Updates from hardie karges Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:14 am on April 30, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Huineng, , , ,   

    Buddhist Imperfection and the Crazy Wisdom of Zen  

    The Buddha never said we’re all perfect, quite the opposite. He said that we are nothing but ‘heaps’ of causes and conditions that he called skandhas. He never even said that he’s perfect. And those imperfections can be the basis for positive change. He DID list change as one of the causes of our suffering, but significantly less than that of the First Noble Truth—craving. Maybe that’s not surprising, from someone who was born into the lap of luxury, since change for someone of destitute poverty might only be for the better.  

    But that’s arguable, also, so let’s just split the difference and apply the Buddha’s own Middle Path to conclude that change can go either way, good or bad, which is convenient, since it’s inevitable. The point is that, in its origins, imperfection is at the heart of the Buddha’s vision, though the Zen sect of the Mahayana school would, like some Christian sects (such as Christian Science), reverse that position and argue that manifesting our innate perfection is only right and proper. 

    They also said that if you meet the Buddha on the road, then you should kill him. Hmmm. Obviously, there’s a logical explanation to that apparent exhortation to violence, but I won’t go into it. I’ll only say that I prefer a simpler approach to enlightenment. The Zen thing is to show the limits and traps of language, and I agree whole-heartedly with that, but I don’t necessarily agree to a Dadaist approach to it. One of the Christian sideline precepts is to say what you mean and mean what you say, (“Let your yes be yes and your no be no”), and they just might have that right. 

    No, I don’t think that anyone has all the answers, and it is to Buddhism’s credit that so much dialogue is allowed, and even encouraged, which promotes a larger dialectic. In fact, this is how the Zen master Hui-Neng upstaged the heir apparent to replace the current master, to whom he was only a rank (in)subordinate. Thus began the line of thought that we are not here to train our minds but to acknowledge the illusion of reality, so something like an alternative Mayanist (haha) school, which thrives to this day as subplot to many more orthodox traditions. We are not perfect, but this is why we practice… 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 10:42 am on April 22, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Mark Epstein, , Roman numerals, , ,   

    Samma Vaca: Right Speech on the Buddhist Middle Path  

    This is something so difficult for so many people that often no speech is better. Because Buddhism didn’t start the old ‘Silence is Golden’ saying, but it probably could have. Because it’s such a valuable tool in the workshop of life that its effect is invaluable. I think that it can easily be seen as the sonic equivalent of Emptiness for Buddhist purposes, that same shunyata Emptiness derived from the Pali/Sanskrit shunya zero (yes, THAT zero), which is not really a number, but a concept, and which largely expanded the original anatman no-self doctrine to everything. 

    But, if easy convenient symbols for that powerful metaphor are hard to find, then silence is one of the easiest, maybe even easier than the eponymous shunya itself, i.e. zero. Because number systems did just fine for many years without the place holder and multiplier that we call ‘zero’ in the English language. And, despite some interpretations that it’s necessary for a decimal system, well, in fact, it is not, and our own (!?) Roman numerals are the proof of that, easily countable up to about 5000, and not so hard to write as V. But you wouldn’t want to see 4999. 

    And, so it is with speech. Sometimes less is more, not just figuratively, but literally, and numerically. Because, if the zero allows easy multiplication, with possibilities of infinity, then silence can do the same. Until I say something, then anything is possible, and the future is wide open. But once I commit to speech, and language, then its reach is definite, certain, limited—and past tense. But what is ‘right speech’? After all, we can’t be silent ALL the time. What everybody wants in life, whether they know it or not, is to feel good.  

    So, in brief, right speech is speech that makes you feel good, though not just you, but all the other people within hearing range, or in the case of written speech, then all potential readers. But that’s easier said than done. Because ours is a world of fierce differences and often acrimonious debate, even when the potential results are more futile than feudal. Still, we persist in advancing our agendas. Silence allows time and space to see the other side. But, if you must speak, then say nice things, constructive and conciliatory. And think good thoughts. That’s two steps of the Buddhist Middle Path right there. You’re halfway home. 

