The journal is still on vacation, apart from possibly finishing a couple of draft posts. My sense is that something needs to shift (not necessarily anything major), so it seems right to go in “neutral” for a while. There is still a great number of posts here to look through, if you find it of value.
Update: There will be some occasional posts from now on, although less frequent than before.
I see that I am in good company 
New research suggests that nutritional supplements may, in some cases, lead to increased mortality rates.
I am sure that these supplements are very helpful in some situations, but it also is a reminder that there is no substitute for eating healthy, and that eating healthy in most cases is sufficient.
After all, we evolved for billions of years - counting our pre-human ancestors - eating whole organisms, and we have only had nutritional supplements for a few decades. Food contains nutrients in a form and combination that our bodies have evolved to make use of. So when it is available to us, it makes more sense to rely on varied, fresh, mostly whole, and less processed foods.
And if it is local (family farms, CSAs), and grown in healthy soil (organic, biodynamic), it has additional benefits. It tastes great, supports the local economy and ecosystems, and supports a healthy form of food production. And if we need an extra boost, teas and infusions are a good first choice before supplements.
Research has suggested certain vitamin supplements do not extend life and could even lead to a premature death. A review of 67 studies found “no convincing evidence” that antioxidant supplements cut the risk of dying.
Scientists at Copenhagen University said vitamins A and E could interfere with the body’s natural defences.
“Even more, beta-carotene, vitamin A, and vitamin E seem to increase mortality,” according to the review by the respected Cochrane Collaboration.
Source: BBC News.
I was reminded of this part of Carl Sagan’s Cosmos series yesterday, after Michael Dowd’s talk.
And we, we who embody the local eyes, and ears, and thoughts, and feelings of the cosmos — we’ve begun at last to wonder about our origins. Star stuff contemplating the stars, organized collections of 10 billion billion billion atoms contemplating the evolution of matter — tracing that long path by which it arrived at consciousness here on the planet Earth and, perhaps, throughout the cosmos.
Carl Sagan, Cosmos
This made a huge impact on me when I saw the series as a kid, and it was a seed of a deep shift in my orientation to life.
Evening at the beach in Bandon, Oregon, where we spent the weekend. (Trying out the bulb function on the new camera on this photo.)
And in black & white…
Michael Dowd and Connie Barlow are back in Oregon, giving a string of presentations in early April.
They will be in Roseburg April 9, Eugene April 10, Portland April 12 and 13, and Salem on the 16th.
If you happen to live around here, it is well worth attending. They are both amazing speakers in the area of evolution and spirituality, and Michael often uses the aqal framework to organize his presentations.
If you live somewhere else in the US, you can find their schedule on the Thank God for Evolution website, where you will also find audio and video snippets.
Some things are more important than vacations, so here is a quick pointer to a new book: Who Speaks for Islam: What a Billion Muslims Really Think. It is based on a large scale Gallup study following 911.
For more information, here is a MPR interview with one of the authors, an article by and a Counterpunch interview with the other author, a summary of the findings, and a brief BBC story.
From the Georgetown University review:
[…] Based on more than 50,000 interviews conducted between 2001 and 2007 with residents of more than 35 nations that are predominantly Muslim or have sizable Muslim populations, the poll surveyed more than 90% of the world’s Muslim community, making it the largest, most comprehensive study of its kind.
The research suggests that conflict between Muslims and the West is not inevitable and, in fact, is more about policy than principles. “However,” caution Esposito and Mogahed, “until and unless decision makers listen directly to the people and gain an accurate understanding of this conflict, extremists on all sides will continue to gain ground.” […]
Some of the key findings of the research include:
- Muslims and Americans are equally likely to reject attacks on civilians as morally unjustifiable.
- Large majorities of Muslims would guarantee free speech if it were up to them to write a new constitution and they say religious leaders should have no direct role in drafting that constitution.
- Muslims around the world say that what they least admire about the West is its perceived moral decay and breakdown of traditional values — the same answers that Americans themselves give when asked this question.
- When asked about their dreams for the future, Muslims say they want better jobs and security, not conflict and violence.
- Muslims say the most important thing Westerners can do to improve relations with their societies is to change their negative views toward Muslims and respect Islam.
The journal is still on vacation, apart from possibly finishing a couple of draft posts. My sense is that something needs to shift (not necessarily anything major), so it seems right to go in “neutral” for a while. There is still a great number of posts here to look through, if you find it of value.
