A dense ramble

Seeking clarity for myself (if not for others!), I consistently return to the thought that prior to any diversification I need to rest in a unity, in One, in faith, in trust, in pure acceptance. This guarantees absolutely nothing but is the only ground, the firm ground of emptiness. 

Whether heading for the Pure Land or heading for hell, all is in Amida's hands. 

This is all in keeping with those in Zen who speak of the living unity of experience that precedes dichotomies of mind and body, subject and object. To arrive here involves for most the "examined life", one that calls us to the critical examination of all our preconceptions, each and every presumption given us, unasked, by our culture, upbringing, our unique time and place. I have found that this involves more a stripping away of ideas rather than any gradual accumulation - it seems to me that often the path of accumulation is a way of confirmation bias, a seeking for facts that support preconceived ideas, avoidance of genuine consideration of what counts against them. Stripping away however, the via negativa, the way of negation, is a way that is nevertheless supported by a complete trust in Reality itself, that sustains us no matter what. 

At this point I often reflect upon just how anyone even begins to enter any path, breaking away from convention, from their own preconceptions. I think now that what answer there is is found in the Mahayana insight of upaya, or expedient means. This suggests that this very earth, reality itself, brings forth fruit of itself, having a healing, natural power. Our earth,space itself, is always holding and offering the potential of awakening as part of its nature. As has been said by another, Zen Buddhism developed and cannot be fully understood outside of a worldview that sees reality itself as a vital, ephemeral agent of awareness and healing, recognising the liberative qualities of spatiality and temporality.

Each of us is unique, irreplaceable, and the dharma rain falls upon all equally, calling for an answer. 

Carl Jung once said that there is absolutely no truth that does not "spell salvation to one person and damnation to another.......there is no good that cannot produce evil and no evil that cannot produce good", which can be a frightening thought to the doctrinaire who preach an absolute truth needing to be accepted by all.

A case in point arises from reading about the understanding of certain philosophers/philosophical ideas where such ideas has led their proponents to "anguish", to mental breakdown, to the thought of being "condemned" to freedom. I speak of David Hume and his extreme Empiricism, who saw that the "self" was merely a succession of impressions and not substantial........of Sartre and his Existentialist anguish when realising that he has "no essence" then cries out in misery that he is "condemned to be free" and that "man is a useless passion". Well, maybe so. 

Yet the strange thing is that such insights and thoughts were the bread and butter of the Buddha, who saw such things - an unsubstantial self, of being without essence, of each moment being contingent, of the radical freedom of being (or non-being!) - as being a blessed release from suffering. What to make of such things? 

Well whatever we make of them, back now to what was stated near the beginning of this rather dense blog, of the living unity of experience that precedes dichotomies of mind and body, subject and object. My friend and mentor Thomas Merton had this to say in his essay "The New Consciousness" drawn from his book "Zen and the Birds of Appetite":-

  Meanwhile, let us remind ourselves that another, metaphysical, consciousness is still available to modern man. It starts not from the thinking and self-aware subject but from Being, ontologically seen to be beyond and prior to the subject-object division. Underlying the subjective experience of the individual self there is an immediate experience of Being. This is totally different from an experience of self-consciousness. It is completely nonobjective. It has in it none of the split and alienation that occurs when the subject becomes aware of itself as a quasi-object. The consciousness of Being (whether considered positively or negatively and apophatically as in Buddhism) is an immediate experience that goes beyond reflexive awareness. It is not “consciousness of” but pure consciousness, in which the subject as such “disappears.” 

Posterior to this immediate experience of a ground which transcends experience, emerges the subject with its self-awareness. But, as the Oriental religions and Christian mysticism have stressed, this self-aware subject is not final or absolute; it is a provisional self-construction which exists, for practical purposes, only in a sphere of relativity. Its existence has meaning in so far as it does not become fixated or centered upon itself as ultimate, learns to function not as its own center but “from God” and “for others.” The Christian term “from God” implies what the non-theistic religious philosophies conceive as a hypothetical Single Center of all beings, what T. S. Eliot called “the still point of the turning world,” but which Buddhism for example visualizes not as “point” but as “Void.” (And of course the Void is not visualized at all.)

In brief, this form of consciousness assumes a totally different kind of self-awareness from that of the Cartesian thinking-self which is its own justification and its own center. Here the individual is aware of himself as a self-to-be-dissolved in self-giving, in love, in “letting-go,” in ecstasy, in God—there are many ways of phrasing it.

