The Paralympics

 

Going through it at the moment. I have been watching quite a bit of the Paralympics and have found some of the contests and races a great tribute to the human race, of adversity being overcome.

One swimming race, I said to my partner just how much spray one guy was kicking up, his legs thrashing away! He certainly never came first, but when he stood up at the finish he had no arms. So, a "winner". (I say "he" but sometimes the short clip they show, and what with wearing a cap, not always sure)

And the comradeship and support they give to each other. After so many races, often close finishes, winner and loser so often hug each other with genuine depth and emotion - obviously, through their very own struggles against adversity they feel a deep empathy for other contestants, no matter what country they are from.

Last night I watched the ladies 100 metres final, eight finalists. Netherlands, 1st, 2nd and third. A clean sweep. Various disabilities on display and I'd estimate that I would have come in 9th! But hey, I'm 75 - that's my excuse! The gold medalist, a lovely looking girl in her twenties, obviously overjoyed at her success, but never forgetting all the other runners. She had suffered some problem, I think in her teens, where poor circulation had effected her extremities, hands and feet. First one leg amputated, then later a second - at different levels. Then, sadly, many of her fingers.

Tulips from Amsterdam!

What can you say? No words can truly express the emotions that girl has been through, and to try to understand the sheer grit and determination that led her to an Olympic Gold is beyond me. All I could do was look on in admiration and wonder. What a triumph over adversity, and I would hazard a guess that family support, and the support of friends, played a huge part.

So there. What can I say? Pointless, futile, to ask myself just why I spend so much time in dread and anxiety - with all my limbs, a loving wife, a nice home, lovely daughter and two beautiful grandchildren (just wish that they could stop treading Blu Tack into our carpet...) and virtually no financial worries. That said, who can understand the mind? Though we share so much in our common humanity , we are each particular individuals, each given our own struggles. Who can truly understand?

Well, that is it. Once more I have tapped this out while sipping a coffee in McDonalds, never sure exactly what I am going to say until I have said it.

All the best to you all

May true Dharma continue
No blame. Be kind. Love everything

Anyone for Psychiatry?

 

Just to add my own thoughts, as I'm once again in McDonalds where I tend to ramble and waffle, which I find therapeutic for myself (if not for others......)

As far as looking towards the "ancient wisdom", rather than psychiatry, a good guide is Karen Armstrong. Sadly today, many associate religion purely with what I would see as Fundamentalism, i.e. belief systems rather that Faith systems.

Here is Karen Armstrong on revelation:-

"There is much to be learned from older ways of thinking about religion. We have seen that far from regarding revelation as static, fixed and unchanging, Jews, Christians and Muslims all knew that revealed truth was symbolic, that scripture could not be interpreted literally, and that sacred texts had multiple meaning and could lead to entirely fresh insights. Revelation was not an event that had happened once in the distant past, but was an ongoing, creative process that required human ingenuity. They understood that revelation did not provide us with infallible information about the divine, because this would always remain beyond our ken."

Ms Armstrong is not making this up! She provides deep analysis and relates this to the long history of all our world's religions. The key is "creative process", this for anyone seeking some degree of insight into the human condition, their own condition, rather than simply learning some creedal formula by rote.

Psychiatry itself is a very mixed field. My actual knowledge is limited, but I have followed more the leanings of Carl Jung, who split from Freud very early on. He saw Freud's ideas as basically reductionist. Jung was more into psyche and soul, the universal unconscious - which itself was a way of bringing in the ancient wisdom, the universal, yet applied to himself/ourselves as unique individuals. Jung spoke of the "spirit of the age" (the conditioning we soak up and breathe in purely by being born in a particular time and place and virtually assume before we actually begin to think for ourselves) and contrasted it with the "spirit of the depths" which we have to seek* and explore for ourselves.

(*I tend to think that "it" seeks us, but that is me)

I lean more towards the "east" and Buddhism (the Dharma) and have found that a lot of western seekers decry "faith" (as virtually "belief"), this possibly because many are on the run from a lot of Western religion, which has been rejected - possibly as factually unbelievable.

Yet going to the heart of the Dharma, no one there is afraid of the word "faith", and informed commentators insist that zazen meditation, for instance "cannot be fully understood apart from consideration of faith.” Dogen, the great zen master, spoke constantly of Faith. Trust. In reality.

Again, this from "Visions of Awakening, Time and Space" by Taigen Dan Leighton:-

"Contrary to present conventions, Zen Buddhism developed and cannot be fully understood outside of a worldview that sees reality as a vital, ephemeral agent of awareness and healing."