Update: There will be some occasional posts from now on, although less frequent than before.
More than 700,000 have signed up for the Tolle/Oprah 10 week course, and it is also the most popular podcast on iTunes. Very impressive in terms of numbers alone, and even more impressive considering that Tolle is a genuine a mystic as any. His namesake had only a handful of listeners, at most.
I watched the first episode, and thought it was well worth it. I found it especially interesting to see how Tolle and Oprah helped bridge the gap between fundamentalism and a more open approach, and also between traditional religion and spirituality.
Sign up at the Oprah Book Club website and watch it there, or download the free podcasts.
I have used open source applications for years, and prefer them not only because they are free and often of very good quality, but also for how they are created and the philosophy behind them. My most recent switch is from InDesign to Scribus for layout type work.
Other applications I find especially helpful: Firefox browser, VLC Media Player, Inkscape (vector design) and sometimes Gimp (image editing), WordPress (including for this blog) and other content management systems, FileZilla for ftp (file transfer), and also Celestia (3D space simulation). I have also started to explore Blender which is 3D animation software.
I used Open Office for a while, but have now switched to Star Office which is part of the Google Pack. (See below.)
And some that are free and good quality, although not necessarily Open Source: Google (gmail, calendar, reader, documents, photos), Google Pack (Picasa, Google Earth, Star Office, SketchUp), Skype (online calling) and Stellarium (planetarium).
And then there is of course Creative Commons for music, art, text, video and more, including fonts. Here is a list of forty high quality fonts, many using a Creative Commons license.
See also these lists of Open Source applications from Open Source Living and WikiPedia, and a selection of Open Source applications for Windows and Mac.
Over the years, NASA scientists have found several anomalies in the trajectories of different spacecraft. They speed up slightly, in a way that cannot be explained by the models NASA use.
One explanation is that there is something with the spacecrafts themselves which systematically makes them go faster than expected, or that there is an unknown external influence. But none such conventional mechanism has been found.
The other, more interesting, possibility, is that there is something we don’t understand about the habits, or “laws”, of the universe, and maybe specifically gravity.
Scientists - and most people in general - understand of course that our maps only have a temporary and functional value. What they refer to is always different from and more than what any map can cover or appear to explain.
When we use terms such as “laws of nature” it is easy to forget that this is the case. A law seem so permanent. So this is a good reminder that even our most basic maps about how the universe functions are still just maps, in need of revision now and then as any of our other maps.
And there are of course other areas where we forget this. In fact, whenever we identify with a story, we forget it, even if it is as simple as “she should do her dishes”.
So anomalies - whether in science or daily life - is a good reminder to look at whether we take our maps to be more than just a map, and maybe to revise them as well.
See the Wikipedia entry on the flyby and pioneer anomalies, and listen to the most recent Planetary Radio for an interview with a JPL scientist on this topic.
It is well known that torture doesn’t work. All it does is breed resentment and make people say whatever they think you want to hear.
Yet, is it true that torture doesn’t work?
It seems that torture works well if what you want is that feeling of revenge and to vent frustration rather than useful information.
In the same way, the Iraq war is a success if the aim is to establish an US foothold in the middle east, and keep a large army there for a long time.
It can be helpful to look at politics and one’s own life in this way.
If there is support for a policy that doesn’t seem to work, in what way does it work? What do we get from supporting that policy?
Similarly, on a personal level, when I keep on doing something that doesn’t seem to work, in what ways does it work for me? What desirable results do I get? Maybe I can find another way to meet those needs?
It can help us understand the dynamics a little better, while keeping in mind that these are just assumptions. Questions rather than answers. A what if that may yield insights and suggest different strategies/solutions to try out.
It goes without saying that in conversation or public discourse, assigning views and motivations to others they themselves don’t admit to is a recipe for disaster. It too easily derails the discussion and fuels defensiveness.
Much better then to stay on topic, informed by the new perspectives we may have found through these explorations.
In everyday language, we sometimes talk about doing doing something fully, such as being fully responsible.
But what does that really mean?
For me, I can find three quite distinct meanings.
First, doing it fully in the meaning of wholehearted. I do it as fully as I can here and now, where I am, with what is available to me. I am wholeheartedly responsible, in the ways available to me here now.
