Archive for the ‘Books’ Category

Fourfold Realization of the Headless Way


17 Jul

From Douglas Harding’s book, On Having No Head: Zen and the Rediscovery of the Obvious
The Fourfold path of Self-Reliance on the Headless Way:

  1. The way really to live is to look in and see Who is doing so
  2. The only You are in a position to see this “Who”
  3. This in-seeing establishes You as the authority on what matters supremely
  4. Accordingly your path will no conform to some set pattern laid down from above by any book, person, or system

You got yourself into this mess, you get yourself out.

Meditating on the Possibilities


22 May

sivakempfort.jpgI have recently re-taken a daily meditation practice. In line with my new method of being more gentle with the demands I make on myself, I have not dove in full bore. Instead, I am taking it at an easy, but consistent pace. I meditate everyday, sometimes in the morning, sometimes at night, sometimes both. My sessions are occasionally timed for 15 minutes, but sometimes I just “go until I am done.” I am trying to remind myself each time that there is a reason it is called a practice. It is the developing of a skill and the strengthening of a view point, it is not perfection.

There’s an old parable about meditation that I have always liked. It goes something like this: Imagine the whole of the universe as one mountain, impossibly immense. Once every millennium a bird flies from the edge of the cosmos, alights on the peak of the mountain, takes one peck with it’s tiny beak, then flies away. When the mountain is whittled down to dust, then will all sentient beings be liberated.

Each time we sit in meditation, the bird takes another peck. Some days the peck is slight. Some days the bird barely lands before skittering away. Some days the mountain reverberates like a colossal bell with the force of the blow. So it goes.

The particular style I am using is derived from The Power of Now by Eckhart Tolle. In a nutshell -

  • Sit comfortably with back straight
  • Focus on breathing for several breaths to quiet the mind chatter
  • Actively witness my thoughts and turn attention inside to the inner body
  • Breathe without focusing on the breath and Be

I find that as thoughts come up I can either stay in a watchful mode of my inner body and they pass by like clouds, or I can get swept along with them until I realize I am participating in thinking rather than witnessing, and then gently go back to witnessing.

In the interest of strengthening the practice I did some online research about meditation techniques and came across the Vigyan Bhairav Tantra. The Vigyan Bhairav Tantra is an ancient Indian text some 5000 years old. It contains a list of 112 meditations. I believe that the only way to get good benefit from meditation is to stick with one for a while to give it its full day in court. But, I also find it stimulating to compare with other methods.

With that in mind, I present the Vigyan Bhairav Tantra here for your enjoyment.

(more…)

Speedlinking


08 May

Just found a useful little site.  It’s an indexed/searchable online Tao Te Ching.  Enjoy!

And, for those of you who crave a reference site for Critical Thinking.

Oh, and some of Rumi‘s Love Poems.

If you’ve ever needed to cut and paste from one computer to another, cl1p.net.

ok, now back to work.

Being is a verb


07 May

Actually it’s not. Be is a verb, being is a noun, adjective or conjunction. But, bear with me…

I like distinctions and definitions. I have always been a semantics bastard, and often take side trips in arguments to dig into the minutiae of definitions for the words and terms being used. Drives some people crazy. I totally get that it can be annoying, and I hold back as much as I am able, but precision of language is now, and always has been, terminally important to me. I believe that the language we use internally is the first barrier, lens, and tool for us to both understand the world as it is, and converse about it in a meaningful way. I really enjoy when shifts in the basic definitions I have are facilitated by things people tell me, I read, or I figure out. The change in viewpoint is always liberating, if only to reaffirm that we have a lot to do with how we perceive the meaning of it all, and how we get in our own way.

I was reading Eckhart Tolle‘s book The Power of Now the other evening. It was recommended by a co-worker. (Thanks, Dan!) I came across a passage that caused a shift in my internal distinctions. In my mind, Being, with a capital B, meaning the totality of creation and all that is beyond it, had always occurred as a noun. A name for a static thing which was, and which we moved through. The quote which changed that distinction for me was -

The word Being explains nothing, but nor does God. Being, however, has the advantage that it is an open concept. It does not reduce the infinite invisible to a finite entity. It is impossible to form a mental image of it. Nobody can claim exclusive possession of Being. It is your very essence, and it is immediately accessible to you as a feeling of your own presence, the realization I am that is prior to I am this or I am that. So it is only a small step from the word Being to the experience of Being. (All italics and capitalization are original to the text.)

That paragraph caused the shift (of course including all the paragraphs and all the experiences of my life before that moment) of understanding the concept of Being as a verb, an active state and happening, rather than as a noun. I wrote earlier on my opinion about I am, and this distinction includes that, but having Being occur for me as a verb has a vast amount of more power behind it and room to work than Being as a noun. And, the only thing that changed was how the word was defined in my head.

I love distinctions!

i against I


20 Apr

It’s funny how the mind works. When I was a young geek buck tearing down the road in my friend Brian’s Toyota Corola we would often blast the 80′s pop-rock and sing along to our favorite top 40 songs at the top of our lungs. One of our favorites was a song by Mr. Mister. It would come on, we would grapple for the radio controls and spin it to the max and bellow. The chorus is where we really got into it -

Carrying a Laser

Down the road that I must Travel

Carrying a Laser

Through the darkness of the night

Carrying a Laser

Where I’m going will you follow

Carrying a Laser

On a highway in the light

We were sci-fi gamer freaks, and we loved it.

