I watched the Terminator last night, and wondered why there are so many sci-fi movies about cold, calculating, apparently unstoppable robotic and/or alien adversaries. What is so fascinating about them?

Of course, it can be exiting - and useful - to get in touch with the clarity and energy of our basic survival instincts. There is a sense of all of us, all humanity, being in the same boat. There is comfort in the simplicity of having a clear enemy and knowing what to do, and entertainment in the openness of not quite knowing how to do it. And it is enjoyable to vicariously experience drama without being part of it ourselves.

Then, if I see these movies as a dream, with all parts mirroring something in me, what in myself do these characters remind me of? 

(more…)

We see ourselves in others… 

So when what I am is awake to itself here, there is a recognition that all is already awake. Sometimes it notices. (When a human self functions within the context of what we are as awake to itself.) And sometimes not. (When a human self functions within the context of what we are as not awake to itself.) There is a clear practical difference, but all happening with all as already awake to itself.  

When what I am is awake to itself, all is recognized as already awake, whether it notices or not. 

And if what we are is not awake to itself, we may take awakening and delusion as much more solid and polarized whether it happens here, in this human self, or there, in other human selves. 

Similarly, when what we are is awake to itself, we notice that there is only a pretending to take stories as true. Delusion is only a game. Sometimes it is noticed. (When what we are is awake to itself, and functions through a human self.) And sometimes not. (When what we are is not awake to itself.) 

So when what we are is awake to itself, and this human self functions within that context, there is a recognition that in other human selves there is - at most - a pretending to believe in stories. To them, those beliefs may appear very true and substantial. But here, they are recognized as only pretending.

I will of course take into account that for them, those beliefs seem real. I can meet them where they are. But I will also recognize that they are really pretending. I know they can notice. And there is no need to take it too seriously. 

(more…)

I sometimes come across someone who sees “politically correct” as undesirable, so I got curious and wanted to explore it a little further.

There is the official definition of politically correct:

Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term applied to language, ideas, policies, or behavior seen as seeking to minimize offense to gender, racial, cultural, disabled, aged or other identity groups. Conversely, the term “politically incorrect” is used to refer to language or ideas that may cause offense or that are unconstrained by orthodoxy. [Wikipedia]

And then politically correctness in a more general sense, as avoiding what may offend others.

Obviously, in that general sense, whether we are politically correct or not depends on our company. For instance, if we pride ourselves on not being politically correct, and are in a group of people who agree, then that becomes politically correct…!

As soon as we make something into a belief and identity, we automatically find ourselves doing that which we try to exclude. I try to be politically incorrect, find others who agree, and suddenly realize that being politically incorrect is now what is politically correct.

Then there is the limitations we put on ourselves if we make it into a belief. As soon as I take on an identity as someone who is not politically correct, I limit my views and actions. I have to spend time and energy making sure I don’t say or do things that could be perceived as politically correct, and I try to control - and sometimes cut myself off from - impulses that naturally would like to move freely among the terrain of what can be perceived as politically correct or incorrect.

I cut myself off from views and actions that may benefit myself and others.

In my case, I have asked for ethical/sustainable gifts for Christmas, and my wife and I are going to give ourselves the gift of sponsoring a child in need. If I had an identity that excluded being politically correct, I may have had difficulty doing either of those things. It is too fashionable. Too much the thing to do. And a family may not have received a goat. A child may not have received money for food, clothes and education.

(more…)

I know.

(more…)

As soon as a story is taken as true, there is a sense of I & other and identification within form. And this makes it difficult for what I am to notice itself, for several reasons.

I am identified as an object within form, so I don’t look for myself outside of those boundaries.

I take myself as form, so all I see is form. I don’t notice how all form is emptiness/awakeness itself.

Attention is caught up in stories, which makes it less easy for what I am to notice itself.

(more…)

Whenever a story is taken as true, I take on a false identity.

At my human level, I have a range of identities including age, gender, occupation, and also how I am and what I like. All of these can be very helpful. They me us function in the world.

Yet, as soon as I take any of these identities as true, I (try to) limit who this human self is. Any identity excludes something else, and what is excluded is very often already here. This means that I need to spend time and energy on fleshing out, living within and defend the identity. Whenever I identify with an identity, it takes a lot of time and energy to keep it up, and it creates stress and tension as well.