    Author’s note: just after writing this, I discovered a passage in Mark Epstein’s ‘Thoughts Without a Thinker’ that resonates in total agreement, in the section called ‘Holding Emotions’: “The Buddha taught a method of holding thoughts, feelings, and sensations in the balance of meditative equipoise so that they can be seen in a clear light.” Nice, couldn’t have said it better myself. Enjoy. 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 9:17 am on April 15, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhist Mindfulness: No Shortcuts to Salvation  

    Mindfulness, sati, requires some awareness of the unpleasant details, also, unfortunately or fortunately, for this is the nature of existence, the existence of suffering and the ways to ameliorate it, on a path to cessation, if not the twenty-five-dollar cure that we’ve grown so accustomed to expect, in some binary fashion, now you see it and now you don’t, as if there were indeed magic bullets that can hit every target, with never a miss—at least in theory. 

    But, until someone can bio-engineer us with eternal life or create us a Virtual Reality so perfect that we can’t tell the difference, then the (not-so?) harsh reality is that each and every one of us will die, later if not sooner, peaceably if not in agony. And this is the truth of Buddhism, that suffering is ubiquitous, and implacable, if not the all-embracing disastrophe that it so recently was. But that was likely due to the dubious emboldenment of patriarchy, in distinct contrast to the previous matriarchal survivalists that sustained us for so many millennia. 

    But the point is that Buddhism is not pessimistic, but realistic, and the obvious corollary would be that the silly-eyed optimism of capitalistic Christianity is itself the cause of many of our problems, especially global warming, for which it is singularly unprepared to offer a credible solution, given the demands of economic growth. But Buddhism can offer that solution: conscious mindful existence that accentuates self-sufficiency, not the excesses of abundance and infinity that capitalism and Christianity demand.  

    In other words: less can indeed be more, in quality if not quantity, and that is the important consideration, now, isn’t it? Yes, I think that it is. And that is also the cautionary tale with so-called ‘mindfulness.’ Be careful which way you turn your gaze of awareness, because you will have to deal with the circumstances in your field of vision. And that is good. Buddhism in its origins never pretended to transcendence. This is the real world we find ourselves in, and that is the challenge… 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:22 am on April 9, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Buddha Mind, , , , , , , ,   

    Buddha Mind and the Incremental Steps to Enlightenment  

    Buddha mind is best all the time. But a little bit is better than nothing. That should go without saying. Because this speaks to the nature of thought and the nature of consciousness, but mostly to the nature of awareness itself, sati, which is essential to the development of samadhi, a more meditative state which is probably the best one-word definition of ‘Buddha mind.’  

    But the problem is the problem of any definition, or lack thereof, in which words compete with themselves for attention, and clarity is often lacking. After all: what is ‘mind,’ anyway? But I think that we can assume that whatever ‘mind’ is, then ‘Buddha-mind,’ must be the cooler (literally) and more meditative version of that, full of kindness and compassion, and with a heavy dose of intuitive wisdom, the kind less analytic, and much less critical.  

    But my point is that this is not a yes-or-no binary choice. This is a choice of many incremental intermittent steps, and none is too insignificant along the pathway to enlightenment, whatever that is. Because this is a Mahayana concept, so a full step toward a transcendental Buddha, world-inhabiting and mind-manifesting; and a step away from the more (non) self-centered and discipline-oriented early Buddhism of Theravada, aka Hinayana. Don’t worry about enlightenment. I’m sure that we’ll all recognize it when we see it. The point is to make the world a better place. ASAP. 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 9:23 am on April 2, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhism 101: Meditation with no Mediation, except the Middle Path… 

    If you’re sipping tea while doing meditation, then it’s not really meditation, unless you’re meditating on the tea itself. And that’s a very nice thing to do, I hear, and it would seem, though I’ve never directly participated in it myself, it being a thing very Zen-like, and my own practice being something very different from that, a more-or-less traditional form of Buddhism. But the result should be the same: a calm and peaceful form of abiding, insight optional. 

