The Angry Gods

 I am preparing a lesson plan on the Odyssey and reflect on how much we talk about the gods as "angry" or vengeful. In Buddhism, there is a class of gods called the angry gods or "asuras", who are said to possess many great powers due to their previous merit and blessings. Yet, these gods are extremely protective of their powers and compete with each other endlessly. To be with the asuras is to have so much power and yet to feel despondent when such power could be taken away by others. From a human's perspective, the gods have all the luxuries of life, and we therefore don't imagine they would need anything. However, perhaps the more we possess, the more we fear losing what we have. This is what explains the notion of jealous gods who continually fight with each other to keep the power they have.

   It would be interesting to do a study describing how qualities such as anger can reflect a certain stage in human consciousness in which we are controlled by our fears and a threatened loss of control. It's possible that early states of humanity somehow required angry gods in order to set a tone of authority that would form the basis for law. Once a state becomes more stable, the gods tend to be more peaceful and even diplomatic, because they feel more secure in their power. During times of peace, gods can afford to relax and extend more grace, especially when they have no other gods to compete with!

   We don't think that we owe the gods any compassion, just as we look up at those with wealth and envy their perceived life (and lack of relative hardship). But in Buddhism, even deities suffer the loss of good karma as well as the eventual withering away of their powers. Studying power in others can be one way we can learn the limits of human excesses, but also that no being escapes from suffering. Even when we seem to have everything, a restless mind still feels itself deficient and wants more.

Neither Adding Nor Subtracting

 When our minds are fixated on gaining something, we tend to be narrow. We define things in terms of what we predefine rather than seeing the totality and resting in it. This can take the form of a kind of empty space or a feeling of not knowing what comes next or what to do next. It's important in that moment not to try to "add anything" or "subtract" from the experience as is.

  If we are trying to add something, it's like sticking a conclusion on top of something that has already concluded. We are straining to complete an already completed moment, which adds to our view that the moment is incomplete. This only creates vexations.

   On the other hand, trying to subtract from experience through simplifying it, is yet another subtle form of vexation. It is as though we are seeing a big banquet and then we tell the host that this is too much food and we are overwhelmed by the selection---so much so that we can't make any choice.

   In between these is the view that mind in the moment has already been perfected. We don't need to add anything new to it or take away from it. We are free to observe things arising as they are.

    This practice needs a sense of clarity and being in the moment that is sometimes hard to realize. But we can use anything to practice on it. When we are working, we practice resting contentedly in the exact nature of the work itself even when we may sense we lack the tools needed to perform the job thoroughly. Simply observe the unfolding process and trust that the mind is already deeply connected to it. When resting, we simply rest in the enjoyment of resting, without adding more or less to the experience. Encountering others, we don't need to add anything additional to what is really unfolding, and there is no need to placate others. This involves simply letting things be, but also open to taking on whatever needs doing. In other words, we don't need to be afraid of any phenomena.

Integration

  We often try to do well for ourselves by climbing a ladder: leaving behind the bad in favor of the good. I would suggest a different approach, which is to integrate disowned elements of the self.

   Platform Sutra talks about the sentient beings that exist within us:

Learned Audience, to take refuge in a true Buddha is to take refuge in our own Essence of Mind. He who does so should remove from his Essence of Mind the evil mind, the jealous mind, the flattering and crooked mind, egotism, deceit and falsehood, contemptuousness, snobbishness, fallacious views, arrogance, and all other evils that may arise at any time. (p.60)

When I read this passage, I reflect on how we contain all of these different elements of sentient beings. There isn't a single thing that a person has done, thought, felt, etc. that does not also reflect within ourselves. When I react to someone else, I create in my mind the idea of that person's motivation, and then reject that person for their perceived motivation. But what I am rejecting is really my own creation, since we can never truly know a person's mind. At most, we can guess, but beyond that, our guesses are based on our own train of thought. So we create cloud beings out of our mind that, at most, are only shadowy things that have no real substance.

Subduing or removing all these selves requires love and equanimity. Love: we accept and take in all these elements as parts of the same mind, just like the waves are parts of the same ocean. We don't separate or cast our one wave. Instead, we treat them all as just different forms. Even if we cannot embrace all these different forms, perhaps we can see that they are potentials that lie within all of us, which can emerge from many complex conditions. At the very least, we can cultivate the humility to know that what we don't like about someone is a seed that is within us. We can choose to accept that what we dislike is only temporary and arises from conditions.