And something similar happens at the level of what I am.

As soon as I take an identity as true, I am firmly identified as an object within the world of form. I take myself as within form, so all I see is form. And since stories are taken as true, I am distracted by them so it is not so easy for what I am to notice itself. I overlook the obvious: that which all form happens within and as, which is what I - already and always - am.

This is one of many examples of how the distance between psychology and spirituality can be very short. In this case, the only difference is in what type of identities we explore. In psychology, it is all the usual human identities. In spirituality, it is the identity of an I with an Other, an identity as an object within form, an identity with the story of I.

Through exploring false identities, I also find an appreciation for what they do.

At our human level, they portion out what we get familiar with in ourselves, taking it one step at a time instead of all at once. I have a limited identify for myself, so get to be more familiar with what is inside of that identity.Then, the identity may shift or expand and I get familiar with new territory. And so on.

And at the level of what we are, they make it all more interesting. It is a way for emptiness/awakeness to not only experience itself as form, but to identify as that form. Experience itself as limited. Live the drama of being an I with an other, a vulnerable object in a world of innumerable other objects. Temporarily, at least.

(more…)

Here is an example of ways to relate to a specific thought…

One of the things our culture (sometimes) teaches us is not OK is to be stupid. We are trained by our culture to see it as undesirable. To create and defend an identity that (as much as possible) leaves out stupidity. And to react a certain way if that identity is threatened.

So say there is the thought that I am not very smart.

What do I find when I explore this thought and the dynamics around it?

(more…)

Some ways of relating to thoughts independent of their source (myself or others) or their content…

I can believe it. Take it as true. Identify with it. Create an identity from it. Prop it up. Defend it. Deny the truth in its reversals. Deny its own limited truth.

I can explore it in the sense fields. How does it appear in the sense fields? How does a mental field overlay combine with the other sense fields to create a gestalt? What happens when it is taken as true? What happens when it is noticed as a gestalt? (I often find that it appears as solid and real when it is taken as true, and that I notice it as emptiness/awakeness itself when it is recognized as a gestalt, but that can change next time I look.)

I can explore it as a question. What happens if I take the story as an innocent question about the world? What happens if I take it as a statement, or as a true view?

I can turn it around to the speaker, and then myself. Any advice is (also) for ourselves. When others speak, and I recognize it as advice for him/herself, it becomes more congruent. And when I turn it around to myself, I find it here too.

I can notice the belief and inquire into it. Do I know it is true? What happens when I take it as true? Who would I be if it was not taken as true? What are the truths in its reversals? What is more true for me than the initial belief?

I can notice the fear behind it and meet that fear. Can I find fear behind the impulse to make a story into a belief? What happens when I meet it? Welcome it, as it is?

And to the extent identification is released out of a story, it is recognized as a tool. It becomes a tool for my human self to orient and function in the world. A story can appear more or less appropriate for any one situation. And as any tool, any story has some things it is good at. (If only to deflate the appearance of absolute truth in its reversal.)

(more…)

A few different flavors of disidentification from own (as always quite limited) experience…

The object of identification falls away, and with it - over time - the identification with it. It wears off.

I may see myself as an athlete, have a serious injury, and the identification with that identity falls away. (Usually replaced with something else.)

Or I may have a oneness experience, maybe for a long time, which then falls away and with it the identification with that state. (Here is the opportunity to recognize what I am independent of any states.)

The object stays, but the identification with it falls away. The identification with a story, an identity, falls away. This can happen - maybe most easily - through different forms of inquiry, such as exploring the sense fields and The Work. It tends to be a gentler process than the previous one.

Also, the object may come and go, so there is a recognition that I am not that. For instance, the sense of a center/I-other may come and go, and I recognize it in either case as awakeness itself.

In all cases, the disidentification is really with a story. And the amount of drama/struggle/suffering is proportional to the resistance to the process of disidentification. When the object falls away, there may be a good deal of drama. And it may be a little gentler if the object stays and we explore identification through inquiry. And even more gentle if the object comes and goes, and there is a natural recognition - over time - that I am not that.

(more…)

Here is a slight variation on a common topic…

Our stories create a limited identity for us, and to the extent we identify with it, we are at odds with reality.

