I haven’t seen this movie yet, but it looks very interesting. It also brings up the question of teaching mindfulness vs Buddhism in prisons.

(more…)

Here is a nice overview from Shinzen Young on six things to look out for on the spiritual path.

These six stories can be taken in a literal way and may be very helpful for some people in some situations. But they will have limited usefulness just for that reason. And if taken as beliefs, these six stories can become pitfalls in themselves.

It can be taken as more universal, applicable to many paths and situations in life.

More simply, it can be taken as a pointer for what is here now. These stories can be taken as a mirror of what is already here now. As a question and an invitation for inquiry.

And finally, if we are used to noticing symptoms of beliefs and inquiring into those beliefs - in whatever way seems most helpful to us - these six pointers are not even needed. Life itself will show us. Chances are, we will already have noticed most or all of them as they show up in many different ways in daily life, in whatever situations we are in.

(more…)

When I occasionally read Buddhist or integral blogs, one thing that sometimes comes up is Buddhist fundamentalism, a defense of the One True Dharma.

As so often, it is easy to see it in others. A story is taken as true, other viewpoints are made wrong, and there may be the usual signs of taking a story as true, especially if it is challenged: a closed view, closed heart, emotional reactivity, compulsion. (The content of the story can be anything, for instance making Asian cultural baggage in teachings wrong, having a bone to pick about the approaches or terminology of related traditions such as advaita, taking a model or map as true and ignoring that reality will always show up outside of any map, relate to the green value meme as an ugly bogeyman hiding under the bed.)

(more…)

I am finally getting around to listen to some of the talks of Shinzen Young, and it is easy to understand why I have heard universally good things about him. He seems very clear, and has a very comfortable “human packaging” as well.

See also the website for the movie, listen to an interview with the director at the Atheism and its Critics episode of To The best of Our Knowledge, and see if is is shown near you.

A few simple things about rebirth….

It may be helpful to separate out the science, social/culture and practice sides to rebirth.

From the science side, there are some simple questions: Does it happen or not? If it seems to happen, what are some ways to explain it? (Rebirth, or picking up information from other lives without rebirth?) If there is rebirth, what is reborn? (Patterns? An entity? Something else?) There is some research looking at these questions, and plenty of room for more.

From the social/cultural sides, the main question is: What function does it have for society and culture? How does it function as ethics, as another angle to the golden rule? Does it help society to function better? How does it seem helpful? In what ways may it be less helpful? (And what measures do we use to determine that?)

And from the practice side, one question is: Is it a useful guideline for me or not? What happens if I take it as truth? Is it useful for me if I take it as a guideline? What happens if I take it as a guideline?

Then, how does rebirth happen here now? Does it happen as a story? Does it happen within my own world of images? Can I find it outside of my own world of images? Is it here in the freshness of everything happening? (Always new, different, fresh?) Does it happen when a story is reborn and taken as true? Can I notice how a sense of me + I is reborn here now?

And also, if something is indeed reborn - as shown by science - is that what I really am? Is it content of experience? Does it come and go? Is that what I really am?

(more…)

Fundamentalism happens whenever we take a story as true, and since we have a tendency to do that, we find fundamentalism in anything from “she should do the dishes” to politics and religion of any stripes.

So how does it show up in Buddhism?

It may show up in a relatively innocent way in how we see the founder of Buddhism. Do I really believe that Sakyamuni Buddha was a historical person? There is no historical data to support it, apart from Buddhism itself. He may well be a fictional person or a composite of several. At the very least, his life story is most likely changed and refined to function as a teaching story.

Just as with Jesus, the truth is that we don’t know if such a person existed. But we do know that in both cases, the stories about their lives are wonderful teaching stories. They reflect an inner truth. They are about us, when we embark on a spiritual journey.

The same is of course the case with the original teachings. According to Buddhism itself, they were transmitted orally for five hundred years before written down. How likely is it that they were transmitted accurately? Not very. Of course, whenever they were transmitted by someone where reality had awakened to itself, it means that there is a better chance of clarity in the teachings, and they may be very helpful. But it still doesn’t mean they reflect the original teachings very accurately.

