Tagged: meditation Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 3:59 am on November 17, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , meditation, ,   

    Buddhism on the Half Shell: Dharma without Dogma 

    Beware stir-fried spirituality, vague ideas tossed in a pan and stirred ‘til piping hot. Buddhism is an open doctrine, true, but it needs a compass. And the Eightfold Path is that compass, of course, the prime phenomena of our lives listed and pointed in the direction of ‘rightness’, i.e. the correct and appropriate versions of the main foundations of our lives: thought, intent, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness, and concentration. If non-duality can fit into that simple list, then fine; it is welcome. If not, then reshuffle your deck to find your place in lives where things actually exist and thoughts actually occur.

    For better or worse, Buddhism must live with the titles of its popular books, regardless of whether those actually describe the philosophy accurately or not. So, we must spend time explaining why ‘Buddhism is True’, and why there are a ‘Buddha and the Badass’ and how we can have a ‘Universe in a Single Atom’, whether any of that has anything to do with Buddhism or not. For the most part, those titles are just the consumeristic fantasies of book publishers, and the ideas inside their covers have little or nothing in common with them.

    But that’s a compromise we make. The real problem occurs when the ideas themselves get breaded and fried in almost total opposition to the original concept. So New Age Buddhists remind you to love yourself without bothering to explain, or even acknowledge, that we have no intrinsic Self, or even selves. Then they’ll tell you that our thoughts are not our own, while giving no clue as to where they actually come from, apparently just floating around, soul-like looking for a body to inhabit. But these are only minor inconveniences. The dharma can easily transcend most of that. I persevere.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:36 am on October 27, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , asceticism, , , , , , , , , , , , meditation, Padmasambhava, , , , Upanishads, ,   

    Buddhism is the Middle Path between Jainism and Brahmanism… 

    Brahmanism is what we now call ‘Hinduism’, but that term didn’t really exist way back when, only recently applied by the Brits to the plethora of sects and devotions which now constitute Hinduism. But it was in the midst of the Upanishad era at the time of the Buddha, which would redefine the previously Indra-based fire rituals which had reigned during the Vedic times. And with the advent of the new Upanishadic orientation, the resulting resemblance to Buddhism was profound—but still distinct.

    And so was Jainism distinct from both of them, at the same time that it shares much with them. But remember, that the ‘Hinduism’ that the Jain reacted to in the 6th century BCE is not the same as modern Hinduism, either, and that is partly because of this same three-way dialogue. Jainism was largely a reaction against the Brahmanists’ fire sacrifices, they being extreme nonviolent vegetarians. But many modern Hindus are also vegetarians, with Buddhists characteristically somewhere ‘in between.’

    That’s the Middle Path, specifically between the extreme asceticism of the Jains and the lavish rituals of the ‘Hindus’, but also between the many gods of Hinduism and the total lack of them in Jainism. Technically Buddhists don’t really have them, either, but, you know… Later versions of Buddhism were not so strict about that, such as the Tibetan version of Vajrayana, which came direct from India sometime after the 5th century and attested by Padmasambhava in the 8th century.

    But both Jains and Hindus were crazy about souls, Jains finding them everywhere and Hindus finding them cosmic, Atman, preferably in union with the cosmic dharma principle Brahman. But Buddhism found little of value in any of that, and so chose non-self anatta. So, they all evolved into different sects with different orientations, and we generally all get along nicely. The main difference is that Hinduism tilted toward a nationalism which international Buddhism could never assimilate. And Jains, ‘winners’ in Sanskrit, were ultimately the losers.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 3:40 am on October 13, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , meditation, , , ,   

    Buddhism 101: Pain is Our Birthright… 

    Pain is our connection to the realm of sentient being. We are all equal in this regard. But we have a path, thankfully. This refers to the First Noble Truth, of course, something like ‘There is suffering.’ Period. Full stop. That’s the foundational thesis of Buddhism, which all further dissertations struggle to assimilate, what with its apparent pessimism, which only gets worse (before it gets better). ‘Birth is suffering, aging is suffering, sickness is suffering, dissociation from the loved is suffering, not to get what one wants is suffering.’ Yeow. Yes, life’s a real sh*t-show at times. What to do?