Then, it means a deepening and maturing over time. What is available to me in terms of being responsible evolves over time, it deepens and matures for me. What appeared fully mature to me then, is not what fully mature means to me now.
And finally, it is the completeness that comes when what we are notices itself. In terms of being responsible, there is a completeness in seeing that there is no I with an Other here, and that everything arising is this I without an Other.
The first one has to do with what is possible for this human self right now, the second one with the maturing and development of this human self, and the third one with what we always and already are noticing itself.
And all three can be at play simultaneously.
I can be fully responsible in the conventional ways. Taking responsible for how I relate to myself and the wider world. Taking responsibility for my actions and their consequences in the world. Work with projections, and see right here what I see in others. Own disowned parts of me. Examine my beliefs, and find what is more true for me. Fully allow experience, as it is.
I can invite in and be receptive to this maturing and evolving over time. What responsible means to me now is not how it will look tomorrow, or in a year.
And I can invite what I am to notice itself, as that which content of experience happens within, to and as. As that which has no Other, so is free from being a victim - and also from (the idea of) being responsible.
Finally, it may be helpful to examine my beliefs around being responsible. I need to be responsible. It is better to be responsible. I need to be fully responsible. Is it true? Could it be that clinging to those beliefs makes me less responsible in certain ways? Less aligned with what is?
What is the difference of taking these stories as practical guidelines only and familiarizing myself with the truths in their reversals, and identifying with them and denying or being unaware of the truths in their reversals?
Trigger for this post: Two excellent posts by Vince on being responsible.
Here is a simple way to work with projections as it happens in daily life, which I sometimes find useful.
I notice something, often in others, and I can ask myself what it is to clarify it for myself. It can be anything: a mood, attitude, quality, emotion, story.
And then I ask myself, somebody is […], is it me?
Somebody is… [bored, angry, jittery, interested, afraid, oblivious, frustrated, distressed, insightful, ignorant, resourceful, lazy, rigid, exited, joyful.] Is it me?
It helps me see that I am the one experiencing it, here and now. It helps me own it, if we want to use that language.
And it helps me see that all I know is that I experience it. I may have it as a question about someone else, something they may or may not agree with if I ask them, but all I know for sure is that I am experiencing it right now.
It also helps me see my tendency to sometimes tell myself, somebody is …., it can’t be me, so it must be someone else. And then ask myself this question and see if I can find it.
Finally, it may be helpful to see that this can show up in two ways. First, as who I am, as this human self, I can find it in myself. I can own it. And this is the practical, everyday way of taking it. Then, as what I am, as awakeness, it is just happening. It is living its own life, on its own schedule, as anything else. It is just happening on its own. This is the practice side of it.
Unusual things are happening. A series of people I don’t know try to connect with me in peculiar ways. I am cautious at first, but then decide to talk with one of them. They want to recruit me to help with catching large scale international drug traders. I will play a small but important part in gaining their confidence, and others will collect the evidence and go in for the catch. It is dangerous. I ask why they want me. They say they need someone they can trust, someone who is sincere and honest. There are not many who has the degree of sincerity and honesty they need. I accept, especially since they are going after the largest fish, the ones who often go free when the smaller ones are caught.
I watched Into the Wild some weeks ago, and as any good movie, it brought up a good deal for me to look at.
As usual with movies and life in general, it is an invitation to find in myself what I see in the characters in the movie, and especially those my attention is drawn to through sympathy, aversion or ambivalence.
And it an invitation to see what beliefs come up for me in watching the movie, and inquire into them.
My attention was mainly drawn to the idealism of the main character, and there was some ambivalence there. On the one hand, it was heartfelt and beautiful. On the other hand, it was naive, reckless and harmed himself and others.
So the question for me then is how am I idealistic in that way?
A charming gem of a movie about the everyday dramas we make for ourselves.
As soon as there is a sense of an I with an Other, we need to maintain and flesh it out with an identity. And that identity, by definition, have to be special. It has to set this I apart from the rest of the world.
We find value in being special, in desirable ways if we can, and less desirable ways if that is what is left for us, because - at least - it gives an identity to this separate I. It helps it maintain its sense of being an I with an Other.
At the same time, the whole process of exploring who and what we are is a process of finding ourselves less special.
When we embrace more of the evolving wholeness of who we are, we deepen into an experience of the wider world as a mirror. Whatever we see in others and the wider world, is also something we can find right here.