There is an identity to justify, defend and prop up. Someone may see something in us that doesn’t fit, and we feel a need to defend against it. Or our human self may do something that doesn’t fit, and we feel a need to defend our identity there too. We are at odds with life as it is, and there is a sense of drama and struggle.

So whenever this happens, it is a great opportunity to notice our identification with a particular identity. We take the offended identity as true, but what is more true for us? What do I find when I explore it for myself.

Someone may say “you are …” (fill in the blank). I notice a reaction to it, a movement to defending an identity, and this is a sure sign that I identify with and take a story as true. There may be stress. Tension. Hurt. Defensiveness. Reactiveness. Getting caught up in stories.

And I can meet and explore this in different ways. I can allow and meet the experience, and the fear behind it. I can notice the belief behind it, and find what is more true for me. I can feel and see the characteristic in me, as a part of my human wholeness, and our shared humanity.

In each case, what I find is that behind the initial reaction, there is pure gold. I find another piece of my lost wholeness as a human being. I am released out of a false - and too narrow - identity. I find another aspect of our shared humanity right here. I experience more of the fullness of who I already am.

If I get caught up in defending the threatened identity, all the usual things happen. A sense of stress. Tension. Conflict. Separation. (To myself and others.) Getting caught up in obsessive thoughts. Hurt. And more than that, I miss out of pure gold. I miss out of finding a previously excluded piece of my own wholeness.

The only problem is that most of the time, I don’t know what people think about me. They just don’t tell, at least not if it is anything they see as unfavorable. I miss out of the gold because it doesn’t happen that often. So what can I do?

Fortunately, there is a way around it. I can use any statement that comes my way, no matter who or what it is about and where it comes from (including my own thoughts), and turn it around to myself.

How is it true for me? Can I find it right here? What happens when I inquire into the beliefs and identities preventing me from feeling and seeing it in my human self? What happens when I allow myself to feel and see it right here?

Whatever statement comes up, I can turn it around to find it in myself.

This process leads to a healing and maturing of who I am, as this human self. And it releases identification out of stories, which makes it easier for what I am to notice itself.

It is pure gold, so why wait?

(more…)

Our world is imaginary. Again, it is simple but there is still a lot to explore there.

My world is imaginary. The world I relate to and function within is imaginary. It is my mental field creation.

There are sense impressions - sound, sight, smell, taste, sensation and even thought itself - and then a mental field overlay of images. Interpretations. Questions. Stories.

It is essential for our human self to function in the world. And it is - quite literally - the world my human self functions within.

If these overlays are taken as real and substantial, there is stress and drama. And when they are recognized as overlays, as they happen, they are revealed as simple tools. The drama falls away.

It is simple. And there is also no end to the complexity I find when I explore it in more detail.  

(more…)

Another exploration I find interesting right now…

Notice a belief. A story that seems true. A fixed position. An emotional attachment.

What is the experience of that belief?

Where do I find it in the body? What are the sensations?

Quietly meet those sensations. Welcome them as they are. Allow them to be here, with a friendly interest and curiosity.

Is there a fear behind the belief or emotional attachment?

If so, quietly meet that fear. Welcome it as it is. Allow it to be here with a gentle interest and curiosity.

What happens to the impulse to create a belief or go into an emotional attachment? Does it stay? Fade? Fall Away? Whatever happens is OK. Just notice and stay with that too.

(more…)

Here is a snapshot of my experience these days…

(more…)

Milarepa went through a process of relating to his demons in different ways, from asking them to leave, going into dharma combat, welcoming them, and finally feeding them. (I have read a few different versions of this so am not sure what it says in his own writings.)

In any case, it is a good illustration of how I find myself relating to my own demons…

I may ignore them, pretend they are not there. Push them aside for a while. But they stay around and continue to do their demon things, so I need to find another way of relating to them. (Milarepa was probably smart enough to pass through this one quickly.)

I ask them to leave. Some may leave. Others may leave and come back. Many don’t leave. This one is also not very effective.

I go into arguments with them. I tell my version of the story. They tell theirs. And it doesn’t work very well.

I welcome them. Wholeheartedly. As they are. Allow them to stay as they are, even forever if that is what happens. (Which it isn’t.) Some go away. Others transform. And again, some stay. Some even continue to bug me.

