Tying Up Threads

[Charles]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Stephanie,

One other thing. In Jay Garfield's translation of, and commentary on, Nagarjuna's "Fundamental Verses On The Middle Way," Garfield interprets the Middle Way as the way between (and transcending) essentialism and nihilism. It's written in very academic, philosophical language, but given other discussions we've had here, I don't think that'll be a problem for you. It might give you some guidance in regards to Buddhism and nihilism. Since he's writing the commentary for people who think in Western philosophical terms, some familiarity with Hume, Kant, and Wittgenstein are helpful, but I don't think they're necessary.

The title of the volume is "The Fundamental Wisdom Of The Middle Way." The author is Jay L. Garfield. The ISBN of the paperback I've got is 0-19-509336-4. The publisher is Oxford University Press/Oxford Paperbacks.

http://www.amazon.com/Fundamental-Wisdo ... 528&sr=8-2

--Charles

[Hans]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Hey Charles!

Just a quick comment to say I very much appreciated your last two postings.

Gassho, Hans

[Ryumon]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Existence is existence. There can't be anything deeper to it, or shallower to it, or other than it. Existence doesn't need something outside itself. It doesn't need justification. It isn't a dog at a dog show where there's some judge that might, at the end of the day, put a medal around its neck and say 'Yes, this dog matches up with what a dog should be!" Reality is the show itself, not one of the dogs. The show doesn't need a medal; people and dogs arrive, and the show is a show. It's just there.

Well said. This is how I try to look at things. The idea of life having a "purpose", while potentially satisfying, is just a construct that we build onto existence because of our existential angst. Understanding that what is simply is can help remove that angst, and that need for a purpose. Sure, it seems that it's unfair, that you're here and tomorrow you won't be, but that's just the way it is. I don't find this nihilist at all, btw, simply realist.

Kirk

[Jundo]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Now, in my heart of hearts, I feel that there is a game maker, and some ultimate direction to the game. But a key way that our Zen Buddhist "religion" may differ from most others is that we do not seek to say too much about the game designer ...

In fact, we are so intent on playing that game, so living of life, that we do not demand even that there be a game designer ... if there is neither master nor point, bounce the ball. Bounce, bounce, bounce ...

I want to add something very important for clarity ...

So trusting are we of life that we do not need to know if there is a maker or not, let alone any of her characteristics. This is vitally important. The border between belief, agnosticism and atheism drops away [EMPHASIS ADDED].

It may sound strange, but it is a lot like being born, mysteriously, as a passenger on a ship. You have never met the captain personally, never been to the wheelhouse, do not even know if the vessel has an origin, or a course or destination ... In fact, you do not know if there is a captain and crew at all.

... But so trusting are you of this vessel, that you just let it sail sail sail. The vessel and the sailing is just your life, is just you. Whether there is a captain at the wheel, or even a wheel and rudder, matters not in the least. The destination is not a concern at all.

And that degree of trust is the highest compliment you could possibly pay to the skipper and her crew (if they exist, which they might not)!

I think that such an attitude is quite unique among philosophy/religions.

Gassho, Jundo

PS. I think the above is pretty much harmonious with what Charles wrote above in a bit more philosophical wording. I think so.

But let's bring it back down to earth. Let's say you walk outside and see a beautiful flower, and you walk up to it and say, "You aren't justified. Where do you get off? What's your meaning? Show me your seal of approval from a higher power, or your certificate that says you have a higher meaning."

I'll respond for the flower: "I am what I am."

Which is what every flower, every rock, everything is saying to you all the time.

Yes. Same as my ship to who knows where.

[Eika]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Charles wrote:
But let's bring it back down to earth. Let's say you walk outside and see a beautiful flower, and you walk up to it and say, "You aren't justified. Where do you get off? What's your meaning? Show me your seal of approval from a higher power, or your certificate that says you have a higher meaning."

I'll respond for the flower: "I am what I am."

I like this. Sometimes I will look out at the yard, or my kids and I'll be brought nearly to tears by the amazing sincerity of everything being just what it is. Other times, I struggle to see this and can't. The bunny outside our front window this morning is much more sincere than I am--no struggle, simply happy to be a bunny.

Speaking of sincerity, what about the Great Pumpkin? Surely, HE can come and provide some judgment about Reality that we can all trust.