Although there is still a unique flavor to how these qualities show up in our life, and others may see us as especially mature and insightful (or not), and we may see that too, the experience of ourselves is as more and more ordinary.
As we embrace more of who we are, we deepen into an experience of ordinariness. Of seeing ourselves in others, and others in ourselves.
There is a deepening sense of us. Of being in the same boat. Of shared dynamics of life.
And we can deepen into a realization of these shared dynamics in several different ways.
What shows up in each of us have infinite causes, and we share the vast majority of those causes - stretching back to the beginning of time and out to the furthest reaches of space. We all seek happiness and to avoid suffering. We all act from fear, which is really an expression of love. Each of us is one way the universe sees, touches, tastes, explores and knows itself.
And when we notice what we are, the falling away of a sense of being special goes even further.
What is notices itself as already and always this awakeness and its content as awakeness itself. It never went away. It leaves nothing out. It is completely unremarkable.
And there is also no “I” here to take credit for anything. No doer. No identification with a sense of an I with an Other, or any particular identity.
As before, it is expressed with a particular flavor through this human self. And others may think it is special and unique, but the experience of it is quite different.
This is why, if we sincerely explore who and what we are, the impulse to be special is a good thing to notice and investigate.
Do I embrace more of the wholeness of who I am to be special? If so, what happens when I hold onto that belief that I should be, or am, special? What do I get for holding onto those beliefs? What is the truth in its reversals? How am I not special? Even in the ways I appear to be different, how is that not different?
Do I explore what I am to be special? If so, who is it that needs to be special? What do I find when I look? Do I find a story? Anchored on sensations? All happening on its own? Happening out of, and as, thin air?
Trigger: Reading Stuff White People Like and noticing the tendency to want to be less predictable than that. (I fit into many of those categories.)
As Pema Chödrön says, there is a wisdom in no escape.
We notice that content of experience is what it is, right now, and that identifying with resistance to it only creates drama and suffering, so I may as well fully allow it, in a wholehearted way, as it is, as if it would never change.
And we may also notice that the sense of no escape is created from wanting to escape, in three ways.
First, without the thought of escape, there is no thought of no escape.
Then, by identifying with the thought of wanting escape, we try to escape, and realize it cannot be done.
And finally, identifying with the intention of escape is exactly how we are trapped in a sense of no escape.It brings identification firmly within content of experience, in this case the thought and intention and attempts of escape, so our identification is trapped within content of experience. We take ourselves to be an object in the world, at the mercy of the whims of a world living its own life.
Yet, as soon as identification is released out of this identification, there is an escape. When we fully allow experience as it is, including resistance to experience, there is a release of identification out of content of experience.
We find ourselves as that which experience happens within, to and as.
We find ourselves as that which is inherently free from any experience, allows all experience, and that all experience happens within, to and as.
We find ourselves as that which doesn’t need to escape. It is already free from it, so there is no need to escape that which does not bind. And it is already any content of experience happening, so there is no need to escape that which is not Other.
So to summarize:
It is interesting to notice some of the many ways different practices support each other. Here are a small taste, as a skeleton list. As usual, these are all questions, not to be taken very seriously.
The long form improv guideline of Yes, And is a great way of meeting people where they are.
We find the grain of truth in their perspective, which is always there, acknowledge it, and then add another perspective to it.
It is a way to meet people where they are, and then gently expand the perspective. We expand our own by taking into account the truth in theirs. And we expand theirs by adding something new.
It is also a quick way to finding common ground, simply by noting the truth in their view.
And it is a way to stay in integrity. I find the genuine truth, for me, in their perspective. And then add something on my own.
It is very simple, almost childishly so as so much else in this journal. But it has a profound impact if we really bring it into our life.
Is a story just a story?
Yes, it is, because it is only a story. It is an overlay of thought making the world appear a certain way.
There are the basic stories of an I with an Other, extent, continuity and so on, overlaid on what happens in the sense fields. These are usually only noticed if we look a little closer, for instance through exploring the sense fields.
And there are the familiar discursive stories using language and words, the ways we talk with ourselves and others.
And no, it isn’t just a story.
Each story has some truth to it. But so do each of its reversals, and all of them have value only as a practical tool guiding our human self in the world. Or, sometimes, in guiding it in noticing what is really is. In that sense, stories has a practical value.
And they do also have another, very important, function. They create a sense of drama.