    The point is to be very aware of all things that are occurring, and with as few distractions as possible. So, in a tea meditation ceremony, the point is to be aware of all things involved in the ceremony, from the preparation to the smell to the little buzz of brain neurons firing. In traditional meditation the point is to concentrate on the breath or something else innocuous yet transcendent, to liberate the mind from its usual task of struggling for survival in a dog-eat-dog world.  

    In either case, traditional silent meditation or a more elaborate ceremony, the point is to be attentive to the point of hyper-attention and to not be distracted. Because, to be distracted is to disrupt the whole point of the meditation, which is sati, or awareness, and samadhi, a term variously translated as something in the range of feelings from absorption to transcendence, so akin to dhyana, the term from which the Chinese chan and Japanese zen derive. I still prefer traditional meditation, seated, serious, and silent, with some misgivings about guided meditations, but very open to more active but silent forms such as the tea ceremony and walking meditation.

    The problems arise with the lack of definition and subsequent degeneration of the form, but not to the point of dismissal. Walking meditators just might need to decide whether to walk fast or slow. A brisk walk can be very satisfying, but I’m not sure that it’s meditation. It’s probably best to master the art of silent sitting before any experimentation. The point is to reboot consciousness, starting at zero, with a fresh outlook on life, language optional, because language is the classic conundrum. We can’t live with it and we can’t live without it. Be safe out there.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:41 am on March 25, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , Drake Equation, , ,   

    The Lessons of Life and the Lessons of Buddhism  

    Sometimes the worst disasters teach the best lessons. And this itself is one of the most sublime lessons of Buddhism, if never the easiest to embrace, that all of our most elaborate plans will certainly fall apart, sooner or later, in part if not wholly. We will be left with whatever remains, and we should be prepared to deal with it. That doesn’t mean elaborate rituals to be done or the best insurance to be had, simply a willingness to move on with whatever life brings and letting go of any pretense to authority over things we can’t control. 

    Now, I certainly won’t go as far as many ‘non-dualists,’ and neither would the Buddha, in asserting that, essentially, we are nothing, neither doer nor actor nor creator, simply witnesses to that over which we have no control, which is almost everything. I won’t go that far. I’d only say that it’s limited, and all pretenses otherwise are extremely il-advised. The Buddha made it clear that we are composite beings on the best of days, however intelligent, and much less than that quite often. We are not Gods nor even masters of our own domains.  

    As a firm follower of science, but not necessarily a believer, I give us all the credits due any featherless biped, and much more, since it’s not yet proven that there are any more of us ‘out there,’ unless they are related to us, or until we find at least one. The Drake Equation is logic, not evidence. No, I believe that this species is unique, as are each and every one of us, with our own DNA and fingerprints. But that doesn’t give us any special rights to command others and the universe. We are children of this universe. Enjoy.  

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 11:43 am on March 18, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhism 499: Suffering doesn’t have to be so sad…  

    Suffering does not mean sadness, maybe in Nepali language, but not in Buddhism. This is one of the lessons, and this is one of the discussions, about what the word ‘dukkha’ really means, and what that means for us. Many pandits try to redefine it variously as ‘stress,’ ‘disappointment,’ ‘dissatisfaction,’ ‘spot of bother,’ haha, or various and sundry other things, but in most modern SE Asian languages the word indeed is usually best translated as ‘suffering,’ however minor or apparently insignificant, which sometimes earns Buddhism the rap as pessimistic.  

    What IS significant is that you will one day die, or simply expire, from this life in this world, and whether anything goes on after that is a matter of sober conjecture. But that IS a limit to your free will and your open skies and your desire for the Christian myth of abundance. For if there is indeed an infinity and/or an eternity, then it is surely empty, and that can indeed be beautiful, just as can the various limits placed upon it. For what is a work of art if not a limit, or definition, of reality, and what is a song? They are nothing if not sublime limits placed upon an undefined eternity. 