The self is not its own center and does not orbit around itself; it is centered on God, the one center of all, which is “everywhere and nowhere,” in whom all are encountered, from whom all proceed. Thus from the very start this consciousness is disposed to encounter “the other” with whom it is already united anyway “in God.” 

The metaphysical intuition of Being is an intuition of a ground of openness, indeed of a kind of ontological openness and an infinite generosity which communicates itself to everything that is. “The good is diffusive of itself,” or “God is love.” Openness is not something to be acquired, but a radical gift that has been lost and must be recovered (though it is still in principle “there” in the roots of our created being). This is more or less metaphysical language, but there is also a non-metaphysical way of stating this. It does not consider God either as Immanent or as Transcendent but as grace and presence, hence neither as a “Center” imagined somewhere “out there” nor “within ourselves.” It encounters him not as Being but as Freedom and Love. I would say from the outset that the important thing is not to oppose this gracious and prophetic concept to the metaphysical and mystical idea of union with God, but to show where the two ideas really seek to express the same kind of consciousness or at least to approach it, in varying ways.

Rather long, yet to me, because it is expressed in basically western terms, offers clarity. 

Clarity, but let me pick up Merton's words that T.S.Eliot's "still point of the turning world" is visualised by the Buddhists not as "point", but as "void." But "Void" in any nihilistic sense? Merton knows better, being himself very familiar with the apophatic mystics of his own Christian Church. But the word "void" drives others into musings upon the nothingness of the "languid east" that seeks a "nihilistic return to nothingness" (as I have had occasion to read once), with the Buddha happily contemplating his navel for all eternity. That such is a misconception, simply the application of western logic dropped upon words and concepts of another order entirely - even another logic - is sometimes never given thought. Which in our times of Interfaith dialogue is rather sad and frankly, not excusable.

Perhaps, gradually, we of the West can acclimatise ourselves to "eastern" ways of seeing things. 

A simple contrast is that of "internal relations" as opposed to "external relations". Western logic, where A is A and B is B and never the twain shall meet (!) each "thing" exists independently and any relationship between "things" becomes a third factor. By contrast, in internal relations, the necessary third factor is that which overlaps, or interlinks, in fact the shared part of A and B. Such a contrast has obvious implications for the relationship between "knower" and "known",  subject and object. This leads, as far as Dogen's thought is concerned, to "we are that which we understand" while the internal model implies engagement and praxis in preference to observation and analysis. 

William Blake, though of the West, saw that we murder to dissect. Maybe, like all things, it is not necessarily a case of "either/or" but of "both/and", and each way is a part of being human.

However, in suggesting this, consideration should be given to the so called "argument by relegation" where opposite positions are treated not by refuting them, but by accepting them as true, but only true as a part of the full picture. One way of knowing is not to cast aside but rather the idea is  perhaps to live/know just which form of knowledge encompasses/enfolds the other. 

Moving on, an example  of misunderstanding, one which can lead to "nothingness" being decried and misunderstood, is in the translating of certain Buddhist philosophical texts. 

Nagarjuna, a prominent thinker of the Mahayana school of Buddhism, uses the sanskrit phrase "na vidyate" which is often translated as "does not exist" when in fact a true literal translation is "not seen" or "is not found". Thus the experiential nature of Nagarjuna's idiom is lost and transformed into a conclusion of thought. Translators also turn phrases meaning "are not evident" or "do not occur" into "do not exist." Nagarjuna in fact said "does not exist" (na asti) when he meant it, and therefore such a phrase should not be used more generally merely because it fits modern thought better, or worse, preconceptions. 

Myself, I think of my very last blog where the Japanese terms for "being" were mentioned - "having at hand" or "something that strikes the hand", this opposed to nothingness, meaning something like "present, but not to hand." Whatever, I ramble, and I doubt that many have reached this far in this dense blog. 

No matter. Myself, I find ever and ever greater clarity, even as Reality itself becomes ever more ineffable. 

"Faith seeking understanding".

Related Quotes:-

"There's a way out there, there's a way out somewhere, the rest would come, the other words, sooner or later, and the power to get there, and the way to get there, and pass out, and see the beauties of the skies, and see the stars again."