When identified with, they make the world of appearances seem real and substantial. They make the stories of a separate I adventuring in the world seem - temporarily - real and true.
They create lila. The drama of an I with an Other in its struggle to survive and enhance its life, and, sometimes, in its struggle to awaken.
We can have trust in something, but if we do we depend on whatever we have trust in being available to us, and we are also likely to be disappointed.
Another approach is to realize that this trust awakened in us by something in the world, is right here now. It can be found independent on circumstances. And it is really just trust. Not in anything in particular. Or maybe, in life, existence, what is.
One way it may emerge is through certain explorations, such as wholeheartedly allowing any experience, and being open to investigating any belief.
When I wholeheartedly allow what I am experiencing right now, especially those experiences that seem the most scary, I find that it is OK. I can be with it, allow it, as it is, as if it would never change. It may be more than OK.
Even as the content of experience stays much the same, there may also be a shift into a sense of nurturing fullness and a quiet joy. A quiet joy in just experiencing, independent of the content of experience, revealed when I don’t struggle against it.
And when I investigate beliefs, including those that seem most untouchable or create the most stress for me, I find that the belief, and what it refers to, also are OK. And again, it may be more than OK. I may find the gifts in the reversals of the initial belief, a release of identification out of the initial story and its reversals, and clarity.
In both cases, I may find a genuine appreciation for what is, as it is.
There is a receptivity of the heart and mind, and this invites in a sense of trust in nothing in particular, or in what is, as it is.
And this trust eventually is experienced in the belly center. It becomes a deeply felt trust. A sense of nurturing fullness of the belly center, and in experience in general.
I have enjoyed following the Improv Everywhere missions since I first heard about them on This American Life a few years back.
What I especially enjoy is their aim of shaking people out of their everyday routines in a way that is enjoyable for everyone (unless someone is set on not enjoying it), and also their long form improvisation guideline of Yes, And.
Accepting an offer is usually accompanied by adding a new offer, often building on the earlier one; this is a process improvisers refer to as “Yes, And…” and is considered the cornerstone of improvisational technique. Every new piece of information added helps the actors to refine their characters and progress the action of the scene.
This is not a bad guideline for life in general.
Life throws something at us, and we can respond with a Yes, And… We say yes to it, and then add our own, advancing the story from a place of Yes, And. The Yes is an invitation to allow it, and even find peace with and appreciation for whatever is happening. And the And is an invitation for us to bring it something else to it, to take it further.
Or we talk with someone, they say something that has a grain of truth in it, which just about anything has, so we can acknowledge that grain of truth, and add another perspective. The Yes is an invitation to find the truth in their perspective, and the And is an invitation for us to bring something new to it.
The Yes is a wholehearted Yes to whatever is happening, an invitation for receptivity and appreciation. The And an invitation to actively add something to it, bring something new to it, advance the story in a way that may be interesting, entertaining, beautiful and touching.
It is common in Zen to say that shikantaza - just sitting, choiceless awareness - is not practice.
We are not practicing in preparation for anything, or to get somewhere. Shikantaza itself is the real thing. It is what we are noticing itself.
It is awakeness noticing itself. This timeless now within, to and as which everything happens.
In that sense, shikantaza is not a practice.
Yet there is also a practice element in shikantaza, which shows up in two ways.
First, it is the practice of shifting into what we are noticing itself.
Attention is absorbed on the inside of thoughts, it is noticed, and there is a shift back into just sitting. This practice happens on the cushion, often several times during a sitting period.
And this practice on the cushion is also a practice for daily life. We practice shifting into what we are noticing itself on the cushion, and then bring it into daily life.
I have enjoyed exploring sense fields for a little while now, and appreciate how simple and practical it is. A great tool for exploring some of the basics such as what arises in each sense field, how thoughts and the other sense fields combine to create appearances, and the dynamics that makes these appearances seem very real and substantial.
As always, what I write here are questions rather than statements, even if the question marks may be missing.
What does it mean to be fearless?
Going into danger while throwing caution to the wind? Pushing away fear and pretending it is not there? Manipulating experience so fear will not arise? Acting in spite of fear?
For me, it has to do with going directly into that which I fear the most.
To fully allow any experience, no matter how scary it seems. To be with it, independent of its content, including the resistance itself, as if it would never change.
And to investigating any belief and story that comes up for me, however dear it may be to me and however much the world may tell me it is true, and find what is more true for me.