Second is about equanimity. Having a balanced view allows all those states of mind that are unwholesome and partial to arise without taking over the show. To identify too closely with those elements of mind is to become imprisoned to them. They become compulsions rather than being integrated elements within the whole. 

Lastly, I try to observe deeply the mind that beholds all these elements. Is that mind inseparable from these mental states, or do the mental states only pass through mind as a function? Staying in that sense of mind can allow us not to become entangled in the sub-personalities. 

When I let go of clinging, naturally they liberate because these sub-personalities were always pure to begin with. It's like imagining that our toy soldiers were really "real", only to find that they were only real because we made them to be real through our imaginations.

The Sutra of Hui Neng. H.K Buddhist Book Distribution Press.

Park Dreams

  “The assertion about individual marks that really have no existence, concerns the distinctive marks as perceived by the eye, ear, nose, etc., as indicating individuality and generality in the elements that make up personality and its external world; and then, taking these marks for reality and getting attached to them, to get into the habit or affirming that things are just so and not otherwise.

Gautama, Buddha. THE LANKAVATARA SUTRA (pp. 11-12). Independent. Kindle Edition. 

  The outdoor park meditation was beautiful tonight. When I was meditating, I felt a sense of oneness with the sounds and was able to connect with them all equally--the rumbling of underground trains, the sound of children laughing, a violin playing classical music, and so on. What a vibrant and living community I am living in. I soaked in the sounds with a kind of innocence that brought me back to summer.

    We never step on the same path twice, and the park already seems to be a dream to me. Interacting in any situation, it's best to take things in a relaxed way that always brings us back to the present. Fashi recommended a method of taking one part of the body and focusing 80% of the body and 20% on the environment.

     It takes a lot of practice to steady the mind and focus on the moment. But when I reflect on it, all the sentient beings are there to support us on this journey. Even when I feel that it might be otherwise, I know that everything around us is a reminder of the three seals: impermanence, no self and emptiness. If we are able to see this aspect in all things, then joy will naturally arise in our minds. On the other hand, to affirm that things are "just so" and "only just so" is to buy into the mistake that there are fixed identities and realities.

 

Courage of Foolishness

    Sometimes I do foolish things at work--doing things that don't really have a value to anyone, except a few managers and the like. I do foolish things by adhering to outdated principles, or blindly following my own habits, or even in doing "nothing at all". Foolishness is the opposite of wisdom, and for many, it can be the greatest source of suffering. However, I would like to suggest that sometimes there is a courage in continuing to be foolish or absurd, while also keeping an eye on something that can be improved or advanced.

   I listened to a video by Master Sheng Yen last week where he talked about the concept of reasonableness in Buddhism. Master Sheng Yen suggests that many of our ideas of what is "reasonable" are simply passed down from previous generations and are the influence of culture rather than actual reasoning. We do things that seem reasonable when, in fact, they are based on taboo, prejudice or even superstition. Anything that worked well in the past can suddenly mean nothing in the present, and may not achieve our original aims, so I have to choose between staying the course or innovating. I think what Master Sheng Yen tried to say (as I understand it) is that it's not always easy to distinguish custom from reason, and reasonable might just mean law-abiding and conforming for the sake of harmony with the greater society. This doesn't mean we are always acting in the most effective or best way.

   But then there is also the "foolishness" of risking oneself. That is: doing something that people may not like or approve of, but standing firmly on it because we have the confidence of knowing we did the best we could and it's right for us. This doesn't mean being inflexible, but it means being able to stand in one place and allow criticism of what we have created. There isn't always a need to apologize for this state of foolishness, and it may end up becoming wisdom in the end.

    Sometimes we don't know why things are happening, but we might reflect: things happen for mysterious reasons that will make sense at a later time, especially when the mind is calm and more settled. It's terrible to make hasty decisions in a split second when the mind is vexed and we are upset or just frazzled and stressed. In those moments, we might feel that staying still is dangerous and risky (even foolish, perhaps) but on the other hand, it's the only thing we can do before we can find a better path in our profession and in our creative life.