I have heard many say "I believe there is a reason for everything" and I see faith, trust, that "all things" work towards the restoration and reconciliation of "all things", is the heart of all genuine spirituality; more a letting go of our preconceptions rather than any clinging to belief.

Yet it is ALL things - both what we see as good and what we see as bad, and our experiences also, good AND bad.

"Flowers fade even though we love them, weeds grow even though we dislike them" 

(Dogen, from his "Genjokoan", the actualisation of Reality)

But what are flowers and what are weeds? Can we ever know? Perhaps with hindsight!

Sadly, still I grasp the flowers! Faith is thus lacking, but I stumble on.

Anyway, I have rambled on a bit. I am having a bit of a rough time mental health wise, good times come and go. I wish you all well.

May true Dharma continue.
No blame. Be kind. Love everything.

Just to finish:-

"In the old city
at the head of Grafton Street
a busker plays his fiddle.
First Brahms, then Bach
and a little Paganini for fun.
Fingers run up and down strings.
Is it the vibrating air,
his skill, or the old melodies
that bring tears to my eyes?
Tell me, I need to know."

(A modern response - Terrance Keenan - to an ancient Koan found in "The Blue Cliff Record" - Case 2, "The Real Way is Not Difficult")

When Summer Comes

 Hope is a constant - hopefully. There are so many in our world who hold opinions and beliefs at variance with our own. Is there any point in arguing? As has been said, you cannot argue someone out of a position that they were not argued into. Something other than strict logic is at work. At work in all of us. 

My own way of seeing things is that fundamentally we are all in the same boat, driven by winds beyond logic and conscious decision making. No one is of another "type" fundamentally, though we are all unique. 

As I see it, we must see this deeply before we seek for differentiation between ourselves and others. Which I also see as the nature of Reality-as-is, which is unity and "one" before differentiation. 

Anyway, I ramble. But the main objection I have to many - in Religion or anything else - is the insistence upon division, not just now, but eternally. "Them" and "us" forever. The saved and the lost, the sheep and the goats. Sadly, this outlook is projected upon "God" or whatever - whereas I would see Reality-as-is as always "working" towards "restoration" and "reconciliation". The "working" of wu wei, effortlessness - when logic subsides and the love that "has no why" can arise. 

Elvis Costello - holding his breath?

 Maybe a chance to quote here my latest love, the lyrics of Elvis Costello. I like these, from "When Summer Comes":-

But as every day still succeeds the darkest moments we have known
When seasons turn
Springtime colours will return
And as the first pale flowers of the lengthening hours
Seem to brighten the twilight and that melancholy cloak
Then a fresh perfume just seems to burst from each bloom
Until the green shoots through each day
As it arrives in every shade of hope
When summer comes
There will be a dream of peace
And a breath that I've held so long that I can barely release
Then perhaps I may even find a room somewhere
Just a place I can still speak to you

 

Good stuff....."a breath that I have held so long that I can barely release"

Accepting our mortality

I have heard it said that "existence just is" and that we should "accept our mortality".

Existence certainly just "is" but what it "is" is the question. Myself, I tend to think that once we settle upon a final answer, reach a conclusion, then we are as good as dead. 

 "Our Mortality" can be such an answer, a conclusion, certainly today when such is the "spirit of the age", breathed in the air around us - with all its implications. "When you are dead you are dead" and all that's left is "tales told by idiots, signifying nothing." Making the most of nihilism. Sorry, saying this is by no means a " judgement" or an "accusation" against anyone,  just  the thoughts of my own mind. 

But to me "embracing our mortality" are only words, but the words are weighted with assumptions. The assumptions then create our very own axioms....

 

That girls are raped, that two boys knife a third,
   Were axioms to him, who'd never heard
Of any world where promises were kept,
Or one could weep because another wept.

(W H Auden)

 

.......or others.....but whatever our axioms are, we begin to solidify as "selves", set in our ways, our anticipations, and finally the world simply comes back to us as echoes. 

 

Conveying oneself toward all things to carry out practice-enlightenment is delusion. All things coming and carrying out practice-enlightenment through the self is realization. (Dogen)

 

How do we allow the world to come to us, without our imprint upon it? Is it possible?

 

Why is their Something rather than Nothing? What is our very own Cosmology......which introduces a passage from "Zen Cosmology" by Dan Berringer:-

 

Affirmation of God does not require projection of a macro-substance, an impregnable identity, a secure foundation, to which one must cling, and which constricts the freedom of the spirit. The Buddhist deconstruction of such a God could be a service to biblical faith, overcoming a God who is substance for a God who is Spirit, and who is thus more, not less real.