(Samuel Beckett, ninth monologue, "Texts for Nothing", as spoken by a tramp-like waif as he contemplates death) 

"....one unfortunate incident when a clergyman had responded to Oscar Wilde's complaint that his cell window gave no view of the sky with the pious observation, 'Let your mind dwell not on the clouds but on Him who is above the clouds', at which Wilde, losing his temper, had pushed him towards the door, shouting 'get out you damned fool'. 

(From "Oscar", a biography of Oscar Wilde)

"There is a trend away from Logos - the pure intellect that analyzes, judges and divides - to Eros, which relates and connects, and brings the realization of our interconnectedness and interdependence. 

(From "Carl Jung and Tibetan Buddhism")

"The Tao can only be shared, not divided"

Finally, from a work on William Blake......."Blake portrays a synthesis of Innocence and Experience that reclaims innocence, transcending the effects of disappointment, mistreatment, and betrayal. Blake scholars call this state 'Organised Innocence'. In Organised Innocence, we can feel the joy of 'Ha ha he!" even in the face of the darkness inherent in the human heart, and it cannot be subverted by further Experience."

 

  

Much ado about nothing

Lately I have, amongst other things - great and small - been delving into a few philosophical works on "nothingness". All much ado about nothing, but it does seem to be the battleground of much inter-faith dialogue these days. Perhaps there is a more appropriate word than battleground but maybe not. Again, given the lack of belief in anything much in our pop culture - apart from celebrity itself - any talk and debate on "nothingness" will obviously pass under the radar of many, and if heard of at all, be dismissed as academic and of no concern by those seeking to "live life to the full." 

Nothingness? How about a selfie!

I will now drift onto the subject of forgiveness which has also gained my attention for one reason or another. I'm sure there is a connection between "nothingness" and forgiveness (although it escapes me at the moment)  but this change of subject is in keeping with my rambles, so I shall continue. 

For me, I am sure that forgiveness, like all things, is simply a by-product of wisdom - wisdom defined as the mind/heart, thirsting for emancipation, seeing direct into the heart of reality. Trying to forgive because it is the right thing to do, this itself a belief, just disintegrates into the self-righteousness of the Pharisee. "I" have forgiven. Subject and object. Each distinct. 

William Blake, English mystic, poet and painter, saw the need not to dissect, and thus saw that mutual forgiveness of each vice opens the gates of paradise.

Jacob's Ladder (Detail) by William Blake

For me, Grace is the heart of Reality, the hidden ground of love, a love that "has no why". Grace is all things; mercy, relationship, diversity, wisdom and potential. Knowing we live by, in, and with grace, forgiveness flowers towards all others. In fact, often, ideally, no hurt or fault is even recognised.

Knowing deeply our own need for mercy is the ground of forgiveness towards others. Maybe we can try to grade ourselves according to some scale of wrongs, acts or thoughts, but as I see it this misses the heart of reality. Lack of forgiveness, a judgemental heart, witnesses to having not accepted ourselves. Pure acceptance is the catalyst of all potentials and becomes the necessary ground of any diversification which follows. Creating a scale of wrongs, all according to our own calculations, before pure acceptance, inevitably chains us to the world of birth and death. 

Trust the ground

Cherishing opinions, identifying with them, is a form of self justification; but when not "cherished" they can become appropriate in each unique moment, unclaimed yet participating in a truly life bestowing becoming. 

The dharma is for passing over, not for grasping. 

So it is terrible to read of those who condemn others, terrible for our own hearts to harbour hatred. This is simply to be out of synch with Reality.

Well, that's it really. Not sure exactly what nothingness has to do with this except for the faint suggestion that Meister Eckhart's "love has no why" somehow connects things in ways beyond conventional logic. 

Just to say that as far as I understand, to put the "eastern" idea of nothingness in direct opposition to the "western" idea of Being, is to go astray. "Nothingness" to a Western ear, is simply a term of negation, and in the religious sphere, invokes ideas of nihilism, this opposed to the positive ideas of "salvation" and heavenly cities and Kingdoms of God. In Japanese, however, there are various terms for negation.

For the Japanese the Western notion of "being"  is given another term, a term meaning "having at hand" or "manifest", something that "strikes the hand". Its opposite, nothingness, means something like "present, but not in hand." Thus, nothingness signifies a presence that is not anything identifiable, something there without being in any sense "manageable" like other things present to us in the world (thank you James Heisig for much of this)

Nothingness - calligraphy

For me, this seems to speak of a childlike acceptance, seeing everything as if for the first time without preconceptions, giving it no name, more experiencing each and every thing, maybe as if back in Eden before the naming of anything. 