    Oh, sure, the PhD’s try to explain it all away by saying that ‘suffering’ can mean ‘dissatisfaction’, ‘stress’, or maybe even ‘bummer’, but the result is the same: it’s not a good look, not when everybody else is bragging about their seven flavors of bliss and their multiple stairways to heaven. But that’s what the Buddha said, and that’s what he meant. But I think that he also meant that’s our connection to the world and each other. Otherwise, how would we even really know that we’re really alive? Pleasure is fleeting.

    But pain is real. And a large part of it is caused by the simple fact of our oh-so-human cravings. Bingo. There’s a path for that, and it will keep us humble in its universality. Because isn’t the underlying cause of all craving, desire, lust, and greed, our selfish assertion that we are something special and deserving of whatever we can get? Haha. Gotcha. Because we are but a bundle of causes and conditions that predictably lead to the defilements which define us: hatred, greed, anger, and those oh-so-pesky cravings. The path outta there is as simple as the decade-old Franz Ferdinand song which seconded that emotion: “Right Thoughts, Right Words, Right Action.” Simple, no? It works. Try it.

     
    • jmoran66's avatar

      jmoran66 4:25 am on October 13, 2024 Permalink | Reply

      I think you, as they say, nailed it here. There’s nothing to add.

    • hardie karges's avatar

      hardie karges 4:59 pm on October 13, 2024 Permalink | Reply

      Thank you for your comments.

  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:25 am on October 6, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , meditation, , , , , , , theft   

    Buddhism in the Bardo Realms: You Are Never Alone 

    Buddhism in Bhutan

    The existential conundrum of our lives is that we are never alone, nor can we be, nor would we likely ever want to be, even if we could. Think of it this way: Suppose you want to enjoy yourself by yourself or just take a little swim. So, you walk down to the beach, find a nice little spot, and proceed to disrobe and jump right in. There’s only one problem: when you come back, you don’t know if your stuff will still be there or not—bummer. This is what many a happy tourist deals with every day.

    Oh, sure, there are ways to mitigate the circumstances. You can go with a friend, but that friend really can’t jump right in, now, either, can they? No, they can’t, because then any potential plunderer has just doubled his payoff. Even if you have a designated watcher for a larger group, that designee still doesn’t get to have his fun (and you still must trust him not to run). So, maybe hire a professional designee? Ditto. Or you could lock it in a box, if it’s a public space with such amenities, but that would probably preclude a dip in the buff, boo hoo. And even then, would you just wrap the key around your little finger?

    Or, you could just leave the key in your pocketed swim suit, but then, why not just leave your stuff in your room, and saunter to the beach semi-nude and flip-flop friendly, because, after all, nobody will steal a pair of flip-flops, or a towel, now, will they? Or would you even care if they did? And your room is safe, right? But what about the maid? Or you could just drive, and lock everything in the trunk, if you’re American, or the boot, if you’re a Brit, but by this time you’re making quite a big show of it, so maybe just call the whole thing off?

    This is the existential conundrum: that our fates are so intertwined, that it doesn’t leave a lot of time, or space, for accidents or circumstance. So, what is the solution? In a more peaceful time, in a more peaceful world, I have it on good authority that people left their houses unlocked with no ill repercussions, and that is the way that it should be. But that was in a world less crowded than today. And many people take it as their supreme inalienable right to reproduce without limit. So, now we live in a world of eight billion with no end in sight. And there’s no place to hide. So, we must learn to live in peace. And Buddhism is nothing, if not a religion of peace.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 2:56 pm on September 22, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , meditation, , , , , ,   

    Buddhism 101: There are no Winners or Losers…  

    There are no winners or losers. There are only players and non-players. Either one is fine, but if you play, then play well. The concept of winning and losing is obviously a binary circumstance, as are players vs. non-players or even East vs. West. But sometimes binary terms are effective in conveying a message, even if they are often ineffective in organizing your life. Because, we Buddhists have long been of the opinion that the Middle Path is the best guide to living your life with or without any scientific proof. 

    But the concept of winning vs losing is especially offensive, as it suggests that some people are simply better than others, regardless of any merit displayed or accrued in the process of playing the game, which suggests racism, if not just arrogance or hubris. None of that has ever been proven, of course, and my gut hunch is exactly the opposite: the more mixed the race the more superior, but again that’s hard to prove or disprove. 