I may ask (pray) for guidance, inviting in intention and receptivity for a shift in how I relate to them.

I may have a dialog with them. Asking them who they are. What they want. What they need. What I can do for them. What they can teach me. How they can help. This is more productive.

I can shift into their role, find myself as them and what I see in them in myself. Taking time to sink into it.

I may find any beliefs related to the demons, including the ones that make them appear as demons, and inquire into them. Is it true? What happens when I hold onto that belief? Who am I without it? What is the grain of truth in each reversal?

I feed them. I give them what they really need - love, kindness, sense of safety, and so on. I hold them within Big Heart, and allow them to transform in whatever way they want - within Big Heart.

I can notice them - and anything else - as awakeness itself. As the play of awakeness in/as form. This is the other side of the coin from working with it on the form side.

(more…)

I have written about this before, but wanted to look into it again for myself.

When a story is taken as true, it has several effects. Mainly…

My stories tells me it is true. I find supporting stories. I find allies who believe the same. I deny the truth in the reversals of these stories. And I deny the limited truth in these stories. In short, attention goes to stories aimed at proving a position.

My emotions become reactive. (Reactive anger, sadness, depression, frustration.)

My body tenses up. (Tensions, jitteriness, dullness, shallow breath.)

And since these effects are always associated with beliefs, I come to take them as support for the initial belief.

Life shows up a certain way. It triggers reactive emotions, tension in the body and stories aimed at proving a point, and all of this is taken as support for my initial belief.

My stories tells me it is true. My emotions tells me it is true. My body tells me it is true. So it must be true.

(more…)

Anything can be used to make a story seem true, and anything can become a tool in the service of a belief.

So also with what we are - Big Mind, awakeness, the infinite or whatever we like to call it. (And this can happen whether Big Mind remains an idea or there is a genuine glimpse.)

I notice this especially well with stories that keep my personality within its comfort zone. I may know that it is appropriate to take a certain action, yet it is somewhat outside of what the personality is comfortable with, so I can shift into Big Mind, see that all is perfect as it is (which is true), and use that as a reason for not acting.

It is not a big problem, and it is perfectly natural at certain phases of the process. It is innocent.

And it is also relatively easy to notice. When I am caught up in this, there is still stress here. And this stress points to a belief which I can then inquire into.

What is more true for me than the belief that stops me from acting in ways that my heart or intuition tells me to, and seems most appropriate in the situation?

It is easy to see that when I am caught up in my beliefs, I am not able to meet people where they are. I see them through my stories of them (as I always do), and am also limited in where I can go through my own identification, through the stories I take as true about myself, others and life.

When there is a freedom from a particular belief, there is also a freedom from a particular identification, and more options in terms of where to go. I am more free to meet people where they are, go to the stories they hold as true - or are just familiar with and find useful - and try them on, see how the world looks through those particular stories. And if it looks like some variation of hell, I can find some clarity in myself around those stories, a way out of identification with them. And by doing that, there is an invitation for the other to find clarity in themselves, or not, depending on what is available to them and where they wish to go.

I am not aware of any better example of this than Byron Katie. She is completely free to go wherever the other person is, and she is more than willing to go into hell with them and shine some clarity on it for herself, which can then help the other find clarity for themselves.

Of course, meeting someone where they are is also a story. In this context, I can only imagine what story they take as true here and now, and then try it on for myself. What happens if I take that story as true? How do I live my life? How do I see myself and others? And who am I without that belief? How do I live my life without that belief?

When I see Byron Katie work, I am sometimes reminded of the beautiful story of Christ going into hell to rescue Adam and Eve. In this context, it shows someone free to try on any story as true, and through their own clarity help others find clarity in themselves.

It also shows someone who recognizes all experience as the play of awakeness itself, and is free from identifying with any particular content. Here too, there is a freedom to allow - even welcome - any experience, independent of its content, because it is all recognized as the play of that which is untouched by any of it.

The third thing that comes up for me, from my own experience, is how hell (knots) tends to come up in a process of healing (as who we are) and awakening (as what we are). It wants to be recognized - seen, felt and loved - as awakeness itself.

Each of these are really just different flavors of the same process.