Through this there is a growing trust.
A trust that comes through seeing that any experience is OK, no matter how scary it may seem when I resist it.
And a trust that comes from thoroughly investigate any belief, including the most scary and apparently true ones, and find the complete innocence and freedom that is already there, waiting for the investigation.
A trust that comes from receptivity of heart and mind.
Finally, it has to do with finding myself as that which any experience, and any story, happens within, to and as, independent of the particulars of its content.
A great little article at the Observer website by a friend of mine, about gardening and its intersection with community, ecology, spirit, politics and more. It is a reminder for me of my own passion for and immersion in that world some years ago, now faded into the background, but still there waiting to come more into my life again.
I took a Personal DNA test, and thought it came out pretty accurately.What it is good for, I don’t quite know, but it is at least entertaining. The use of it may be take my strengths and weaknesses into consideration when I make decisions, and also bring some additional attention to the weak areas. The drawback is of course that it can reinforce identification with a particular self-image, which leaves a great deal out.
This also reminded me of why I often find it difficult to take these tests.
They ask about how I behave generally, but it varies a great deal with the situation. They ask me to make an either/or choice between two characteristics that for me are more both/and. They ask me if I ever do something socially undesirable that everyone do, and I say “yes” because it happens now and then, but maybe not always that much. (Maybe that is why I rated high on openness.) Are they testing if I am willing to admit to do something socially undesirable that everyone does, or whether I do it a lot or infrequently? They ask me if I can tell what people feel even if they don’t tell me, and I pull the slider down to “no” because - even if others would say I usually have a pretty good sense of what is going for them - I don’t like to make those type of assumptions. (Which is probably why I didn’t rate so high on empathy.)
A few things about karma, aka cause and effect…
Trigger for this post: Reading the section on karma in “Buddhism for Dummies” which I thought left a few things out.
A good post from Vince about taking responsibility.
A few things coming up for me, as usual in a quick skeleton version:
First, in a very practical sense, a few of the things we can take responsibility for:
Then some of the dynamics behind it:
Some practical ways of working with it:
And finally, what appears as victim mode and neediness is really just confusion. And what appears as responsibility (when it is not an imitation, acting from a “should”) comes from simple clarity.
It is better if they don’t project on me.
A sometimes useful tool in embracing our wholeness as who we are, and discovering what we are, is to fake it.
We can visualize ourselves as someone mature and awakened, whomever that may be for us. Our teacher. Buddha. Christ. A dream figure. In this way, we connect with the qualities we see in these, and find them in ourselves. We invite these qualities to come alive, see them in someone else, and then find them right here, in ourselves and our own life.
In daily life, we can imagine how a mature and/or awakened person would respond, and then imitate it. If I was such as person, how would I act?
Most practices are done in an approximate way, at least in the beginning. We do approximate shikantaza. Approximate stability practice. Here too, we fake it, do it as best as we can, until it falls more into place.
And in noticing what we are, we can use practices such as headless experiments and the Big Mind process to get a taste of it. Even if it feels fake at first, it is a pointer to the real thing. It helps us reorganize within it at our human level, and it guides us in noticing it more clearly.
Faking it is a great tool, especially when we are clear that we are faking it, until it falls more into place.
I am familiarizing myself with a teacher I just discovered, whom seem very clear and direct. But there are also parts that brings me to inquiry for myself, such as this one about insight practice:
Ultimate insights cause permanent changes in the relationship to reality and eliminate fundamental levels of suffering forever.
Forever is a very long time.
It is also just a story. A projection of what is here now into an imagined future.
A projection of the awakeness here now, which is already awake whether it is confused or clear. And a projection of the content of a story of “forever”, as if it was real, substantial, existing - somehow, magically - somewhere in an imagined future.
All we know is what is here now. Anything else is just a story of a future.
An episode of Pompel & Pilt, an anti-pedagogical Norwegian children’s TV series that made a big impression on one or two generations of Norwegian kids. I believe it was meant to get kids familiar with the absurdity of life, and question authority…! Worked for me, at least. Sorry about the lack of English subtitles, but it doesn’t make much more sense even if you understand Norwegian.
Pompel & Pilt are repair men, looking for something to repair, and get into uncomfortable situations with Gorgon The Janitor and some other creatures.
It is inspired by dadaism and absurdist theater.
If we are used to take ourselves as content of experience, and this content does not show up as we are used to, what then?
