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!