(more…)

I keep coming back to this one, mainly because I hear the word “ego” used in ways that can be misleading and confusing rather than clarifying.

First, there is a difference between how “ego” is used in psychological and spiritual context.

In a psychological context, “ego” is used to refer to that which helps our human self function in the world. It is the operating system and the software of the human self, and the healthier and more mature it is the better.

In a spiritual context, it is used to refer to our mistaken identity, and that can be helpful too. It points to that sense of an “I” that is overlaid on doing, thinking, experiencing, choosing and so on.

So it is good to differentiate those two meanings of the word, and also take a closer look at what it refers to in a spiritual context.

Is it an entity of some sort? Something that resists awakening? A small black demon that holds us back? An enemy to get rid of or override? The way some folks use the word, it can almost give that impression. The “ego” is made substantial and into an enemy.

What I find when I look at it for myself is that “ego” is what happens when a story is taken as true. It is a simple as that. It is just the dynamics around beliefs and how these dynamics express themselves in my life. And it is all innocent. An innocent and temporary mistake.

A story is taken as true. That story becomes right and other stories - and the ones believing in them - wrong. Reactive emotions come up: anger, sadness, envy and so on. And this human self act as if the belief is true and from the reactive emotions.

We can notice this for ourselves through simple investigations, such as exploring what happens in each sense field and how they combine, and exploring beliefs through The Work.

(more…)

Good human being believe in things.

(more…)

I listened to an excellent phone seminar with Mona Grayson on freshening up your inquiry. (The full audio is available online.)

The main pointer that stood out for me is that self-judgments are really about something else. They are an reaction to another belief, usually about others or life. So in a practical sense, self-judgments are a great guide to one or more underlying beliefs.

Some ways to uncover these more primary beliefs is to take a specific self-judgment and ask, with sincerity… Why? Where is the proof? (With should/need statements.) So what? What is not OK about that? (With factual statements.) And also… Where does my mind go (about life/others) when I believe that thought? What do I fear would happen if I didn’t believe that thought?

(more…)

Through a body oriented practice I am doing, I am required to listen to a particular teacher for about 40-50 hours once or twice a year. I find that he is pushing a good number of buttons for me (including about what is “good teaching”) which is uncomfortable for me but also invites me to notice and work with some deeply held beliefs.

Through this, I see more clearly that a teacher can either be a model or an annoyance, and that each has its value. In Zen, I am used to a teacher being precise in words, yet also challenge their students in different ways - often through their behavior.

But here, it goes even further since the words themselves push buttons. (Some of my stories about it: Imprecise, coming from a “should” about needing to shock his students, talking down to his students, pretending the teachings are more profound or unique than they are, being deceptive about the hierarchy of the organization and the history of the practice, and so on).

It is easy to relate to a teacher who is obviously a good model, such as Byron Katie, Adyashanti, Joel, and others. It is comfortable, and also very helpful.

And while it can be tremendously difficult to deal with teachers who show up more as an annoyance, it can also take me even further. I am directly faced with some deeply held beliefs that sometimes remain more hidden when I am with “good teachers”, the teachers who follow my expectations.

These beliefs will of course come up anyway, just through living my life, but in the presence of these types of teachers, they are dredged up more thoroughly and directly. I sit in the fire whether I want to or not, and have to face it. (Including the belief that since life will trigger these beliefs, a teacher don’t have to.)

This particular teacher comes from the Gurdijeff lineage, so I shouldn’t be surprised by this since it is an important element in that particular tradition.

I may not like it. I certainly wouldn’t have sought him out if it wasn’t a requirement for doing the body work (which I love). I may not chose to act in that way myself. But, although I don’t like to admit it, his teaching style is helpful to me. Through pushing so many buttons in me, I have to face them.

I have to reluctantly admit that it works, whether it is intentional from his side or not.

It is even possible that rather than being a “bad” teacher who unintentionally is a “good” teacher, this is all intentional… How would I receive it differently if I knew it was all intentional?

(more…)

Teachings can be seen as medicine.

We have a fixed position, which creates wounds, immature behavior and a sense of an I-Other. And the teaching is designed to nudge us out of that fixed position, either directly or through offering us a tool which invites the shift when applied.