And the end of all our exploring will be to "arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." 

A kind of "unknowing."

Related Quotes:- 

"O happy fault that merited such and so great a Redeemer"

(The "O Felix Culpa" of the Catholic Church)

"One must have the mind of winter

To regard the frost and the boughs

Of the  pine-trees crusted with snow;

And  have been cold a long time

To behold the junipers shagged with ice,

The spruces rough in the distant glitter

Of the January sun; and not to think

Of any misery in the sound of the wind,

In the sound of a few leaves,

Which is the sound of the land

Full of the same wind

That is blowing in the same bare place

For the listener, who listens in the snow,

And, nothing himself, beholds

Nothing that is not there and the nothing that is"

 ("The Snow Man", Wallace Stevens)

 "Ride your horse along the edge of the sword

Hide yourself in the middle of the flames

Blossoms of the fruit tree will bloom in the fire

The sun rises in the evening"

 (Zen Saying - quoted by Thomas Merton in his book "Zen and the Birds of Appetite")

"The birds don't know they have names"

(From the Journals of Thomas Merton)

Rambling more than usual

Bob Dylan shows great courage and perhaps sees the funny side

I have been reading a book that wends its way through various interviews given by Bob Dylan over the years. Some of the early ones, in the sixties, are pretty weird, with Dylan deliberately being obscure - or perhaps contemptuous would be a better word - treating the questions with ridicule, giving absurd answers; running away to the circus and suchlike. But he could be quite comical at times, as when one late night caller to a radio chat show said that he liked Dylan's songs a lot but thought Dylan  "could sing a bit better." Bob replied that he appreciated constructive criticism, and the host of the show quickly said that the caller showed "great courage" to speak so plainly direct to Bob. Dylan then said:- "It takes great courage to sing like I do". Quite funny. 

Amida manifests to an anxious heart

Anyway, that is just a preamble to nothing much in particular. Quite a few random things pass through the mind in any day. The past couple of months I have passed through a time of various shades of anxiety and uneasiness, caused by who knows what. One antidote has proved to be walking into town and having an extra hot cappuccino at Costa's. 

The walk into town is for exercise only, certainly not to take in the scenery, which consists of urban dwellings and constant passing traffic, subways and roundabouts. I often pass the time counting the number of discarded beer cans and food wrappers that litter the pathways. The record so far is 39. 

A discarded beer can (scenic view)

Again, sometimes a bicycle sweeps by, a rider on the pavement, seeking to keep themselves safe from the traffic on the roads - but in doing so endangering unsuspecting pedestrians ambling along towards Costa's, seeking solace and peace of mind. 

Sometimes I have thought that they should ring their bell to warn of their approach; this was until one did so and the shrill screech sent me skyward in shock.

Look out!!

Anyway, eventually I reach Costa's and feel, with the aroma of the coffee as I enter, a sense of peace. I really do think that such an ambiance is just one of the ways that Amida manifests to us mere mortals, bringing succour to the heavy heart or troubled mind. I always order "extra hot" which has the effect of making the drink last longer, a plus factor to those like myself who are on the miserly side. 

Drinking it I dabble with my Kindle, but also like to look around. More often than not there are groups of mothers with young children, or even babies, and I drink in, as well as my coffee, the sight of the very young, their beautiful eyes that absorb all around them with that wonderful interest that has not yet been soiled by a world seemingly designed to corrupt and destroy.

What price "original sin"?

Speaking about "corruption" I have been dipping into a book about the Eastern Front in World War 2. There is quite a preamble to the invasion of Russia which took place in June 1941. The book takes up the story around 1938 and we hear about all the toing and froing between Russia and Germany, Stalin and Hitler that preceded Operation Barbarossa, the name that the invasion was given.

Quite startling to hear all the official communiques of the two nations as they justified themselves, via press releases and suchlike, as they entered into their "non-aggression" pact, and of how they spoke of other nations involved in the build up to war in those years. Good grief! is all you can say. Duplicity and, perhaps worse, self deception, all dressed up in language often designed purely to deceive. 

Now, with hindsight, we can take our pick from the past, while revisionist historians, intent upon presenting Adolf Hitler as the "man of peace", can have a field day by picking and choosing amid the various speeches and pronouncements to convince us all of his benign intent. 