    The issue of players vs non-players is more well-defined, though, in that participation is an act of will and not an accident of birth. So, when comparing the aggressive Abrahamic traditions vs the renunciative dharma traditions, it is possible to draw some conclusions, even if they are still subject to interpretations and circumstances. Because, while India and China long ago embraced renunciative dharma and taoist traditions, their cultures are anything but. And while the abrahamic West is known for its aggressive colonialism, some of the world’s finest most peaceful cities and cultures are to be found there today. 

    So, it’s a mixed bag at best, and I myself qualify as a proponent of renunciation only in the sense that too much wrong action has already been done, and so its opposite is now often preferable. But I don’t think that humans should be passive and that’s not how I live my life. So, my conception of Buddhism is somewhat like Marx’s communism, something appropriate after the previous partial phases have occurred, i.e. its time has come. At an earlier time, something else was possibly more appropriate, but not now. So, when someone insults you or feeds bait your ego, do nothing–quickly.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:56 am on September 15, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , meditation   

    Buddhism in the Bardo Realms: Equanimity is Key…  

    Revenge is not sweet. Justice should be blind. Equanimity should prevail. This is a common mental trap, that somehow, we must ‘get even’, even when such is difficult or impossible to accomplish. Still, it’s a psychological juggernaut, somehow engrained in consciousness, that there is a balance beam of tit-for-tat justice, that somehow must be fulfilled or even expanded upon, as if something could be made ‘more right’ by applying penalties to deter future misbehavior, ‘punitive damages’ the operative concept.  

    And this is the basis of civil justice systems, of course, and that’s all well and good, but need not apply to your personal life. Because what’s good for Caesar is not necessarily best for you. The problem is that it’s a never-ending cycle which will never be at peace, just like old-time feuds between the Hatfields and McCoys. When the world was sparsely populated, it was easy just to leave and go elsewhere, but it’s crowded everywhere now. The Muslims made a positive step in limiting ‘punitive damages,’ so that ‘eye for an eye’ means just an eye for an eye, and no more. 

    But I think we Buddhists can go a step farther, so that not only is punishment not necessary, but neither is ‘getting even,’ even on a personal level. The only ‘evenness’ that we should be concerned with is evenness of mind, all the time, and that’s equanimity. There’s never any reason to get all excited, much less vengeful. If punishment is necessary to deter future crime in society, then maybe simple forbearance is the key to bring peace to the self and family. To just ‘let it go’ often works wonders.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 8:16 am on September 7, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , , meditation, , , , , ,   

    Buddhism: It’s a Process… 

    I am not the same person as yesterday, and I will be a different person tomorrow. I am not DNA code. I am skandhas, anatta, annicca, that is: I am a ‘heap’ of causes and conditions, nothing permanent, always changing. So don’t get too attached to yourself or to anyone else, because tomorrow offers no guarantees. Oh, and one more thing: there’s no soul, at least nothing like what the Christians or Hindus have in mind, eternal and/or cosmic, though Buddhism usually allows for at least a limited sort of rebirth.

    After all, we don’t want to get too dreary now, do we? Certainly not. But the principles listed here are foundational to Buddhism. And so, life and the world are at least somewhat illusory, at least in their most obvious manifestations as part of the visual and sensory feast that constitute our world of perceptions. But there is another principle that is even more important to some of us as Buddhists, and that’s the concept of the Middle path, which can be applied to almost anything, including itself, that hypothetical middle path which defines Buddhism by its very lack of definition.

    And such is the history of Buddhism, as it evolves almost dialectically, from thesis to antithesis to synthesis, only to start the process all over again. It is in that view that Buddhism emerged in the first place, as the middle path between the excesses of Hinduism and the extreme renunciation of Jainism. And it is that process which continues today, as Mahayana offers an alternative to the original Theravada, and to which Vajrayana and Zen start the process all over again. Now the original Theravada Buddhism would like to remake itself as Vipassana: meditation, that is, first and foremost. I like that idea.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 7:41 am on August 31, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , innocence, meditation, , ,   

    Buddhism in the Balance: Right Thoughts, Right Action 

    The wisest person has the mind of a child: always open, always learning. Of course, there are also many types of wisdom that accrue with age, so the perfect balance is just that: a perfect balance. And that’s the hardest part, of course, walking that fine line between two opposite extremes, in order to find that sweet spot that ultimately transcends them both. But that’s what Buddhism is all about, first and foremost, in its highest mode of being, the Middle Path, central to its foundation.