And the same is the case with any of the Buddhist teachings. As soon as any of the maps, models, or pointers is taken as true, there is fundamentalism. They may be very helpful in a  limited and practical way - as a pointer for exploration - but that is about it. They are medicines, each one aimed at a particular condition, and have no value outside of that. (Apart from as entertainment, of course, as any story.)

The great thing about Buddhism is that it has a big fat exit sign built into it. From the very beginning, they said don’t take any of it as true. Use it only - and at most - as a pointer for your own exploration.

In a practical sense, I can then notice if and when I take any Buddhist story - or any story in general - as true. For instance, what expectations do I have about the path? Do I expect it to be slow or fast, gradual or sudden, difficult or easy? What happens when I take any of those stories as true? What am I hoping to get out of taking it as true? (A sense of security? Being a good student?) How would it be if I didn’t? What are the truths in the reversals of those stories?

I may find that whenever I take any story as true, even the most basic teaching stories in Buddhism, there is an identification with a story and an identity. A sense of a separate I - an I with an other - is automatically created. There is a view and identity to protect. (The “true teachings” of Buddhism! A “good” Buddhist student or teacher.) There is an identification firmly within content of experience. Everything is filtered through that story, and it may well become a self-fulfilling prophecy as well. I act as if it is true, so it becomes true to the extent possible.

Whenever there is a sense of stress or tension, I am most likely attaching to a story as true. What is my belief? Is it true? What happens when I take it as true? How would it be if I didn’t? What is the grain of truth in its reversals?

(more…)

During the last 35 years people around Pharping in the southern part of the Kathmandu Valley have noticed that an area of a cliff began to slowly bulge out. It began to look more and more like Tara, the female buddha. At the same time the form of Ganesh also appeared. The place is just below the Asura Cave, sacred to followers of Padmasambhava. I have seen it many times over the years, and can attest that it has gradually become more distinct.

- from Blazing Splendor, the blog of Erik Pema Kunsang 

Anything happening is an opportunity to investigate…

In this case, I can explore this emerging Tara (and Ganesh) as a projection. I can find whatever I see out there also right here. 

What do I see there? Do I see Tara, an aspect of the Buddha mind? Do I see mystery and magic there? Do I see deception? Do I see gullible people? 

If I see Tara, can I find it here? Can I find a compassion that is unfiltered by stories? A kindness towards whatever is happening… towards experience, myself, others? Can I notice what arises in each of the sense fields as emptiness? As awakeness itself? Insubstantial? 

If I see devotion, can I find it here? Yes. I can find devotion to stories, whenever I take them as true. And I can find devotion to truth, to sincerely find what is more true for me within the realm of stories, and also what is more true for me than any stories. 

If I see mystery and magic, can I find it here? I find mystery in… Anything existing at all. In whatever is happening. In awakeness. In the play. 

If I see deception, can I find it here? Yes. I deceive myself whenever I take a story as true. (In this case, if I take any story about this as true, I deceive myself.) 

If I see gullible people, can I find that here? Yes. Again, I am gullible whenever I take a story as true. And I am gullible when I am not smart about how I go about certain situations. And again, I can find several specific examples. 

(more…)

I have read about half of Feeding Your Demons: Ancient Wisdom for Resolving Inner Conflict by Tsultrim Allione, and am as impressed by the book as I am by the practice. It is beautifully written, simple, insightful and always very practical and helpful.

The five steps of the practice itself is outlined at her Kapala Training website.

A draft that didn’t go further… (too many points to flesh out!

(more…)

Here is an excellent practice on feeding your demons, adapted from the Tibetan chöd practice by Tsultrim Allione. The link goes to an excerpt in Tricycle from her book on the same topic.

Her version of the practice is quite similar to the Big Mind process, although goes far beyond in some respects.

The basic Buddhist pointer of living for the benefit of all beings has a great deal of different effects.

It places my life in a larger context. It reminds me that I am a part of this world, of this larger social and ecological whole. It is not all about me.

It helps me see that my life not only influences myself but also everyone around me and rippling out from there in ways I cannot know.

It brings a shift from working against situations (complaining, resistance, victim role, making someone wrong, sense of drama) to working with situations (receptivity, open heart, sense of ease and simplicity, practical solution focus).