Operation Barbarossa - June 22, 1941. End of the "non-aggression" pact between Germany and Russia.

Of course, it still goes on. In our post truth world where hard facts are a thing of the past, where instinct and the conditioning of the world around us build minds that then go shopping for whatever supports our fancies. 

"Do not be conformed to this world" says the Good Book in Romans 12:2. 

How do we avoid becoming "conformed"? 

Rather than leave this remarkable meandering and virtually pointless blog with such a question, maybe I could seek to justify this nonsense with a brief diversion into hermeneutics, a  diversion in part prompted by a previous mention of "hard facts". 

Made of ice? Wait for the sun, the "unhindered light".

It seems that our current crop of philosophers doubt that there has ever been such a thing as a hard fact, that belief in such a thing has itself been a mode of deception - a deception especially indulged in by those determined to push their very own hard facts at those they are intent upon controlling and herding towards their very own view of the world". 

According to such philosophers, we - human beings - can in fact (!) be defined as the beings who interpret. It is what we are. Indeed, they say, "everything is a matter of interpretation". Every matter of fact is a matter of the interpretation that picks out the facts, and hermeneutics is the theory that the distinction between facts and interpretation bears closer scrutiny. Well, if you wish to indulge in such scrutiny be prepared for a rocky path  - but some say it can be enlightening. We find out who we are. Or as Dogen, the Soto Zen master claimed, "for to be is to understand, that is, one is what one understands".

If you meet the zen master on the road......

Another aspect of this, for those who like this sort of thing, is Dogen's non-dualistic analysis of reality, where he investigates the "difference" between our dreams and our waking state, between illusion and reality. In a sense, Dogen says, there is no difference! Thus, "all" is illusion, unreal. Yet if so, all is Real, whether dream or reality.

Perhaps we are back where we started from, yet knowing it for the first time. (T.S.Eliot, Four Quartets)

Related quotes:-

"To study the Way is to study the self. To study the self is to forget the self. To forget the self is to be enlightened by all things of the universe. To be enlightened by all things of the universe is to cast off the body and mind of the self as well as those of others. Even the traces of enlightenment are wiped out, and life with traceless enlightenment goes on forever and ever."

(Dogen)

"For the earth brings forth fruits of herself."

(Gospel of St Mark, New Testament)

Beyond conventional patterns

The humble marigold - a conventional pattern?

As I dipped into a few more books of one subject or another, my mind was taken by the words:- "There is meaning beyond the conventional patterns". These words have jiggled about in my head for a day or two - maybe merely drawing forth meanings within the conventional patterns.

I think we can see ourselves as "seekers", as not falling for the "conventional", whether that be atheism, the predominant Faith of our culture or any other off the shelf creedo of our post truth age. Therefore as "seekers" we see and imagine ourselves as having escaped the conventional patterns and thus, alas, for all intents and purposes, remaining within them - but within the pattern of a "seeker". 

The sunflower as mandala

How is any "meaning" beyond all our conventional patterns found, known, lived, shared?

It could be that there is none to be found, all is "a tale told by an idiot" and when told we leave this earthly stage, none the wiser for our all too brief sojourn upon it. Determinism, fate or the unexamined life, has won the day, the only day that was ever possible. Yet what of the Hidden Ground of Love in which we "live and move and have our being", or Emptiness; emptiness as the source of all things or, perhaps better put, as all things themselves.

How can anything "beyond" the conventional patterns ever come to be unless it be the only reality? The conventional is then the "illusion". 

The poppy, now symbol of much more

How does anyone accomplish the somersault of mind that will ground them in the love that knows no why? 

Dogen, the 12th century Soto Zen master, would seem to suggest that the conventional patterns should not so much be displaced, replaced or rejected, but more come to realisation. The realisation/living of duality within non-duality.

Shinran of the Pure Land Tradition spoke of a "sideways leap". 

The blue globe thistle - itself or more?

"The right way and wrong ways are not two" (Pao- chih) 

"The real Buddha sits within: enlightenment, nirvana, suchness, and Buddha-nature are all clothes sticking to the body. They are also called afflictions; don't ask and there is no vexation" (Chao-chou) 

"Like space, it cannot be cultivated" (Pai-chang)

 "The graduations of the language of the teachings - haughty, relaxed, rising, descending - are not the same. What are called desire and aversion when not yet enlightened or liberated are called  enlightened wisdom after enlightenment. That is why it is said, 'One is not different from who one used to be; only one's course of action is different from before.' " (Pai-chang)

One o'clock, two o'clock, three o'clock, four

Make of that lot what you will. Words are so simple yet can be so confusing. Much like life itself. 