That is one reason why there are so many - apparently contradictory - teachings. They each are designed to invite us out of a particular fixed position and belief. (There are of course other reasons for teachings, but this is an important one.)

From this, it is easy to see a “good teacher” as someone who is fluid among a wide range of views and positions, and can take any one of them according to what seems most helpful in the situation. And that is certainly true from a conventional viewpoint.

But I also find that teachers who take a somewhat fixed and rigid position can be very helpful. Maybe more helpful, in some ways, because they bring my attention straight to my own hangups.

I may have an expectation of the teacher being fluid, so get to notice and inquire into that belief. I may agree completely with the teacher, which then feels a little stale after a while, so I get to inquire into the stories I agree with. And I may disagree with the teacher, which is stressful, so here too I get to notice and inquire into my fixed positions.

In the first case, the teacher is fluid and models it for me. I get to see my own fixed views in contrast to the fluidity of the teacher, and am inspired and invited to move in the direction of a similar fluidity.

In the second case, the teacher is rigid, which in different ways also brings my attention right to my own fixed positions. And here, I have to do the work myself, which in many ways is more powerful.

(more…)

When I notice I am caught up in a belief-knot, I sometimes ask the one I am talking with to not agree with me. I find that to be the greatest support anyone can give me in that situation: Speaking from what is true for them, and does not align with the belief I am temporarily caught up in. It helps me shift out of it and see it as a belief only, a viewpoint that I tried to make into a solid truth.

Some of the ways I am shaken up, shaken out of my familiar stories…

I am regularly shaken up by life, whenever life unfolds different from my beliefs and shoulds. If I am receptive, I can be with and allow the experience and also inquire into those beliefs. If not, I resist the experience and fuel my familiar beliefs.

I am also shaken up by practices, by tools such as The Work, the Big Mind process, exploring the sense fields, and more.

I am sometimes shaken up by teachers, especially when they cut through confusion in a very precise and clear way. This is yang compassion, and even then can be expressed through yin compassion (conventional kindness and empathy).

(more…)

In its essence it is simple: Whenever I am caught up in a belief, I often work against myself, life and situations. And whenever there is clarity, I tend to work with myself, life and situations.

And it is - as usual - infinitely complex in how it is expressed, including how it is expressed in different approaches to various areas of life.

Here is a brief list of approaches and tools I have found - and use regularly - that embody working with life: Feldenkrais, Breema, yoga (depending on instructor/tradition), tai chi, chi gong, The Work, Big Mind process, Clicker Training, and Total Immersion Swimming.

I keep noticing the shifts between beliefs/working against and clarity/working with throughout daily life. And this has also come up for me through swimming. Whenever I take up something new, I seek out approaches that work with life, and in swimming, a great approach is Total Immersion swimming.

It helps me swim the way I always knew I could, but haven’t been able to before now: Effortlessly. With ease. Simplicity. Elegance. Efficiency. As a sea mammal. (It is a process, as anything else, and I am just in the beginning of it, but there are already surprisingly quick and major shifts in that direction.)

It was the same with Breema. I knew there had to be a body-work approach out there that works with life rather than against it (which most seem to do), and I had actually given up looking when I found Breema - with its emphasis on no extra, body comfortable, doing it for oneself, giver and receiver both receiving, inviting in healing and maturing at all levels (physical, energetic, emotional, mind) and inviting in awakening as well.

(more…)

I notice that my attention naturally goes to knots. To beliefs and their consequences (drama, tension, a sense of separation, supporting stories and so on).

And I also see that I can work against or with this natural tendency.

In some specific situations, it seems appropriate to work against it. For instance, when I do a stable attention practice, I can work against that tendency by noticing when attention goes away from its practice object (breath or something else), and gently bring it back.

But in most situations, it seems to make more sense to work with it. To notice that attention naturally goes to knots, and take this as an opportunity to find the belief behind the knot (creating the knot), inquire into this belief, and also allow and be with whatever experiences are associated with the knot (mostly emotions).

If I get stuck in seeing distractions as a problem, I continue to battle with it, and also miss out of the valuable guidance in the wanderings of attention, naturally going to knots.

If I take the wanderings of attention as a valuable guidance, I am led to knots and have an opportunity to work with the beliefs creating them.