It invites in a sincere well-wishing for all of me and the larger whole. (If there is well-wishing here, it meets whatever happens in this human self and the wider world.)

It helps me see that just a small shift here, even just in intention, is a shift in the world as a whole. It brings about a shift in how I relate to myself and the wider world, and that benefits myself and those around me, and ripples out from there. It helps me appreciate the value and effect of small moves.

It may look like a noble aim, but it is really just a very practical and simple tool. It makes my life much simpler and easier in daily life.

In practical terms, it is a simple prayer or a setting of intention: May this practice benefit all beings. May whatever I am doing benefit all beings. May this life benefit all beings.

(more…)

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:

• The wisdom of no escape is to realize that what is, is. The content of experience, here now, is what it is. Trying to escape it only creates drama and suffering. Fully allowing it invites in a sense of peace and clarity.
• The sense of no escape is created in three ways.
  • Without the thought of escape, no thought of no escape.
  • It is the trying to escape, which brings us to notice that there is no escape.
  • And it is the identification with that thought of escaping which traps us in the first place. It brings identification firmly within the world of form, so we are trapped within it and the whims of this world of form.
• As soon as we fully allow content of experience as it is, as if it would never change, identification is released out of content of experience. We find ourselves as that which content of experience happens within, to and as. As that which is already free from content of experience, because there is no identification with the thought of escape, because it is that which the ever changing world of form happens within, to and as, and because content of experience is not Other.

A few things about karma, aka cause and effect…

• It is instant, happening here now. Said one way, I relate to all content of experience in a similar way, including this human self and the wider world. If I get caught up in reactiveness, a closed heart, a fixed view, then that is how I relate to my human self, those around me, the rest of the world, life, the universe, God and so on. And the same if I relate from receptivity and an open heart. The way I act towards others is a sign of how I habitually relate to myself. The karma is instant, in that sense.
• Whenever there is an identification with a pattern, it is reinforced. The groove is deepened. A pattern is taken as I, fueled, lived from, and becomes more of a habit.
• Patterns of an open heart and receptivity leads to happiness and a release from suffering. And patterns of reactivity, a closed heart and fixed view leads to suffering. This happens in many different ways. For instance, an open heart and receptive view tends to give a sense of connection, intimacy, recognition, empathy, joy in other’s happiness. And it also gives less sense of a need to protect any particular story or identity. Both tends to release suffering and open for a sense of quiet joy. It also makes it easier to release identification out of content in general, and notice what we are, which is a more complete release of suffering.
• Karma shows up in my relationship with the wider world. How I treat the wider world determines, to some extent, how I am treated back. In my immediate relationships, how I treat others is how they tend to treat me. (The post card effect.) And as a part of larger social and ecological systems, the way I influence the health of these impacts me and those within my circle of care, including generations of offspring.
• The story of karma is a teaching and practice tool. It is a guide for noticing the effects of our actions in the world. Take responsibility for our actions. Treat others the way we would like to be treated in their situation. (Golden rule.) And act from enlightened self-interest.
• And if we look a little closer, we may find that everything has infinite causes and infinite effects. I may not find any individual or local “doer” here. Only infinite effects stretching back to beginning of time and out through the extent of space.

Trigger for this post: Reading the section on karma in “Buddhism for Dummies” which I thought left a few things out.

Buddhism and Christianity both use a “pointing beyond itself” analogy.

In Buddhism, it is the finger pointing to the moon. The teacher, teachings and practices point beyond themselves to what we really are, this awakeness with a content which is awakeness itself. Don’t mistake the finger for the moon.

In Christianity, it is the humility to realize that it is all from God. Nothing happens here which is not from God.

This also shows where the traditional teachings sometimes don’t go quite as far as they can.

In Buddhism, it is not only the teacher/teachings that are the finger pointing to the moon. It is also this human self. When it points to itself as the final truth of what it really is, it is deluded. When it notices that it is already and always pointing to awakeness as what it really is, it is awakened.

In Christianity, it is not only that I as a human being give all credit to God. It is also that God is all there is. It may appear that there is a human being here, with a separate I, but there is nothing but God. There is no separate I here, only God.