Time is just something that stops everything happening at once. Infinite compassion, infinite wisdom, infinite potential. Each and every moment, infinite, singular, precious.

When you come to think of it (!) "instant" realisation lasts eternally. Or as Thomas Merton once said, "how far I have to go to find You in Whom I have already arrived", (and the journey itself is home)

Be still and know that I am God. 

Once we are grounded in faith/trust, diversification takes on a different hue. It can be healing.

Well, a slightly confusing blog, which did not seem to go where I thought it would go, but after making six banana muffins one just has to write something.

The peony

Related Quotes:- 

Question put to Neddy Seagoon upon being found deep in a coal cellar:- "What are you doing down here?" Neddy answers, "Well, everybody gotta be somewhere" 

(The Goon Show)

"......Dogen's emphasis was not on how to transcend language, but on how to radically use it." 

(Hee-Jin Kim, from "Eihei Dogen:Mystical Realist".

"....Dogen's......approach to awakening as a function of the nature of reality, intimately connected with the dynamic support of the earth, space itself, and a multidimensional view of the movements of time." 

(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 itself as a vital, ephemeral agent of awareness and healing." 

(As above)

"Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things"

 (Isaac Newton)

Postscript:- 

The thought in my mind when beginning this particular blog was centred upon the scriptural story of the Buddha descending into hell holding a lamp aloft. Those there, until then believing themselves to be alone, were heard to exclaim:-

 "Ah! There are others here besides myself!", a realisation that can be as profound as we wish. 

The story now makes me think of a line from  Bob Dylan's "Thunder On The Mountain":- "Gonna forget about myself for a while, gonna go out and see what others need."

Love has no why

Winnie the Pooh

I recently downloaded a little book of quotes by A A Milne, the creator of Winnie the Pooh. One caught my eye:-

  "A quotation is a handy thing to have about, saving one the trouble of thinking for oneself, always a laborious business. " 

Well, be that as it may, I have always liked a quote or two, and for those unfortunate enough to be familiar with my Blogs, they will know that one of my all time favourites is that spoken by Meister Eckhart, "Love has no why" . Deep words which perhaps touch upon the "meaning" of life. 

Often "words" come in for a lot of criticism, sometimes from those who claim that they obscure the truth, which is deemed to be "beyond" words, a truth of "feeling", to be lived not thought. I seem to remember saying much the same myself. 

However, Dogen argues differently, seeing dualism lurking in the shadows of all such claims. His thought is complex and often  leaves me trailing in its wake, but that said, we "understand as we are, and we are that which we understand", and as such, as Dogen sees it, we all participate in Buddha-nature, even express it at all times. Our ultimate unity does not negate our differences. Our expression now of Buddha nature does not deny our journey - which is itself "home".

Buddha-nature

So "love has no why", which tells me much of the meaning of life. That in fact, life has no "meaning" as such. No purpose other than to be itself. What is the meaning of a rose, a daffodil? In flower, to be itself is enough, no matter the bulb and the withered petals of "before" and "after". One philosopher of science, Alfred North Whitehead, taught of "process", where nothing ever actually is, but is always in process, becoming. Dogen would argue that everything  is a continuous Is, each moment unique and complete in itself, yet empty. Whitehead would perhaps counter with:- "The many become one, and are increased by one." I think perhaps it would be an argument between friends. 

Alfred North Whitehead

Maybe all this sort of thing can be thought of as academic, a waste of thinking, purposeless as well as meaningless. For myself, I think back to when I first began to take the Buddhist path seriously, of just how inspirational I found the words of the Buddha,  that he taught one thing and one thing only, suffering and the ending of suffering. Inspirational words and also, giving purpose to all life and thought . Not "academic" at all. 

I still instinctively associate all thought and even my blogs with those words. Given the suffering of our world, given how suffering's sheer depth and extent can undermine any faith at all in a final meaning to existence at all, then any path that speaks of its "end" becomes significant and makes worthwhile every step we take, of mind or body. Add bodhicitta, the "heart/mind" that seeks enlightenment selflessly, purely for the sake of others, and what more purpose would anyone seek?