Our cosmology functions as the very foundation of our conduct. We think, speak, and act in the world in accordance with what our understanding of the world is. The more our view of reality diverges from the way reality actually is, the more unreliable our thoughts, words, and deeds in reality will be. One does not need to be a scientist to recognize we would do well to establish a more reliable cosmology – and sooner rather than later.

Later on, Berringer writes:-

......as Zen contends, knowledge (epistemology) and existence (ontology) are not two different things – our ‘cosmology’ is not simply how we see the universe it is how the universe is actualized. The significance of this point is succinctly illustrated in the following observation by Hee-Jin Kim concerning Dogen’s (hence Zen’s) view of the unity of knowledge and reality: "To Dogen, mind was at once knowledge and reality, at once the knowing subject and the known object, yet it transcended them both at the same time. In this nondual conception of mind, what one knew was what one was—and ontology, epistemology, and soteriology were inseparably united."

 

The point is, such is not fixed. It is always "Now" but Now is always on the move and can never be finally captured. At least, not by words. 

What is the difference between saying that "meaning" is inherent in Reality but such meaning is unique to each, ongoing, not fixed - and saying that there is no meaning except what each unique being chooses to believe and live? Is there any difference? I tend to think that there is, but my thoughts lack clarity on the issue. 

But I am a good little Buddhist, and seek the "heartwood of the Dharma":-

So this holy life.....does not have gain, honour, and renown for its benefit, or the attainment of virtue for its benefit, or the attainment of concentration for its benefit, or knowledge and vision for its benefit. But it is this unshakeable deliverance of mind that is the goal of this holy life, its heartwood, and its end.

 

Anyway, having questioned the word "mortality" and its possible implications, I am not sneaking immortality in by the back door - in fact I'm not sneaking anything in. No conclusions. Which I can trace to the so called "Silence of the Buddha" on all metaphysical questions - any conclusion, belief, answer, is inimicable to the Holy Life , the road to the end of suffering.

There is a Biblical Proverb:- "Those who answer a thing before they hear it, it is a shame and a folly unto them."

What is it to truly "hear" a thing? Is there a "thing" to be heard once and for all and the job is done, and we wait for our eternal reward when we have said "Yes"? Or is what is to be heard constantly on the move, yet with a direction toward Buddha (as Dogen claimed). The Circle of the Way. 

Well, my rambling has taken up a half hour or so while I drink my coffee.

Positive nihilism

Will Durant

 Recently I downloaded one of the volumes of Will Durant's "History of Civilization", the volume on the Reformation. It was only 99p, cheaper than a McDonalds coffee! Quite a bargain. 

Anyway, it begins:-

Religion is the last subject that the intellect begins to understand. In our youth we may have resented, with proud superiority, its cherished incredibilities; in our less confident years we marvel at its prosperous survival in a secular and scientific age, its patient resurrections after whatever deadly blows by Epicurus, or Lucretius, or Lucian, or Machiavelli, or Hume, or Voltaire.

What are the secrets of this resilience?

The wisest sage would need the perspective of a hundred lives to answer adequately. He might begin by recognizing that even in the heyday of science there are innumerable phenomena for which no explanation seems forthcoming in terms of natural cause, quantitative measurement, and necessary effect.

 

A wise sage

Well, I'm hardly the "wisest sage" (needing paroxetine to even cope) so I can't really answer the question. 

 

On the same theme, Erwin Schrodinger - of the both dead and alive cat story - has said:-

Science cannot tell us a word about why music delights us, or why and how an old song can move us to tears.

 

This made me think of a "case" (or zen koan) in the Blue Cliff Record - case two. Which goes:-

 

Joshu spoke to the assembly, saying, “The real Way is not difficult. Just avoid choices and becoming attached. A single word can induce choice or attachment. A single word can bring clarity. I do not have that clarity.” A monk asked, “If you do not have that clarity, what do you appreciate?” Joshu replied, “I do not know that either.” “If you don’t know, how can you say you don’t have that clarity?” Joshu replied, “Asking the question was good enough. Now go.” 

 

Well, whatever you make of that, one comment found on this goes:-

 

In the old city

at the head of Grafton Street

a busker plays his fiddle.

First Brahms, then Bach

and a little Paganini for fun.

Fingers run up and down strings.

Is it the vibrating air,

his skill, or the old melodies

that bring tears to my eyes?

Tell me, I need to know. 

 

Do we really "need to know"? Maybe we do need to try to understand, however futile the effort. 

The closest I get is the pre-eminence of Grace. The word covers multitudes - from the offer of a transcendent Deity that must be "accepted" to gain His approval, to the pure rest in the "nihilism" of Buddhist "emptiness" and "suchness", known in the West only as nihilism - belief in nothing. Multitudes - an unbroken seam, with all points in-between, the Circle of the Way.