In both cases, this human self becomes a finger pointing beyond itself.

And this shift has to be thorough for it to be real. For this human self to really notice what is already and always is.

(Leonardo’s beautiful painting of St. John the Baptist shows him pointing up. He has to point somewhere, so it may as well be up. But it is really in all and no directions.)

Practice, at least the one aimed at seeing what we really are, is a strange process of the human self pulling the rug out from under itself. From taking itself as a doer, to see that there is only doing.

Or we can say that it is a process of shifting from the human self pointing to itself as the final truth of what it is, to pointing to awakeness/Ground as what it really is.

The human self notices that it always and already is a finger pointing to the moon.

What a strange thing.

The Blogisattva Award Nominees have been announced!

Here are the blog of the year nominees:

• American Buddhist [the combination of American Buddhist Perspective (1/1-9/23/07) & American Buddhist in England (9/23-12/31/07)]; Justin Whitaker
• Danny Fisher; Danny Fisher
• Dreaming of Danzan Ravjaa; Konchog Norbu
• Integral Options Cafe; William Harryman
• One foot in front of the other; Michael

Michael died last month, so I find it especially poignant to read through his blog… a good reminder of impermanence, and of the courage available to us even in difficult times.

I also see that Mystery of Existence is honored with four nominations! Best achievement blogging on Buddhist practice or Dharma, best achievement blogging on matters philosophical and psychological, and twice under best philosophy or psychology post.

Any tool is fair game, as long as it works and seems appropriate to the situation.

Many nondual folks are familiar with contemplative prayer, visualizations, heart prayer, Christ meditation and similar forms on prayer where a receptivity to and invitation in of the soul level is the main emphasis, possibly shifting into realized selflessness in glimpses or more thoroughly.

The more common forms of prayer, those where we ask about something specific, also have their place. They are a part of any comprehensive toolbox. They can be used as in Buddhism, to ask for awakening for the benefit of all beings. This sets a clear intention, which in turn helps reorganize and align our human self with this path and may even have effects beyond that.

And of course, prayers for the health and well-being of ourselves and others have their place. Again, they help realign ourselves with that intention. And it opens our heart. It opens for a sincere well-wishing for ourselves and others. And both of those spill over into our actions.

As with visualizations, these forms of prayer may (or may not) have an effect beyond how it works on us, in how the world shows up on its own.

In either case, the effect it has on us is more than enough reason to sometimes engage in them.

They set a clear intention for ourselves. They help realign us with that intention. They open our heart. They open for sincere well-wishing for ourselves and others.

And sometimes, especially in extreme situations, they may be comforting if that is what we need.

(And if not, if we are invited into being wholeheartedly with what is coming up and we use these forms of prayers as an escape, they - and anything else we do to try to escape - are likely to not work.)

I did a brief exploration of the shadow of the Buddhist precepts a few days ago, and it turned out that this was one of the topics of Arny Mindell’s class earlier today.

We each have our personal ethics, whether we are aware of it or not. And as he hinted at, it is meant for ourselves. If we don’t pick it up, it is still around, but we assume it is for others. It is the classic it happens, it can’t be for me, so it must be for everyone else.

Then he talked about the denier of the ethics, both our inner denier and those in groups who take on the role of the denier. This is the voice that asks why, how, when? The voice that criticize and question the ethical guidelines.

How do we relate to this denier? Do we squash it? Disown it? Listen to it? Find the validity of what it has to say? Find a perspective that hold the truth in the initial ethics and the view of the denier? Refine our ethics?

The voice of the denier is essential. It helps us see our ethics, question it, refine it, explore the larger landscape, and much more. It also helps us not get trapped in the shadow of the ethics, disowning in ourselves whatever doesn’t fit with our personal ethics, whether we are conscious of this ethic or not.

One way of exploring this is by noticing our personal ethics as it shows up in daily life, explore the views that criticize it, and then find ourselves as that which holds both. (Process Work has exercises that makes this come alive, and also helps us find our deeper ethics, the ones just emerging, the ones not quite conscious yet.)

Another way is to explore the reversals of our ethics, as I did with the Buddhist precepts. What is the grain of truth in them? In what ways are they sometimes better? What is the gold in these reversals?