Bodhicitta

Yet, selfless or not, "In protecting oneself one protects others; in protecting others one protects oneself." All for one and one for all, or the Tao cannot be divided, but only shared. Oh yes, quotes can certainly save me from thinking for myself - very laborious at times. 

So I think words can be important, even enlightened. They can certainly add clarity.  I think of where so many arguments about "relative" and "absolute" begin, of  there being, logically, only One Truth. Replace the word "Truth" with "Reality" and I find a greater clarity. There can be, and is, only one Reality. Yet a Reality that can be known and experienced each according to our unique selves, in each moment, where the only extension is intensity.

 

Speak of a "truth", of a unique "incarnation", a God distinct and separate, and then claim there can be only one such, and look out, here comes the Inquisition, lost and saved,  heaven and hell, and the terrible dualisms as eternal verities. Speak of one Reality, and the "work of Christ", if we wish to use Christian terms, takes on a hue that can truly "save", truly be shared.

Not used to divide and separate, creating sheep and goats.

Division and unity

Related Quote:-

"Don't underestimate the value of Doing Nothing, of just going along, listening to all things you can't hear, and not bothering." 

(A.A. Milne)

And to repeat another quote given in a previous blog, which comes from a book on T.S.Eliot. It again seems appropriate here:-

Eliot feels no compunction in alluding to the Bhagavad Gita in one section of the poem and Dante's Paradiso in the next. He neither asserts the rightness nor wrongness of one set of doctrines in relation to the other, nor does he try to reconcile them. Instead, he claims that prior to the differentiation of various religious paths, there is a universal substratum called Word (logos) of which religions are concretions. This logos is an object both of belief and disbelief. It is an object of belief in that, without prior belief in the logos, any subsequent religious belief is incoherent. It is an object of disbelief in that belief in it is empty, the positive content of actual belief is fully invested in religious doctrine.

All for one and one for all

I have never much liked hierarchical organisations, or in fact, hierarchical anything at all. Once in the long ago, reading about a particular Buddhist movement, it was revealed that  those who were members wore various colour sashes around their waists, this to distinguish the "level of attainment" of each. Which tended to make me feel just a little bit queasy. Moving on from this, linking it with other things, I once wrote a blog called (in a slightly tongue in cheek manner) "My fertile period", in which I included one or two poems that I had written. At the beginning I wrote:-

I think that the reason I eventually stopped attempting to write poetry was that I discovered the "real" stuff. Which is sad in certain ways. Even though our own attempts are often no more than doggerel they are ours and often seek to express emotions, viewpoints and human empathy. That such is expressed in what in a literary sense is poor is in many ways beside the point. Knowing ourselves and expressing ourselves has a value beyond literary merit as such. 

Yes, now I think it is sad in every way, and the "value" in all our expressions becomes clearer by the day.

No matter what

There is, in the world of zen, a story concerning Bodhidharma - he who "came from the west" - and he once quizzed those who sought to learn from him.

Bodhidharma was about to go back to India. He said to his students, "The time has come. Can you express your understanding?" 

One of the students, Daofu said, "My present view is that we should neither be attached to letters, nor be apart from letters, and to allow the Way to function freely." 

Bodhidharma said, "You have attained my skin." 

Nun Zongchi said, "My view is that it is like the joy of seeing Akshobhya Buddha’s land just once and not again." 

Bodhidharma said, "You have attained my flesh." 

Daoyu said, "The four great elements are originally empty and the five skandhas do not exist. Therefore, I see nothing to be attained." 

Bodhidharma said, "You have attained my bones." 

Finally Huike came forward, made a full bow, stood up, and returned to where he was.

 Bodhidharma said, "You have attained my marrow." 

Bodhidharma

Well, this little story, given our sad predilection for grading everything as "better" or "worse", or as "right" or "wrong" - and thus leads to different colour sashes and eventually to inferior and superior races and cultures and much worse - is often understood in the sense of our own movement along the path of "awakening", of the gradually "deepening" of our understanding. Thus we are "polishing a stone, hoping to make a mirror". This is to seek attainment rather than realisation, or in Christian terms, to justify ourselves by works rather than by faith. 