I don’t do recreational drugs, or even much alcohol, so I don’t know how it is when content gets weird in that way.
But I do get sick occasionally, as right now, and fewer can easily make the content of experience different from what I am used to, especially during the night when the anchors of the routines of daily life, and ordinary sense experiences, are not there in the same way.
It is better if I get what I want.
It is better to be clear. (Rather than confused, deluded, mistaken.)
As soon as we take ourselves to be an object in the world, there is an impulse to feel connected, to find that wholeness we feel - and rightly so - is missing.
One of the ways to find this sense of connection is through the Universe Story, with all its minor stories woven in at different size levels (holons in a holarchy) and areas of life. The history of the universe is our history. We are made up star stuff. All life on earth shares the same basic building blocks. We share the same ancestors. We are the ways the universe touches, sees, tastes, knows itself.
It is beautiful, poetic, scientific, aligned very much with spirituality (at least certain forms of it), and gives a deep sense of connection, belonging, shared existence, and meaning.
It also widens our circle of care, compassion and concern, our circle of us. If this human self is a local expression of this universe and its evolution, and the earth and its evolution, what can I leave out of my sense of us? There is really nothing that can be left out.
The more we learn about these connections, the deeper we can feel it. And one way we can learn about it is to read books like Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin. (On my reading list.)
The facilitation sheet for The Work has some excellent subquestions to help us look at beliefs in a more detailed way.
If you are familiar with The Work, what additional subquestions do you find helpful? Please share by leaving a comment.
Below are some additional subquestions I have found helpful, one - at least - from Byron Katie, and a couple from other facilitators.
The prison industry in the US has lobbied long and hard for longer and harsher sentences for more and more crimes, and it is paying off well for them. For the first time in the US, one in a hundred is in a prison, according to a new PEW report.
This is easily the highest incarceration rate in the world, with China a somewhat distant second. The rate is more than ten times higher than in my home country of Norway, and the US has 5% of the world’s population and 25% of the world’s incarcerated population.
Maybe the most disconcerting information is in the details, from this New York Times article:
Equally disconcerting is how the strategies of the prison industry align so well with the mindless opinions around punishment among mainstream Americans, and how they also fuel and guide these mainstream opinions. A people gets the politicians, and the policies, they deserve, as this is just another example of.
As with the health care system in the US, the prison industry is expensive, inefficient, and made possible by an uninformed public.
This follows from the previous post…
A rambling post that gets a little clearer in the summary…
It is the perennial question for any kid and curious adult: What is the meaning of life? What is the meaning of my life?
It may be a little different for each of us, but most of us experience meaning around the same things. Survival. Relationships. Providing for ourselves and our family. Offspring. A sense of connection with others, ourselves, life, the universe. A sense of belonging. Making use of our potentials and opportunities. Being of service to those within our circle of us. Being remembered by others. Exploring the evolving fullness of who we are. Exploring what we really are.
In short, it all tends to revolve around two things: Taking care and enhancing the life of this human self and its circle of us. And finding a sense of connection with ourselves and the larger whole.
It is of course important to explore this for ourselves. Where do I experience a sense of meaning? How can I align my life a little closer with it? How can I bring it into my life a little more?
But the question we don’t so often ask ourselves is, what is meaning? How does this sense of meaning come about? What are the dynamics and mechanics behind it? What is the anatomy of meaning?
It is better if they don’t think this is how/who I am. (When I am out of it due to illness, lack of sleep, or something else.)
The impostor syndrome is apparently quite common these days, and maybe for good reasons. After all, almost no matter which area we work in, most of us know only a fraction of the knowledge that is out there, and we know very well that even all current human knowledge is only a fraction of all possible knowledge. We are only scratching a surface that is only scratching yet another surface. It was simpler when most folks were farmers, fishermen and craftsmen.
We feel like an impostor, because it is true! No matter what we do, independent of culture and setting, it is true in several different ways. And it is a perceived problem only if it is not seen through, when it is only half explored.
So one way of working with it is to more thoroughly see how it is true, with specific examples. This takes out the stress of feeling that we have to defend against the story that we are an impostor.
Then, we can explore equally thoroughly how the reverse is true, in what ways are we not an impostor. And that takes out the stress of being stuck in just one of the permutations of the impostor story.
We are freed out of the dynamic through seeing that each permutation has some truth in it, and none is close to having the whole picture.