The problem is, those weren’t the lyrics. The actual title of the song, and the refrain we mistook for “Carrying a Laser” was “Kyrie Eleison“, which is Latin for “Lord have mercy.” The song was a fine example of Christian rock. And, when we found that out, it died for us. We tried to sing with the right words, just two words different, but it was no where near as exciting. We tried singing it our way still, but that didn’t work either. I don’t know about Brian, but I know I felt an odd embarrassment about the whole thing and the song promptly lost its magic. I had an understanding of the song, one that was important to me, and it was wrong. I reacted to being wrong by shutting down. But, there is another way…

Several years ago, at the beginning of my study of Aikido, I came across a book that was right up my alley: Cheng Hsin Tui Shou: The Art of Effortless Power by Peter Ralston. He is a renaissance man of a martial artist, with black belts in Judo, Juijitsu, and Karate. He has also studied Northern Sil Lum Kung Fu, T’ai Chi, Hsing I, Pa Kua, Western Boxing and Aikido. The book concerns his attempt to distill the concepts from the various disciplines he practiced into something new. Since I came up through Judo, then T’ai Chi, and finally to Aikido with side trips into Western Fencing, Western Boxing, Hsing I, Pa Kua, Wing Chun and Muay Thai I figured it was a perfect fit. The book is a good read and I highly recommend it to any thinking person of a martial artist. One of the fields of study that Peter Ralston has a passion for is Ontology. That was a new word to me. I looked it up, I’m not really sure where, but I received the following definition – “The Ontological argument is that the first knowledge, the only knowledge from which all other knowledge can possibly arise, is the knowledge that there is a God.” That definition is not quite right. Ontology is a branch of philosophy concerned with the study of being, or existence, and the first, most basic knowledge that derives therefrom. Some great minds have used the Ontological Argument (and variations of it) as proof of the existence of God. Ontology is also sometimes translated as “first knowledge”. Descarte summed up his ontology with the famous phrase, “Cogito ergo sum.” “I think, therefore I am.” So, I had a wrong understanding of the basic Ontological Argument and its implications, but I didn’t know it at the time. All I had was this basic whiff of an idea that caught me at a deep level. It became for me a kind of koan, and lodged itself in my throat, a “red hot ball of iron that I could neither swallow nor spit out.”

I grappled with that idea, that the first knowledge must be the knowledge that there is a God, in varying degrees for years. I haunted me, pleased me, gave me a yearning and solace in turn.

Recently the koan turned on itself. I was sitting in front of my computer, contemplating the meaning of web 2.0 and social networking on grand scales when it occurred to me that the idea that knowledge that there is a God had to come first was simply wrong. The first knowledge, the source of all knowledge is simply, “I Am.” This powerful realization that I exist as a distinct thing is the pivot on which all knowing spins. Without knowing that I am, I can know nothing. This is how it occurs for me know. The realization was deep and complete, and very, very quiet. More like an, “oh…” than an “AH HAH!!!!” But, deep and real nonetheless. I can sincerely say that I am not the same man I was before. For me now, the basis of my Ontology is, “Sum”. “I Am.” This is the same bold declaration that Jesus made, and what Buddha was pointing at when (as legend has it) immediately after birth he walked seven steps in each direction, pointed one hand at the sky and the other at the earth and said, “In all of Heaven and Earth, I alone am the honored one.” “I Am”, and the fact that I know that, know that I am an individual point of knowledge, and that that knowledge is the source of all knowledge makes me realize that everyone else, in all of the world, also is “I Am”. Of course, a quad cappuccino still costs me $4.25 at Starbucks. Knowing is only worth so much.

Now, being me, I of course excitedly looked up the Ontological Argument, and very swiftly realized that I had been mistaken in the definition I had carried all those years. I was wrong, but this time being wrong was alright because it was so damn useful to me. My reaction to being wrong this time is much better, it simply means I still have much to learn. (Thank God!)

Now, bear with me for a moment. I recently finished Michael Pollan’s book The Omnivore’s Dilemma: A Natural History of Four Meals. Bloody brilliant book! Again, I highly recommend it, this time to any thinking person of an eater. It was good on so many levels that I really should write a proper review, but there is a part pertinent to this discussion. Michael Pollan goes into the distinction of recognizing the modern habit of relating solely to individual of a species rather than the concept of the species as a whole. One of his examples is the Native American mythical concept of Buffalo, and Coyote, and relating to those animals as that concept rather than as a group of individuals. The Native American had respect for the Buffalo as they hunted the great beast, and demonstrably strengthened the breed as a whole with a symbiotic relationship. That is, until the White Man came on the scene and started paying good money for buffalo parts. This individualization is part of what contributes to modern industrial farmings inhumane treatment of a cow, or pig, as a machine good only for producing protein, rather than a Cow as concept, and makes it easy to treat the animal in a way that denies its basic creaturely suchness. There is strong argument for the moral correctness of eating animals as long as they are treated as Pig, Cow, and Chicken with gratitude and mutual respect rather than a pig, a cow, and a chicken suitable only to be rapidly forced to a size appropriate for slaughter.

This concept of Buffalo rather than buffalo, mixed in with the recognition of “I Am, and so is everyone else” into a blossoming understanding of what the mystics have referred to as the Self, as opposed to the self. The world is a better place when you start to comprehend the concept of Person rather than person, I rather than i, and Self rather than self. You begin to see that we are all, on a very real level the same, and that each of us (Pig included) is merely striving for what is good in life and to be happy. Each, and every thing in this world deserves that, and deserves to be seen as equally deserving that.

But, a quad cappuccino still costs $4.25, and that is alright too.

Digg!

Travis Eneix

Dedicated to looking at the self.