    Thus, suffering need not be so cruel. For me it is little more than life in passive voice as much or more than active, if those grammatical terms still have meaning for you. They do for English language literary agents, I assure you, and passive voice is largely prohibited, while in Asian academic circles, it is almost required. Go figure. But I’m not advocating passivity, and that is what kept me from Buddhism for many years, the passivity that I perceived in Thailand. As always, the truth lies in the Middle Path, and the subtle balance between aggression and renunciation. There is always a way forward without resorting to extremes… 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:16 am on March 11, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , Kramer, , , Passion of Christ, , , ,   

    The Passion and Dispassion of Buddhism…  

    Buddhism in Sri Lanka

    There is no worse slavery than the slavery to your passion(s). And that’s a tough pill to swallow, because we tend to think of our passions as our pleasures, as though it’s only natural to be obsessed and conflicted. It’s not. But that shows the path that western culture has taken, in which our passions, which once meant ‘suffering,’ now are the focal point of our lives, and full of positive connotations—even if it kills us. So, with the ‘passion of Christ’ fully articulated as his suffering, in defeat, with no victory implied or intended, then Buddhism and Christianity are not so far apart, at least not superficially, at least not originally.  

    For both see suffering as seminal. The differences only become apparent when we realize that Christianity and the West make of suffering (i.e. passion) something to be encouraged, and sought, not something to be avoided and mitigated, as in Buddhism. The examples are many: samsara, for instance. This is a word that in the time of Buddha meant, and still means (in modern Nepali), ‘the world.’ And the Buddhists made something distinctly negative of that term, it now symbolizing the drudgery and misery of incessant rebirths. But most westerners, and especially Christians, are famous for their (our) ‘love of life’ and the world, too, of course.

    So, is the Christian belief in (and desire for) some sort of ‘eternal life’ really any different from the Buddhist rebirth? Only in that one is desired and the other abhorred, it would seem. So, if it’s not surprising that Buddhism and Christianity spring from similar roots, given their shared Indo-European proto-language and homeland, it IS a bit surprising that they’ve diverged so far from that initial starting point, and in apparently opposite directions. What would cause that? Good question. There would seem to be nothing in the physical landscape to explain the divergence, though the cultures encountered, and conquered (Indo-Europeans didn’t lose too many wars, except among themselves), differ quite radically.

    Considering that they went both ways from the Yamnaya Horizon’s original Pontic steppes, West and East, to Europe and north India, respectively, they would have encountered light-skinned ‘old Europeans’ on the one hand, and dark-skinned Indus Valley people on the other. That’s the biggest difference between the two groups right there, and may be significant, with respect to the caste system and perhaps more. But my own pet theory is that West and East were mostly playing out a dialectic of ideas, that likely dates back to 4000-3000BCE around lively campfires on high steppes and with spirited discussions.

    In this theory that dialectic is still being played out today, albeit in more ways than could ever have been imagined in the years BCE. The important thing is to not become a slave to your passions, though, even when you enjoy them, or when they cause you suffering. I’m reminded of Kramer’s statement to the ‘Soup Nazi’ in the old Seinfeld TV show: “You suffer for your art.” Touche’. Freedom FROM is the important thing in life after all, even more than freedom TO. Does it really matter whether you get the espresso or tamarind flavored ice cream today? Enjoy… 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 7:15 am on March 3, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhist Karma and the Middle Path to Salvation   

    You want good karma? Help a beggar to eat. That’s good karma. Because karma literally means ‘acts’ or ‘actions’, though it is often used almost synonymously with the English word ‘fate,’ as though it were all about some sort of predestination. But no, that’s a derivative meaning which may or may not always apply. The most important thing is right actions, or samma kammanta, as specified in the Eightfold Path that concludes the Four Noble Truths of Buddhism. 

    And that’s the important thing, to perform good acts, the other steps along the path, not unlike the Ten Commandments of Christianity, including right speech, right livelihood, and, of course, the basics: do not kill, do not steal, and for god’s sake don’t mess with your neighbor’s partner! Is nothing sacred? And if the Christians like to phrase that as ‘thou shalt not covet,’ then the Sanskrit is not so much different. They’re related languages and people, after all, and the Buddha puts ‘craving’ up there as the main cause of suffering. 