Bill

[Ryumon]

Re: Tying Up Threads

I always thought (well, when I grew up) that the Great Pumpkin was just a version of Waiting for Godot for kids.

Samuel Beckett, one of my favorite Zen authors...

Kirk

[Alberto]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Gassho--I like your explanation, and can relate to it, but it doesn't satisfy this sense I get that the Nishijima school is fairly nihilistic--if anything it enhances that sense. If the philosophical basis for this practice is that reality is fine as it is and we don't need to strive to attain anything, I'm left scratching my head as to where the "without acceptance" part of your equation comes from.

Other Buddhist schools might say that our fundamental nature is compassion, and that it arises of its own accord when we remove the impediments to it. But how would you, being what I would describe as a skeptic materialist, justify such an idea? If you believe that mind is only an epiphenomenon of matter, that compassion is just mirror neurons and empathy, that the basis of practice is letting go of the struggle to change or improve oneself or one's mind, could you not just say that trying to improve the world is a sort of vanity?

And even if not, where's the inspiration for such efforts in the teaching of your school? Why should we want to help others? If we only live one life, if mind only is a product of the brain, if we know this world is going to die out at some point anyway, couldn't you say then that compassion is mere sentiment? Nothing to do with the nature of reality? That we might help others because it feels good and promotes a better world, but that at the end of the day it doesn't mean anything in the bigger picture of the universe?

Hi Steph

Just like you, I'm interested in the issue of compassion. Why should we want to help others? Maybe we shouldn't want to. Helping is enough.

The way I see it, our practice gives no inspiration for humanistic efforts. None. You don't need no stinking zen to go and feed the starving kids in Africa or to save the whales. Most people in Amnesty international will never sit on a cushion and send to hell the conviction that torture is wrong even for 30 min. And they do great stuff that we can be grateful for.

Now that's not what zen tells you to do (or not do). But, trust me just for the duration of this post, zen ain't nihilism. It just takes time to realize that "we do this for all beings" ain't just empty rethoric.

Don't you think, sometimes, that what we usually understand as compassion is a way to soothe our anguish and justify our little self? That is and was my case, at least. I elected a professional career of service to others, genuinely wanting to serve. Now, looking back, the reasons for wanting to serve were not pure compassion (as I thought 20 years ago), but had a lot to do with self-affirmation, with my need to be appreciated, with my need to feel useful. I guess that could accomodate the search for "sense", "direction", "meaning". So "meaning" is the nice feeling that A is a useful dude? Turned out it wasn't. Like every other goal and nice picture in our minds, the reality of it ends up not fulfilling our expectations. I'm sure if I decide to do somethng different and save 200 whales my Ego won't be happy in the end. Unless I save them just to save them, not to feel good about it -or about anything else.

Real compassion is not something that needs to be inspired by others, is not something that we should aim for. Real compassion is the natural result of finding out that this person in front of me is nothing else but part of my Self. I hate how rethorical this all sounds, but natural compassion is like massaging your sore foot or quenching your thirst with a good glass of water: you don't feel more valuable because you did it, you don't expect a medal, you just do it.

"Compassion arises of its own accor when we remove the impediments". Indeed. What are the impediments? I guess there are thousands. Maybe they're all in our minds, and these are 2 that I found surprising:

1) The thought that the world should be according to our standards: no war, no injustice, no hunger, no violence, etc

2) The conviction that you and me are a separate thing

Our school gives no inspiration to be compassionate. But eventually we see that compassion is not an option: it is ourselves we're taking care of.

So how about some sitting? Please receive a cyberhug.

[chicanobudista]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Samuel Beckett, one of my favorite Zen authors...

Ah...yes. Time to bring up "Charlie Rose" by Samuel Beckett. :mrgreen:

[Stephanie]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Thanks for the feedback, all.

It was hard to write out that post because it was very personal. And, again, I'm not sure I did a good job communicating my experience. Because even if the language I use is convoluted, the experience is very simple. I think a lot, but the thinking doesn't bother me so much. Sitting regularly and doing retreats, etc., has helped a lot with that. There's been a darkness in my mind for a long time, and no matter what language I've layered over top of it, I think it's pretty much been the same thing. But I don't think it's as simple as, "Oh, I get depressed." Maybe it is, and I'm just being stubborn. But it doesn't feel that way.