"Love has no why" Meister Eckhart.

 

Anyway, it is my wedding anniversary today. 46 years! Which reminds me of the old joke, of the guy who says:-

 "I'm more in love now than on the day I first married..........the trouble is, my wife won't give me a divorce!"

Blooks - again!

 I've spoken before about my Blooks, a cross between a blog and a book, created on free Google blog space and printed off (after editing) in France by Blookup. 

 

My latest is "The Illustrated Notebooks of Dookie" (Volume II)

 

Rather than describe the contents again, here is the "Preamble" that opens the blook:-

 

One of my Blooks that I turn to more often than not is "The Illustrated Notebooks of Dookie". A pretty random collection of quotes and excerpts from all the books that pass through my life. 

My Notebooks are filling up again and therefore another volume of various odds and ends is called for. So this it it. 

Section headings will be as random as the quotes and excerpts,  as often the notes put into the various notebooks are pretty random themselves, resulting in a glorious jumble that will often make no sense as such - but that is the way I like it. Correspondences can follow in life itself, as lived and experienced. As John Keats once wrote:-

I have never yet been able to conceive how anything can be known for truth by consecutive reasoning.

Which - at least in my mind - is from the same family as Oscar Wilde's:-

Nothing that is worth knowing can be taught.

How do we learn, grow? Through life itself - the hidden ground of love that has no explanation. The love that has no Why. Only Faith is needed, which itself is a gift.

 

Such is the Preamble. As said, the various quotes are very random and as I was quite lax in keeping note of where they came from, many have no citations. Which brings to mind the thought of whether or not the source of the quote makes the words more - or less - likely of acceptance, or agreement; and whether or not it should. Maybe the answer for me is that it "should not, but it does". 

 

There are "Poetic Interludes" in the Blook, 5 in number, some of my favorite poetry. Here is one, by Philip Larkin, called "First Sight":-

Lambs that learn to walk in snow
When their bleating clouds the air
Meet a vast unwelcome, know
Nothing but a sunless glare.
Newly stumbling to and fro
All they find, outside the fold,
Is a wretched width of cold.

As they wait beside the ewe,
Her fleeces wetly caked, there lies
Hidden round them, waiting too,
Earth's immeasureable surprise.
They could not grasp it if they knew,
What so soon will wake and grow
Utterly unlike the snow.

Not really typical of Philip Larkin, who often wrote of darker themes. So much so that when I first read it the thought of an abattoirs popped into my mind regarding the "surprise" (utterly unlike the snow) But I'm fairly sure that such was not the surprise in Larkin's mind. 

Whatever, the poem this time has brought to mind another entry in the Blook, this from Picasso:-

 

Every child is an artist; the problem is staying an artist when you grow up.

 

......which itself suggests the verse from the Good Book, that "a little child shall lead them" (while the wise are sent empty away)

Talking of trees

 Sad sight this morning walking across a nearby Recreation Park into town. My very favorite tree, an ancient horse chestnut, was being "dismantled" - chopped down by the look of it. A dog walker I spoke to said that it was suspected that it was diseased. Obviously no one wants large branches snapping and falling upon the unwary! But a rather sad sight. Not exactly a tree hugger myself but often as I have crossed the Recreation Park I have admired that tree, throughout all the seasons - and yes, just lately I have reached and touched its ancient bark and felt "one with the earth" from which it has grown, helping my mental health issues. 

Anyway, maybe a chance to share a much loved poem....

Binsey Poplars

BY GERARD MANLEY HOPKINS

(felled 1879)

My aspens dear, whose airy cages quelled,

  Quelled or quenched in leaves the leaping sun,

  All felled, felled, are all felled;

    Of a fresh and following folded rank

                Not spared, not one

                That dandled a sandalled

         Shadow that swam or sank

On meadow & river & wind-wandering weed-winding bank.

        

  O if we but knew what we do

         When we delve or hew —

     Hack and rack the growing green!

          Since country is so tender

     To touch, her being só slender,

     That, like this sleek and seeing ball

     But a prick will make no eye at all,

     Where we, even where we mean

                 To mend her we end her,

            When we hew or delve:

After-comers cannot guess the beauty been.

  Ten or twelve, only ten or twelve

     Strokes of havoc unselve

           The sweet especial scene,

     Rural scene, a rural scene,

     Sweet especial rural scene.

Obviously my favorite tree is not being felled for so called "progress" but I do love that poem and the flow of the words.

All the best to you all - and try to truly SEE the beauty that is around us - look up now and again from the mobile phone.