths, say up to 10, and keep repeating. You can also internally say the mantra OM AH HUNG synchronized with the breath, so that when you breathe in you think "OM", when you pause ever-so-slightly before breathing out you think "AH" and when you breathe out you think "HUNG." One of my favorite meditations is to combine this focus on the breath with a meditation on compassion (bodhicitta). When you breathe in, imagine that all the afflictions and suffering of sentient beings are drawn in to your nose in the form of black smoke. It collects at you heart center, where it is transformed into white light, which you then breathe out, purifying all sentient beings of their sufferings.

I am grateful to Lama Norlha Rinpoche for teaching me these methods, and giving me permission to teach them to others. If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask.

Codex Seraphinianus

I found out about this amazing book, Codex Seraphinianus, while reading a collection of articles by Douglas Hofstadter. It purports (or does it?) to be an encyclopedia of another civilization or world, written in another language that is indecipherable to us. Most of the images are delightful containing all sorts of playful modifications of form from what we're used. Hofstadter compares it to music. I've included some of my favorite pictures here although I would definitely recommend finding it and looking at it yourself. When one browses the internet, the standard refrain is that large university libraries have it, and indeed, that's where I got my copy.

The first image is from the "botany" chapter. Who says plants have to be connected, or only have one root? The second image is from the "physics" chapter indicating a contraption for some physical experiment that presumably makes sense in their physics. The third image is really funny is all I have to say, and so is the fourth, an entry on one of the various tribes that inhabit this other world.

More philosophy of mind

Beckett, in a comment below, asks: "What if it is true that our rational decision-making thought process is actually a fantasy ; a running commentary to justify decisions already made (a concept supported by some evidence, according to a NY Times article)."

I think this is probably largely true. The way I see it at the moment, the decision making process occurs largely unconsciously, as does the thought generating process. But, who is coming up with that running commentary, and more to the point in my mind, who is experiencing the running commentary? As far as I see, it is our awareness that experiences the results of our unconscious thought processes. However, I don't think that our actions are completely determined by our unconscious mind in this way. What would the point be of our awareness if it were powerless? I think that we can affect the way our unconscious mind works through our awareness, but it is subtle and it takes time.

Mount Timpanogos Photos Part 3

First photo: Emerald Lake, fed by a year-round snow field.
Second photo: Tibetan prayer flags someone had hung on the little structure at the peak. Very cool!
Third and Fourth Photos: A lone mountain goat that was wandering around very close to the summit.

Mount Timpanogos Photos Part 2

The first image captures some mountain goats high on a rock wall. The third photo is a view of the top.

Click on pics for more resolution.

Mount Timpanogos Photos Part 1

I hiked to the top of Mt. Timpanogos about an hour south of Salt Lake. It's definitely among the top hikes I've ever been on, if not the top one. It ranks among the hikes I've done in the high Sierra in California.

Be sure to click on the photos for a larger view.

Salt Lake City

I took a little (1.5 hour) hike from my hotel room up the side of an adjacent foothill this morning. It was hot, but the air is so dry that it didn't feel too bad, especially with a hat. The temperature is actually about the same (95 degrees) as back home, but it feels infinitely better here. I snapped this picture when I reached the highest point I could get to in time. I had a talk to present at 1pm, so I didn't have the luxury of climbing all day, even though it looked like I was about 20 minutes from the peak. Alas. The surrounding countryside is stunningly beautiful.

If you lived in Nebraska, you'd see this all the time!

On the road I'll be

I'll be leaving tomorrow for Salt Lake City, where I'm attending a conference. I've decided to drive because I love to see the countryside change as you move further west. It's about 1800 miles from here, which I plan on doing in two and a half days. The conference itself is three days long, so there'll be more driving than conferencing, but that's okay. While in Utah, I hope to get a bit of hiking done. I'm bringing my trusty camera with me so hopefully I'll get some good pictures. See y'all later!

Hofstadter versus Searle on the mind

I read I am a Strange Loop by Douglas Hofstadter several weeks ago, and it contains an extremely good explanation of something called Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem. This is a result in the foundations of mathematics that says, essentially, that there are true mathematical facts that cannot be proven. The heart of the proof is a method for reading a second encoded meaning into arithmetical statements, one which is consistent with the axioms of arithmetic, but which actually means something else to us. (Similar to the way a string of zeroes and ones underlies the entire operation of your computer, and yet you are reading a different meaning into it.) Hofstadter then points out that this is the way consciousness works. There's the laws of physics which underlie the operation of our brain (kind of like the zeroes and ones), but then there's our conscious experience which arises from symbols interacting at a higher level.

So far, I have to say "Right on!" However, here's where things get sticky. Hofstadter argues that once you have a set of symbols in whatever substrate, the human brain, a computer (not too hard to imagine) or anywhere else (hmm), which is sufficiently complicated then there lies consciousness. John Searle argues against that point of view. He says that computers will never be conscious, even if they act like it, because they won't understand what they're doing. He doesn't explain what makes humans different, though.

I personally believe that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. I don't see any reason why computers can't be conscious. Maybe they can, maybe they can't. There definitely seems to be something special about conscious awareness. But here's a question. Could I act like myself, going about my usual daily activities, in the same way I always do, with my conscious awareness shut off? When I phrase it that way, it seems more intuitive that I could not, and that actual conscious awareness is concomitant with behavior of a certain kind.

If a computer were made that acted conscious, would we ever be able to know that it is conscious? It seems unlikely that that could ever be settled scientifically.

And what about the Buddhist perspective? After all, in Buddhism we seek to understand the nature of mind. Well, I don't see any reason why, within the Buddhist framework, computers can't be conscious. There are all types of sentient beings, in all different types of states. (In fact, in one of the hell realms, mention is made of metallic beings.) But, just because I don't see a reason why not, doesn't mean I see a reason why. :)

And now, I must go eat lunch...