Maybe there's nothing to fix, really. Because I do have some trust in how my life has unfolded and continues to unfold. I just wonder myself, why I'm so fixated on meaning. I would probably be happier if I wasn't. But then, I also probably would be a much more worthless person too. I don't know, I wouldn't trade my life for a happier, easier one. This post and some before come across a bit maudlin, but I laugh about this as much as I hurt over it.

But, in lieu of twelve paragraphs of gibberish, I'll just say thanks, for now.

Now that's not what zen tells you to do (or not do). But, trust me just for the duration of this post, zen ain't nihilism. It just takes time to realize that "we do this for all beings" ain't just empty rethoric.

I believe this wholeheartedly, Alberto.

Don't you think, sometimes, that what we usually understand as compassion is a way to soothe our anguish and justify our little self? That is and was my case, at least. I elected a professional career of service to others, genuinely wanting to serve. Now, looking back, the reasons for wanting to serve were not pure compassion (as I thought 20 years ago), but had a lot to do with self-affirmation, with my need to be appreciated, with my need to feel useful. I guess that could accomodate the search for "sense", "direction", "meaning". So "meaning" is the nice feeling that A is a useful dude? Turned out it wasn't. Like every other goal and nice picture in our minds, the reality of it ends up not fulfilling our expectations. I'm sure if I decide to do somethng different and save 200 whales my Ego won't be happy in the end. Unless I save them just to save them, not to feel good about it -or about anything else.

Beautifully put. And yes, to all of it. A lot of my "helping" behavior in the past hasn't come from a healthy or selfless place. I picked up a lot of codependent qualities growing up. I've let go of some of the more pathological manifestations of that, which actually, as it was going on, was unleashing a flood of questions and doubts. I got some good lessons about doing things in hope of a particular result or reward, especially for the sake of a lot of the self-centered agendas listed above. The moments when I've been able to "save them just to save them" have been some of the happiest moments in my life.

Real compassion is not something that needs to be inspired by others, is not something that we should aim for. Real compassion is the natural result of finding out that this person in front of me is nothing else but part of my Self. I hate how rethorical this all sounds, but natural compassion is like massaging your sore foot or quenching your thirst with a good glass of water: you don't feel more valuable because you did it, you don't expect a medal, you just do it.

No, don't worry, I get it--trust me, I do! Again, tapping into this has been my saving grace in the past year. It's like... an island of joy in a sea of desolation. And sometimes, somehow, the desolation's all caught up in the joy, and vice versa, and it seems that both equally inform one another. I don't really understand it. I feel like I'll be okay, but sometimes it feels like being crushed in the maw of nothingness--lol, that sounds so absurd and melodramatic, and maybe I'm just young and chemically unstable. But it feels honest and real, too. Maybe I'm just being a dumb ass, I think I'm going to quit trying to explain this, I think I've embarassed myself enough for the next day... week... month... year... :lol:

So how about some sitting? Please receive a cyberhug.

Yes, and thanks.

[Eika]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Maybe I'm just being a dumb ass, I think I'm going to quit trying to explain this, I think I've embarassed myself enough for the next day... week... month... year...

Not a dumbass, just trying to figure life out like the rest of us. And, for what it is worth, I admire the honesty in your posts. You are not afraid to ask a question, even when asking it reveals a vulnerable spot. I call that courage.

Gassho,
Bill

[Charles]

Re: Tying Up Threads

But it feels honest and real, too. Maybe I'm just being a dumb ass, I think I'm going to quit trying to explain this, I think I've embarassed myself enough for the next day... week... month... year... :lol:

Stephanie,

I think what you post is honest and real. I'm very sorry to whatever extent I've contributed to you feeling embarrassed. I don't think any of us should feel embarrassed about what we're posting -- I think it's important that we can all come here and share whatever experiences, difficulties, and doubts we're having about our practice. I know it helps me a great deal to hear what others are going through.

I know I come on strong sometimes. It isn't intended to be judgmental or discouraging -- it's just what comes to mind, and I pound it out as I think it and hope it's helpful. To the extent it isn't, I'm sorry.