What is the gold in the shadow of our ethics?

It is interesting to see how dream themes come up in the days before and after a dream. I noticed yesterday, the day after the Himalaya dream, a pattern that I only later connected with the dream.

For a few days, I had purposely gone into stressful thoughts to take them to inquiry, and also gone into unpleasant emotions so I could fully allow them and be with them., and noticed I had gotten a little stuck in that mode. So I decided to do some heart centered practices to lift it up a little, including the practices of rejoicing in other’s happiness, and prayer for the happiness and awakening of all beings, that I know from the Tibetan tradition.

I then realized that this mirrors exactly the dream. I purposely went down into the abyss, into the stressful thoughts and unpleasant emotions. And then climbed up to the top of the plateau again using a rope ladder, guided by a Tibetan teacher. Or as it happened that day, climbed up using a simple made-made device, the practices, and guided by Tibetan teachings.

It is better to not filter Buddhism through New Age and Christianity. (Distorting it.)

(more…)

Another look at karma, and how it is and isn’t, and is personal and universal, belonging to the part and the whole.

As with any maps, models and stories, the story of karma is a practical tool only, a tool that helps our human self to orient and navigate in the world. A tool that can be more or less useful depending on what we want to use it for. There is no value or truth in it beyond that.

And we can say that karma is and isn’t.

It is, because there is, obviously, cause and effect in the conventional sense.

It isn’t, because there is only what is here now, the five sense fields and what appears in each one. Anything else comes from the inside of a story. Past, future, time, continuity, space, extent, causality, all that is only found on the inside of a story.

It is individual, because we can find, in a conventional sense, causality within the boundaries of this human self. We see how thoughts and decisions are followed by actions in the world, and so on. It is also individual as a practical ethical tool, inviting and helping the human self to live in a more ethical way and follow the golden rule more easily.

It is universal and of the whole, because everything has infinite causes and effects, reaching back to the beginning of the universe and out to its furthest reaches. What we see locally, including what appears as local causes and effects, are just the local effects of movements within the whole.

So karma, cause and effect, exists in a conventional and practical sense. If we look a little closer, we cannot find it in our immediate experience. It can only be found on the inside of a story.

It is individual, again in a practical and conventional sense. And it belongs to the whole of the world of form, in that everything happening locally has infinite causes and effects, and is a manifestation of the movements of the whole.

And we can find all of this here and now, in our own immediate experience. How is it true for me, here and now? What do I find when I look for myself?

I just started looking at Buddhism for Dummies, and it seems to be an excellent book, written in a way that honors and is faithful to the traditions, yet in a very simple and ordinary language, and always very practical.

If anyone asks me for a good book about Buddhism, I am going to recommend this one. And I am going to read it myself as I have benefited a great deal from the brief sections I have read so far.

When the tagline says “a reference for the rest of us”, I read that as “a reference for all of us”.

I read a great post from Vince on how to relate to accusations.

One thing I would like to add to the list is gaining insight from the content of the accusations. In this way, we benefit from the content, and the other person benefits from feeling heard and acknowledged.

(Few things are as annoying as being caught up in reactivity and sharing it with someone who just goes into equanimity without relating to the content of what we have to say.)

Anything anyone has to say about us has, inevitably, some grain of truth in it.

How can I find it in myself? Can I find three or more examples in my own life where it is genuinely true for me, maybe even in how I relate to this person right now?

Why is it better that this person said this in exactly this way? Can I find three genuine examples of why it is better?

I was fortunate enough to see the new Milarepa movie tonight, made by Neten Chokling who was one of the actors in The Cup and assisted with Travelers and Magicians.

Since I have been exploring the early part of the chain behind “deluded” actions lately, that was one of the things that came up for me.

Especially, how, when we unravel what is behind motivations, the ones stemming from a sense of an I with an Other, we find first fear, and then love.

In his case, fear of losing his mother (she threatened with committing suicide if he didn’t take revenge on the village), fear of what may become of him (they had lost their family fortune), fear of not getting his girl (he was poor, she more affluent). When I look for myself, I find that these types of fears are often behind ill considered actions, and also reactivity and reactive emotions. (Anger, frustration, despair.)