    But where East and West might truly differ, though, is in the speed and willingness to act. Because if we in the West see our active ‘go go go’ lifestyles as a normal and predictable outcome of our sojourn upon this planet, I can assure you that not everyone sees life and the world that way, least of all the rishis for which India is so famous, not to mention the pandits, gurus, swamis, and acharyas. And so, there’s a hidden message for them here also: Do something! After all, you can’t sit in a cave all your life, can you? Can you? 

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 9:19 am on February 26, 2023 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , ,   

    Buddhism and the Case for a Monkhood… 

    Some people think that there is something mystical or magical about monks chanting, in this case the Buddhist scriptures. But really it started as a way to memorize sutras that were not written for 500 years. And this is interesting in a few different ways and for a few different reasons. Firstly, it speaks to the issue of whether the Buddha actually said the things that are attributed to him. After all, if it wasn’t initially written, then how can we be sure? To which I would quickly add: even if it were written, how could you be sure that the Buddha actually said it? Ever heard of ‘fake news’? 

    The fact is that, given the times and the circumstances, memorization was a perfectly acceptable way of recording documents, which is the ultimate goal, after all, since nothing was being prepared for print, only some poorly defined remote abstract history, and of which only time itself would later determine the parameters. And if memorization is acceptable, or even superior, to easily stainable documents, then certainly a large group of literate and disciplined monks would be the perfect way to do it, meeting regularly to iron out any differences in the accurate transmission of such important information. 

    Secondly, it shows that not only were monks charged with a task of utmost importance, but that it was rigorous and highly demanding, thus giving the lie to the idea that monks were always intended to be ‘kept’ as pure and pristine specimens, virgins to the world and unashamed of it. No, they had a job. And lastly, it speaks to the notion of whether the Buddha himself even existed in this life in this world. Conspiracy theorists love nothing so much as to recreate history to their predilections and post-election dictates. 

    But, obviously, if monks have been chanting the same words in an unbroken line of descent from the original 2500 years ago, then that is proof, in and of itself. Yes, there were some breaks here and there, but those were rigorously mitigated, such that though Thailand received the original dharma from Sri Lanka, when things went awry there, the renaissance dharma went back to Thailand to make sure that they had it right. This is serious stuff.  

    But I like the sound of monks chanting, also, and even credit the sound of that on my ears in Mongolia in 2013 as an impetus to my impending initiative towards Buddhism. While listening, it felt like something Matrix-like moved, and ultimately that would be me. Still there is a larger issue of why writing was eschewed for so long when it was obviously the wave of the future, but that probably says more about India itself than Buddhism. Conservatism is not always a bad thing in uncertain times. Buddhism was all about discipline and training long before anything else, so more like kung fu than koans… 

     
    • quantumpreceptor's avatar

      quantumpreceptor 12:42 pm on February 28, 2023 Permalink | Reply

      Well said Hardy. Being a monk is not easy now was mit easy then and will not be in the future. Memorizing the teachings is a gift that when passed on only expands the blessing. I love your writing keep it up!

      QP

    • hardie karges's avatar

      hardie karges 8:15 pm on February 28, 2023 Permalink | Reply

      Thank you!

    • gederedita's avatar

      gederedita 12:08 am on March 2, 2023 Permalink | Reply

      I just know this temple from this blog. Iseen from the film but i dont know di temple located. I am lucky to find your blog, Hardie karges.

      • hardie karges's avatar

        hardie karges 5:33 am on March 2, 2023 Permalink | Reply

        This temple is in Bhutan, near the town of Paro. It’s usually called the ‘Tiger’s Nest.’ Thanks for your comment.

← Older posts

Newer posts →

c
Compose new post
j
Next post/Next comment
k
Previous post/Previous comment
r
Reply
e
Edit
o
Show/Hide comments
t
Go to top
l
Go to login
h
Show/Hide help
shift + esc
Cancel