--Charles

[TracyF]

Re: Tying Up Threads

I'll respond for the flower: "I am what I am."

Funny because God in the burning bush said something similar to Moses. :lol:

Well, Steph, I'm one of those modern scientific, materialistic skeptics. Yet, I don't call life random or an anomaly. I also never think of life as "only organic" or "nothing deeper".

I agree with everyone here that are saying that you are trying to force your sense of 'meaning' and 'purpose' to nature. Even if there is a personal god, there's no way we could ever find out his purpose. I mean, life doesn't make a lick of sense from a human perspective.

For me, practicing Buddhism helps me remember the miracle of being just as it is. As many others here have said, once you remove the impediments to realizing your true self, you'll naturally be more compassionate. It will feel unnatural to be anything else.

This is a fantastic thread, by the way. It's definitely a keeper.

[Charles]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Jundo,

I think I passed over the meaning of this when I read it the first time:

I want to add something very important for clarity ...

So trusting are we of life that we do not need to know if there is a maker or not, let alone any of her characteristics. This is vitally important. The border between belief, agnosticism and atheism drops away [EMPHASIS ADDED].

I'm not sure if my take on this is in line with what you're saying, but here goes:

I don't see the question of God as a question about whether or not there's some particular being that has certain qualities, and whether or not that being exists. I see it as a matter of how one experiences the world, how one lives in relationship with everything, and one's 'frame of interpretation' for lack of a better term.

As a philosophical idea I more or less reject the God idea because I don't think it makes a lot of sense. For reasons I mentioned above, God as an explanatory hypothesis seems illogical to me -- it seems like a bad explanation because it's unnecessary. For example, it seems akin to walking into your kitchen and finding some spilled milk, and positing that a malicious elf snuck in through the window and caused a spill. Sure, it explains what happened, but it seems silly. In that sense, I guess I'm an atheist.

But, I have a lot of religious friends who live their lives in relationship with what they describe as the living God. For them God is an experience of life, and it involves the value of all things and compassion for all things. I take no issue with this and have a deep respect for it. They experience the world and live in it in such a way that their personal relationship with God is just how they relate to everything. I don't, personally, experience the world like this, I don't live in the world like this. But I make no claim whatsoever that this kind of experience is invalid or wrong. In certain ways I think that the way I experience the world, and the way they experience the world, are similar, but we use different words to describe it.

I know that may seem like a contradiction, like I'm splitting hairs, but I don't think so. I think there's a big difference between the idea of a thing, and an experience and relationship, a way of life. So: I think the idea of God is unnecessary. But I think that people who live in a relationship with God are on to something, though I don't frame things in quite the way they do.

--Charles

[Charles]

Re: Tying Up Threads

I'll respond for the flower: "I am what I am."

Funny because God in the burning bush said something similar to Moses. :lol:

Heh. That wasn't an accident. I was raised on the Hebrew Bible. :wink:

--Charles

[Jundo]

Re: Tying Up Threads

Jundo,

I think I passed over the meaning of this when I read it the first time:

I want to add something very important for clarity ...

So trusting are we of life that we do not need to know if there is a maker or not, let alone any of her characteristics. This is vitally important. The border between belief, agnosticism and atheism drops away [EMPHASIS ADDED].

I'm not sure if my take on this is in line with what you're saying, but here goes:

I don't see the question of God as a question about whether or not there's some particular being that has certain qualities, and whether or not that being exists. I see it as a matter of how one experiences the world, how one lives in relationship with everything, and one's 'frame of interpretation' for lack of a better term.

Hi Charles,

Usually, in our Zen practice, we advice folks to get out of philosophical debating and postulating (as nice as your ideas are) ... and SIMPLIFY. Drop the excess words, no matter how lovely.

So, my point is very simple: I drop all idea of either belief or doubt, agnosticism or atheism, god or no god, buddha or no buddha ... and I chop wood and fetch water. In other word, I have a life, so I live life.

If there is a god/buddha/whatever, I think that living the life I received is the highest tribute I could pay thereto. And if there is no whatever, I live this life still.

That is, I think, taking the flower as just the flower.

I think a philosophy/religion like Zen Buddhism that drops all idea of either belief or doubt, affirmation, neutrality or rejection is a very unusual creed.

Gassho, Jundo