And going behind that fear, there is love. In his case, love for his mother, his father, his sister, himself. Love for those he included in his circle of us, which probably shrank due to how his family was treated by most others in the village.

And of course, behind the fear and reactivity, we find beliefs. A sense of being a separate self, beliefs in justice, in wanting a good life, and so on.

And mixed in with it all, pure innocence. Pure innocence in believing certain thoughts, just because most people around do it. Pure innocence in acting from fear, because this fear is inevitable when we take ourselves to be an I with an Other. Pure innocence in this fear taking the form of anger, hate, despair and wanting revenge, because that is inevitable when we resist the experience of fear, and also when it gets mixed up in typical beliefs. Pure innocence in the love that is behind it all, because that love is what we are. Pure innocence in filtering that love through a boundary of us and them, because that is inevitable when there is a sense of a separate I. Pure innocence in where that boundary falls, because that comes from culture, family and where we are in terms of maturity.

The story, as any other story, is a mirror for myself. Can I find what I see in Milarepa, his path, and in the people around him, in myself?

Where do I find the confusion? Being caught up in a sense of a separate self, and everything that comes from that? Where do I find the turning point? The situation or situations where I went far enough in acting from confusion, reactivity and beliefs that it stunned me, invited me to see if there is another way.

And in the sequel, which is about his training and awakening process, where do I build up stone towers just to have to dismantle them again, or having them dismantled for me?

Some aspects of tong-len…

It invites me to find in myself the confusion I see in others, and see in others the clarity I find here.

It invites in a receptivity to any experience, even those I would rather not were here.

It invites in a sense of us, a sense of a seamless field we all happen within and as.

In other words, it helps me notice more of the fullness of who I am, as a human being, it gives a taste of fearlessness towards experience, and it releases identification out of content of experience, inviting me to notice what I already am.

In terms of the three centers, I see that it invites in a receptivity of mind, heart and feelings. Recognizing myself in others, opening my heart to all of us, and a felt sense of our shared humanity and existence.

Of course, all of this can be expressed in a more technical language, but why not stay with the simple words? Those that are a little closer to immediate experience.

Buddhism often talk about attachments to things in the world, and how this creates suffering.

But is that really what is going on? What is it an attachment really to? And what is an attachment?

When I explore this for myself, I find that what appears as an attachment to things in the world is something a little different.

Any attachment is to a story only. And this attachment is really an identification with a story.

The core story is that of an I with and Other, which is then fleshed out with other stories.

And I am identified with these, I take myself as these stories. I am this I with an Other, I am a living being, an object in the world, has a certain gender, age, from a specific ethnic background, has certain interests, skills, values, and so on.

I believe I am this human self, so am naturally attached to its well-being and aliveness. (Nothing wrong with that, although the added drama around it may be uncomfortable.) I believe people shouldn’t lie, so am attached to people speaking the truth. I believe a certain type of food will give me comfort, and that I need comfort, so appear attached to that food. I believe an intimate relationship will give me nurturing I cannot find any other way, and that I need that nurturing, so I am attached to having intimate relationships.

Our stories about what is and what should be often do not align, so attachments to stories create a sense of drama and discomfort. This is of course fine. But eventually, there may be an impulse to take a closer look at what is going on, and explore working with attachments.

One way of working with attachments is to explore impermanence.

Exploring impermanence has two effects. It invites in a disidentification with stories. And also a realignment of the stories we use in daily life, whether we are identified with them or not, to more closely reflect impermanence. In both cases, there is a release of attachment to having things a particular way. There is less of a war with what is, as Byron Katie says. (Although she uses a direct inquiry into the beliefs themselves, not this particular approach.)

We can explore it outside of stories, through directly see impermanence in the different sense fields. By getting familiar with impermanence in this way, we see that our stories are not true so there is a disidentification with them, and the stories we use realign as well. (This one is important for the disidentification part, less so for the realignment.)

We can also explore impermanence within stories, the impermanence of the universe, earth, humanity, civilizations, individuals, relationships and so on. This helps us realign our stories, and the larger perspective can also give a certain disidentification with stories. (This one is important for the realignment part, but maybe less effective for the disidentification.)