    Meditation is the paradigm of that open child-like mind, to the point that even thoughts should be scared to show their silly faces there, begging for attention and generally making a nuisance of themselves. But I’m being generous on the subject of thoughts and thinking. Many Buddhists, but especially ‘non-dualists’, reject all thought as being of little use and no more than a distraction. But the Buddha promoted ‘right thought’, i.e. good thoughts, and I totally agree with that.

    It’s disturbing that many ‘spiritual’ people are so ready to ‘throw out the baby with the bathwater,’ so to speak, assuming that if our evil thoughts cause so many problems, then all thoughts must be evil. Nothing could be further from the truth, of course. Thoughts have revolutionized the course of human history and propelled us into an era largely peaceful and progressive, at least compared to what came before. You don’t have to study much history before you realize that no matter how bad things are now, they’ve been much worse before. Walk that fine line between innocence and experience for the highest wisdom.   

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:23 am on August 23, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , meditation, , , solitary confinement, , ,   

    Buddhism Loves a Sangha, but Loves Solitude, too… 

    Western psychology thinks solitary confinement is torture. Buddhism thinks it’s pretty nice—sometimes. Go figure. Because that’s exactly what meditation is, is it not? That and concentration, yes, exactly, at least in meditation’s original purest form, which is maintained to this day in Theravada Buddhism, so important there that it’s often called Vipassana by its association. And it’s true. I couldn’t believe it the first time I did a retreat in a Thai forest temple, laymen silent unflinching for hours, monks even longer.

    I haven’t witnessed that degree of meditative absorption in the Tibetan or Chinese temples where I have experience and knowledge, but it might certainly exist there. And Zen might be another level of attainment, since the name derives from dhyana, after all. All of which goes to make a distinction with the typical Western ‘guided’ meditation, which, whatever its benefits, I simply wouldn’t consider true meditation, maybe more like a ‘dharma talk’ if done well. But if it’s not a Buddhist meditation group, then it might not be a Buddhist talk. Hindus are still trying to reclaim Buddhism as their own.

    But the point is that, while solitude might be torture for some, it doesn’t have to be. And it’s more likely to be, I think, if you’re accustomed to living your life in crowds and constant confusion. For someone raised on a farm out in the countryside, what’s a little solitary confinement? Sounds like Sunday afternoon. Solitude can and should be something good, healthy, and productive. If they don’t teach meditation in prisons, then they certainly should. It just might save somebody’s life sometime.

     
  • Unknown's avatar

    hardie karges 4:34 am on August 18, 2024 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , meditation, Rumi, , Sufi   

    Buddhism in the Balance: Conciliation, not Confrontation… 

    Conciliation seems to be a prime corollary of Buddhism, something like Christian forgiveness, but without all the weeping and wailing. And I’m not trying to be cute, but seriously, let it go, ‘it’ being that reactive stance to any blow to ego, whether full frontal or slight glance, equal in their danger to provoke chain reactions and nonstop confrontation, which should be the last thing that anybody would really want, and the first thing to avoid. In other words, don’t take the bait.

    Now, I don’t know if we’re just an argumentative species, or it’s a western thing, but the upshot of the modern Social Media (SM?) phase of world history seems to be that we’re a bunch of combative SOB’s. And, while Buddhism and the other Dharma religions are well-known for advocating the non-violence of ahimsa, I’m not sure but that maybe some damage might already be done by that time. So, I think the great Sufi poet Rumi had a much higher and better standard (yes, Buddhists often copy this):

    Before you speak, let your words pass through three gates: At the first gate, ask yourself, ‘Is it true?’ At the second gate ask, ‘Is it necessary?’ At the third gate ask, ‘Is it kind?’

    In other words, be better than the other one, the instigator, the troublemaker. Don’t respond in kind. You don’t have to respond at all. In many instances, that’s the best you can do, and there’s really nothing better than that. But it’s not always easy. And what if they’re standing right there and won’t let you just walk away? And wouldn’t you like to teach the instigator something about the results of his bad speech? Humor is another possibility but be careful. The laughter often works. Regardless, reconcile ASAP. Don’t hold grudges, or they will hold you.

     

← 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