Illusions of Security

  I have been reflecting recently on the trade wars and looming possibility of recession. I have realized how mistaken to think that one could retire early or even rely on my present employment to protect me from the possible crisis ahead.  Many people will lose jobs, and I have even been thinking, there is not much difference between myself and someone who is unemployed or homeless. Is there anything that I can rely on for a source of security? I don't think such a thing as security really exists in a true way; it's only fleeting and illusory.

    People who delve with the stock market are kind of playing mental games. They think they know how to bank their money to maximize returns, but it's really a gamble that is dependent on a great many things. There is never any guarantee in life that people will gain in the long term, and I think it's silly that I would imagine myself retiring or even deriving a sense of security from the number of years I have worked, let alone the money in the bank. 

     And then I thought, since this over-reliance on external forces is quite foolish, I must turn inward to find a sense of ontological security, or security simply in being present, or being in the moment. If I am ever going to be homeless, I should at least be a joyful homeless person--leaving behind my sense of failure and regret, to face the wind and rain with a sense of peace in the present. Even if I am starving, I should also enjoy the sensation of hunger rather than being afraid of it. And in that sense, I will find a deeper sense of security as opposed to these illusory dog-chasing-tail stock markets.

  The idea of being able to rest from work is probably not a good idea to adopt. We should always expect to work until our dying day, and at least look for work. After all, work is our contribution to society. If we don't contribute our value to society, then we are simply waiting for ground zero, and this is not true peace or happiness.

    I have given up the hope of retirement. I will struggle and work until I die. I vow to at least be cheerful and take life one moment at a time, not worrying about the future. After all, the idea of ever being financially secure is essentially crazy since all of money is tied to others, and what happens to the world will happen to us in turn. We are only really riding the waves, and so we should never put hope and trust in them.

   To try to hope and desire an "easier" life is really only to invite suffering. There is simply no easy life, so the best way is to have an attitude that I will die working or die trying to look for meaningful work.

Anatomy of Kindness

 In my research on a possible upcoming book about Loving Kindness practice, I came across Kevin Griffin's book Living Kindness. In fact, I read this book before, but I believe it's one of my favorite treatments of the subject. Rather than seeing loving kindness as some kind of touchy feely prayer that elevates a person to a blissful state, Griffin grounds his ideas of loving kindness in real lived experience, without sentimentalizing it by making it only a fanciful thought. In fact, he provides many examples that show the difficulties that many people face when trying to extend loving kindness to all beings everywhere including those we have difficulties with.

  During my walk home yesterday, I asked myself, what makes for kindness exactly? Being an analytical sort, I am naturally one to try to break down something into discrete parts. I believe these parts could be described as "respect for complexity" "openness", "curiosity", "trust", and "humility". To summarize these points:

1) Respect for complexity: rather than concluding that something is the result of one thing (which usually leads to an attitude of blame) or results in one thing (which usually entails regret), looking at things with kindness means taking a more holistic approach and seeing that all results from interconnected and complex situations. In other words, a kind mindset steers clear of dualistic or hard-lined thinking, opting for a softer and more flexible approach to viewing situations

2) Openness entails an ability to see and feel things the way they really seem and feel, as opposed to trying to block out painful emotions. This may seem antithetical to kindness, but it seems that being kind requires tolerating difficult emotions and placing a certain kind of embrace around them so that we feel that they are tolerated. A soft openness, however, also suggests not attaching too much to one emotion or another--that is, to see that emotions are not who we are but rather they sit within us

3) Curiosity entails the desire to understand--to really understand the why without going to a place of labeling or condemning something. Curiosity continues openness with a state of inquiry into the why that does not attempt to change it into something else. Both openness and curiosity pertain to a sense of acceptance but also of wanting to know more and how things connect

4) Trust--trust means that we can be ok with uncertainty and allow that whatever is happening does come together even if it hardly makes sense in the beginning. A trusting mindset is one of faith in mind, that we are more than the sum of our identities, roles, etc.

When I put these elements together, I may get something close to kindness, although it's important to really feel a sense of optimistic and warm beholding, rather than treating these as neutral. Kindness is an effort in itself to see things in a way that we appreciate who we are and what we contribute as well as others around us.