And we can investigate stories directly. We find a should which clashes with our stories of what is, and take it to inquiry. Is it true? What happens when I believe it? Who would I be without it? Can I find the truth in its turnarounds? This invites identification to be released out of the story.

A third way of releasing identification out of stories is to notice what we already are. We can use the sense fields to explore impermanence, see how all content of awareness comes and goes. But something does not come and go. What we really are does not seem to come and go. What is it? What is it that does not come and go? Or we can use the headless experiments to find ourselves as a no-thing full of whatever happens, or the Big Mind process to find ourselves as Big Mind.

There are of course lots of ways to explore attachments. These are just the ones I happen to be most familiar with right now.

So a quick summary:

• Attachments to situations or things in the world creates drama and suffering, because everything is living its own life and is in flux. We get what we don’t want. We don’t get what we want. We don’t lose what we have but don’t want. We can’t hold onto what we want to keep.
• This attachment is really an attachment to stories about what is and should be. And this attachment to stories is really an identification with them.
• We can work with this in two ways. First, by realigning the stories we use, whether we are identified with them or not, with everything living its own life, on its own schedule, and being in flux. Then, by inviting identification to release out of these stories altogether. Realignment without disidentification only works up to a point since the world always will show up differently from our stories about it. There will be a certain amount of drama and discomfort left. Disidentification without realignment will release the drama out of it, but the stories our human self uses in its daily life will not be as closely aligned with the world as they can be. Both are important.
• And there are several tools for working with attachments in these ways. One is The Work which directly addresses the beliefs, broadens the scope of stores we have available to us through the turnarounds, and invites in a release of identification with the stories. Another is exploring impermanence through the sense fields, which invites in a release of identification with stories, and some realignment of these stories. And we can also find ourselves as that which is already free from identification with stories, through headless experiments, the Big Mind process, or finding ourselves as that which does not come and go in the midst of all content of awareness coming and going.

(more…)

Our local art museum has an exhibit on Buddhist art called Buddhist Visions, focusing especially on depictions of heaven and hell.

So as with anything else, as usual, this is about what is happening here and now.

Heaven is here. Hell is here. The bardos are here. Whatever happens after we die, as described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead, is here.

It is a projection of stories happening here now, into past and future. And it is a projection of dynamics happening here now, into past and future, or another location in space.

There is a story here, about heaven, hell, creation, what happens after death, and I see it as reflecting something really out there, in the past, future, or somewhere else in space. And I can either recognize it as just a thought, having purely a practical function for this human self in the world, or I can take it as somehow substantial, real, something far more than just an ephemeral thought.

Dynamics happening here now are also projected out, in a similar way, through these stories.

I can find heaven here, when I tell myself what is and what should be are aligned, or when I notice myself as that which all content of experience happens within and as. I can find hell here, when I tell myself that what is and what should be are not aligned, or when I get caught up in beliefs in general.

(For instance, have you ever felt like either or all of the figures in the painting above? I have, and do whenever I get caught up in being right, in a hot anger, creating a sense of being eaten alive. That is one version of hell.)

I can find the layers and processes described in the Tibetan Book of the Dead here now, when I explore the sense fields or use other approaches.

So all of these Buddhist images can be seen as describing something happening here and now, for each of us. And that is really the same with anything else, any other story, in the news, in movies, in books, in dreams, in myths, in fairy tales, in science, in religion. Whatever it is, it is something we can find here now, in immediate awareness.

We can find the story of it here now, as simply an ephemeral and insubstantial thought. And we can find the dynamics it refers to. Any story is a story about what is alive here now.

It has a double practical value. First, as a practical tool for our human self to navigate and function in the world. Then, as a reflection of what is alive here now in our immediate awareness.

What do we know about life, death and what continues?

Well, we know for sure that this human self dies. It is gone. Never to come back. So if we take this human self, with its particular personality, to be “I”, then “I” will surely die and be gone forever, reincarnation or not.

At the same time, we see that the world of form is a seamless whole. Everything has infinite causes and infinite effects. The world of form is reorganizing itself in always new and different ways. There is no I with an Other within the world of form. Doing, but no (separate, individual) doer.