Another dimension of practice is whether we emphasize the universal or the specific.
Do we emphasize the universal, that which is valid for everyone at any time? I tend to gravitate towards these tools, such as The Work, headless experiments and the Big Mind process.
Or do we emphasize that which is specific to where someone is in the process of discovering who they are as a human self, or what they are as that which experience happens within, to and as?
There are benefits and drawbacks to each.
If we emphasize the universal, it has the obvious benefits of being inclusive, accessible, and offering pointers and tools we can use at any point in the process of discovering who and what we are. It helps us see that we all are in the same boat. It makes it relatively simple for us.
The drawback is that people sometimes needs pointers and tools specific to where they are, it may be easy to think we are somewhere in the process we are not (mistaking a glimpse for a stable noticing, or unity for nondual), and there can be a lack of differentiation and clarity about the dynamics of the process as it unfolds over time.
If we emphasize that which is specific to where people are, it has the obvious benefit of being tailored (if skillfully done), it helps people see where they are in the overall process, and it can help differentiate the different states and stages.
The drawbacks include ignoring or overlooking the universal, getting caught up in maps, and getting caught up in competitiveness.
In practice, of course, both are usually included. If we emphasize the universal, it is usually presented in a way tailored to and specific to where someone is, and a good teacher will know from experience what is helpful. If we emphasize the specific, it is often placed in the context of the universal, in terms of what is universally valid for anyone and any time, and the universality of how the process unfolds over time.
Yet another dimension of practice is exploring on the inside and outside of stories.
Again, if we over-simplify, we can find benefits and drawbacks for each.
Working on the inside of stories tends to help who we are directly. It helps reorganize the stories it uses to navigate in the world, and also the stories it uses for exploring who and what it really is. But if this is all we do, it can also just reinforce the tendency to identify with stories, to go to stories for the ultimate answers, and to - inadvertently - confuse the map with the terrain.
Working on the outside of stories helps us see thoughts as thoughts, see what arises in each sense field here and now, and how thoughts combine with them to create gestalts, and much more. It gives us an immediate insight into what we are, and what is going on, which is outside of thought. Of course, the exploration is guided by thought, and later reflected in thought, but the exploration itself is outside of thought. (At least discursive thought, and as we get more familiar with it, outside the layers of thought that creates a sense of continuity and extent, and I with an Other.)
Together, we can find that our exploration within thought - of maps, guidelines for life and practice, finding the truth in reversals of our habitual stories and so on - helps our human self, and also in guiding our practice outside of thought. Our explorations outside of thought helps us see thoughts as thoughts, with relative truth only, each one a question more than a statement, and with value only as temporary guides for our human self. And this exploration outside of stories also helps us notice what we are, which in turn reorganizes our human self, and relieves it of the burden of taking itself as the end station of what it really is, and having an I with an Other.
We can practice alone or with others.
If we stay with just one or the other, we miss out of something.
If we only practice on our own, we miss out of the support from others on the same or a similar path. We miss out of the inspiration and course corrections offered by a community of fellow explorers.
If we only practice with others, we miss out on checking out how this works when we are on our own. Am I dependent on the community to practice and to bring it into my life? How does it look when I am on my own, and in other situations?
Yet if we do both, we can benefit from the best of each. We get the moral and informational support from a group of fellow practitioners. And we get to test it out on our own, alone, in different settings.
Our explorations can be self- or other-powered at the different levels of who and what we are.
If we stay exclusively self-powered, it may fuel arrogance and a belief in having to do it all ourselves. And we don’t notice all the ways it is already other-powered. All practices happening here has infinite causes, stretching back to the beginning of time and the far reaches of space.
If we stay exclusively other powered, we don’t make it our own. We don’t get to experience how it is to do the work ourselves, and walk the path through our own efforts.
Tempered by each other, we can benefit from the best of each. We get to make it our own, through our own efforts, and we get to benefit from what is given to us, as a kick-start or a glimpse of what is possible.
For instance, at the physical level, we can benefit from other power through massage and different healing modalities. And we can do our own work through exercise, diet, yoga and so on.
And in terms of awakening, we can benefit from shaktipat, an energy transmission (diksha and much else) that initiate and fuel an awakening process. And we get to make it our own through exploring the new terrain that opens up for us, or if it was a glimpse, it is then a reminder of what is possible if we do our own work.