If I am free to do both, in different situations, it may be even more valuable. I get to practice a stable attention, gently notice and bringing it back whenever it wanders. And, at other times, I get to use attention as a guide.

(more…)

Several of my friends- myself included - were as sick as we had ever been this winter and spring, typically with some form of pnemonia. It turns out that there was a surprising number of shared experiences among us.

For instance, we all felt death very close and got to see how we relate to our mortality.

Another thing that happened is something I have seen for while. When the body-mind gets exhausted, for whatever reason, there is less energy for resisting experience. Whatever is habitually resisted in daily life tends to come up.

Knots line up and come through wanting to be seen, felt and loved. Knots made up of shoulds clashing with my stories of what is, and their associated emotions and supporting stories.

For me, it is an invitation to see it, feel it, and this may gradually shift into a sense of appreciation.

Illness and exhaustion is an opportunity for knots to surface. If I continue to resist them, the discomfort only deepens. But if I welcome them, as long lost relatives, it all shifts.

It is easier to inquire into the beliefs behind the knots, and fully allow and be with the emotions and experiences associated with them, inviting in a healing and softening of the knots and my relationship with them.

(more…)

I watched The Giant Buddhas earlier today, a documentary about the Bamyan Buddhas shown as part of our local/international archaeological film festival.

It is a very well made movie, weaving together several different stories and perspectives: A Chinese monk traveling along the Silk Road around year 630. A woman from Kabul visiting the Buddhas that her father has visited in his youth. A family living in a cave between the Buddhas, and then relocated by the current regime. A French archaeologist searching for the location of a 300 meter long reclining stone Buddha in the same valley. An Al-Jazeera reporter who filmed the destruction in 2001.

Some of the information is not so well known in the west, such as the claim that Saudi Arabian engineers were called in and helped with the destruction. And that the destruction of the statues was ordered in response to western money coming in to restore artifacts, instead of as much needed aid to the people of Afghanistan. (It may be just a way to blame the west for something people in the west were upset about, but there could also be a grain of truth in it.)

When I first heard about the destruction in March of 2001, I thought of how well it illustrates the essential teaching of Buddhism - impermanence.

If we really get impermanence, if we see it and feel it, over and over, not only in stories of impermanence but as it happens here now in immediate awareness, there is no foothold for identification within content of awareness. And this invites a shift into Big Mind, into finding ourselves as that which experience happens within, to and as.

Exploring impermanence, thoroughly, over and over, as it happens in the sense fields here now, is one of the many ways to discover what we really are, and probably a sufficient one as well.

Also, it is an invitation for me - and us all - to see what stories we cling to as true, and examine them and find that is already more true for us.

It is a reminder that iconoclasm is maybe not so useful when targeted at artifacts, but has more value and meaning if we target the real icon worship: Taking stories as true. Making a thought - a story, an image - into a God for ourself.

And a reminder that we all are at different places in regards to all of this. Some of us take a modern western view on it, emphasizing the value of culture, art and tolerance. Others take a more fundamentalist view, seeing literal iconoclasm as a pretty good idea. And others again see it as a reminder of impermanence, and of iconoclasm having its value if targeted with some wisdom and applied with gentleness.

And if we want to be practical about it, we see the validity in each of those views, work on ourselves with impermanence and investigation of beliefs, and in the world in trying to prevent these things from happening using whatever - hopefully skillful - means seem appropriate.

Btw: Here is a link to the German version of the movie, although it is also available in English.

There are many connections between beliefs in stories and resistance to experience.

Both fuel and emerge from a sense of I with an Other.

Beliefs create an identity which doesn’t allow certain experiences. And resistance to experience in turn support and lends a sense of substance to those beliefs.

And yet another connection is distraction.

Whenever I want to resist experience, I find that a good way to do it is to go into and get caught up in stories. It doesn’t matter what type or flavor of story. Any will do. Stories of excitement, fascination, daydreams, judgment, blame, and so on.

(more…)

At the CSS retreat, Todd briefly mentioned the middle man, the imaginary figure we create to mediate between awareness and content of awareness. Something happens in the sense fields, awareness is aware of it, and the mental field creates an image of a middle man/woman/person that is aware of it. And that is of course the whole point, in a nutshell, in discovering what we are. To see the middle man as a mental creation.

(more…)