And if we look, we find that within all of this coming and going, all of this change, something does not come and go. The awareness it all happens within does not come and go. It is that which all forms happens within, to and as, including all time and space, all causality, and any sense of an I with an Other. This awareness is inherently free from all of it, so is also free to allow the appearance of it all. This is what we really are, awakeness inherently free from any of its content, free from any I with an Other, yet allowing the appearance of it all in its fluid richness.

So in this context, personal karma does not have much meaning, nor does reincarnation if we think of an “I” that is reincarnated.

There is no “personal” karma because everything has infinite causes and infinite effects. Every single little thing this human self does has causes that stretch back to the beginning of time and out to the extent of the universe. It is the karma of the world of form as a whole and does not belong to any individual entity within this world of form.

And there is no reincarnation of a separate “I” either, because it doesn’t exist. It only appears when we filter the world through a sense of I and Other, which all comes from a thought, which all happens within, to and as awakeness itself.

At most, there may be a rebirth of this alive presence with its many flavors of infinite love, wisdom, luminosity, nurturing darkness, and somehow personal and impersonal at the same time. This alive presence at the soul level, which may come in through certain soul level practices such as prayer, and which we can place our sense of “I” on if we want. But this too is within content of awareness, this too comes and goes, this too is inherently free from any I with an Other. So even if there is some form of rebirth here, it is free from a rebirth of any “I”.

So why does Buddhism, and some other traditions, emphasize personal karma and reincarnation? They are not stupid, they too must have discovered this either in their own immediate experience or at least rationally, so why do they still - sometimes - emphasize it?

To me, it seems to be a teaching strategy. A teaching aimed at a particular, introductory, level.

It is far too easy to be caught up in the words about these things… ground, awakeness, emptiness, no I with an Other. As soon as we start believing the thoughts about these things, or anything else, it quickly gets really weird.

So then it is better to encourage people to continue to believe in a separate self, with individual karma and the prospect of being reborn, because that at least invites in some personal responsibility, some measure of ethical living, the practice of thinking of the longer term and far reaching consequences of ones actions.

(It easily becomes a fear based motivation, which Buddhism traditionally is not foreign to, so we may agree or disagree with that particular approach.)

It aligns our sense of a separate I, with a conscious view of a separate I, which anyway is more honest.

If we are going to believe in thoughts, as we do until there is a shift into awakeness awakening to itself, we may as well believe in these thoughts. They do at least have some practical everyday value.

And if we, in addition to this, practice, we may eventually come to see through it all. We may discover that there is really no I with an Other. That the world of form is a seamless whole, where the local manifestations of the movements of the whole appears as under the influence of infinite causes and infinite effects. That what we really are is this awakeness within, to and as the world of form appears, inherently and already absent of any I with an Other.

And that there is no, and never was any, personal karma. No reincarnation of any I. No substance to those teachings.

Yet a great deal of appreciation for them anyway, as practical guides for a certain phase of the path.

Many traditions have ways of bringing all of us into transformative processes.

In Tibetan Buddhism, it is done - among other ways - through visualizing all beings taking refuge with us, during the first of the four ngondro practices, each done a hundred thousand times. In Shamanic traditions, by inviting in the protectors from the six directions. In Christianity, through the Christ meditation where Christ is visualized in the six directions and the heart. In many traditions, through prayer or well-wishing for all beings, including our enemies and those in the hell realms. And so on.

In each of these apart from the Christ meditation, there is an intention and visualization of all beings aligned… in taking refuge in Buddha nature, in participating in sacred space, being included in healing and awakening. And even the Christ meditation has a sense of completeness and absolute inclusion in it, by visualizing Christ in all directions and in the heart.

And each of these is a way of inviting all of us to participate, and to align all parts of us. Using voice dialog language, each subpersonality or voice is invited to join and align in the same overall purpose of healing and awakening of the mind and heart.

In addition, it helps us see all beings in the same boat in different ways. All beings are taking part in this sacred process of life. All have the potential for awakening, and all have Buddha nature. We can learn to see beyond the surface ripples of contraction, and see how we each seek happiness and freedom from suffering, and all are awakeness.