Dogen understood the story differently, within his own totally non-dualistic manner, stating:-

If you take these different responses as being superior or inferior to each other, you have missed the intent of Bodhidharma. We should realize that although each disciple’s expression of the Dharma was different than the others, nonetheless, each in his or her own way contained the teacher’s whole being.

Each precious moment

Dogen goes on to speak of authenticity of practice, rather than different levels of realisation. and thus however lowly one's symbols and practices are as in, say, a peasants religion, it is authenticity that matters, a point made by Hee-Jin Kim in his fine book on Dogen. The Bible makes the very same point, that we are all one in Christ Jesus our Lord. 

Tonight the Music Man Project takes to the Royal Albert Hall. Begun about twenty years ago, the joy of music is shared with those often referred to as having "special needs", who play the instruments and sing. I have had the pleasure of seeing one of the shows (at the London Palladium) and those on stage shared their joy with me. Maybe wrong to highlight just one person, but one young girl in particular grabbed my attention. Her "authenticity", selfless in a performance of pure joy and exhilaration, was everything that reality could be. She had all the moves!

All the moves

Why grade it according to any mode of assessment or calculation, giving her perhaps a blue sash and another a red? 

For as Dogen says:- "nothing throughout the entire universe is concealed". 

(Nevertheless, as Hee-Jin Kim summarises, "the mystery of emptinesss and thusness had to go beyond this: intimacy had to be ever penetrated")

The road goes on forever.

Related Quotes:-

"To cast off the body-mind did not nullify historical and social existence so much as to put it into action so that it could be the self-creative and self-expressive embodiment of Buddha-nature. In being 'cast off,' however, concrete human existence was fashioned in the mode of radical freedom - purposeless, goaless, objectless, and meaningless. Buddha-nature was not to be enfolded in, but was to unfold through, human activities and expressions. The meaning of existence was finally freed from and authenticated by its all-to-human conditions only if, and when, it lived co-eternally with ultimate meaninglessness."

(Hee-Jin Kim, on Dogen)

"Love has no why"

 (Meister Eckhart)

Once upon a time

Once upon a time......

Once upon a time, back in the 1970's, a Referendum was held in the UK to confirm our joining of the EU. At that time, although many visions of a united Europe were being mooted, the EU was basically a trading organisation only, a "single market and customs union" designed for ease of trading between the many sovereign nations of Europe.

From the very start the result of this Referendum was deplored and resisted by those who became known as "euro-sceptics", these predominately within the folds of the Conservative Party (aka "Tories) As the UK press is also predominately supporters of the Tories, and largely euro-sceptic in orientation, the UK papers became a seedbed of anti-EU propaganda, where often failure of policy, political and social, was put down to the UK's membership of the EU. Closer inspection would, could and does reveal that much failure was purely the consequence of successive UK Governments, both Tory and Labour. Alas, the constant jeering at non-existent rules such as the need to produce straight bananas became a game played by  those who in effect were sceptical, even suspicious, of anything foreign, of anything at all originating across the channel. Having "beaten the Germans twice" such people were disinclined to "obey" rules and regulations not passed by a totally sovereign UK Government.

Enough of this, enough.......

Cutting a long story short, the disgruntlement of the euro-sceptics rumbled on, the press continued its assault upon the EU at every opportunity, more so at what they saw as more and more encroachment of the EU vision upon the UK's total self-determination, going now beyond mere trading, the Single Market and the tariff free zone.

Nevertheless, the UK, being relatively strong and sovereign, being more than capable of fighting its own corner (as were the Danes for instance) negotiated various "opt out" clauses and "vetos" of such rules and regulations as were deemed unacceptable. Such though would never be enough to satisfy the euro-sceptics.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, euro-sceptic, known for his family receiving £7.5 million of tax payers money to renovate his mother-in-laws ancestral home of 365 bedrooms, and also voting for the bedroom tax that penalises those with an unused second bedroom. Possible front-runner in any Tory leadership contest.

 Now we must enter muddier waters, the question of immigration, and the "freedom of movement" within the EU. Despite statistics that reveal that overall EU nationals in the UK contribute a net amount to the economy, reveal again that they are 13% less likely to be on benefits than a UK born citizen, despite the fact that they are predominately young, fit and healthy, sadly the ingrained suspicion of all things foreign in many born in the UK has created a situation where blaming the EU has become entangled with and even morphed into blaming immigrants for virtually all things, from the strain on our NHS to the lack of affordable housing.

The blame game

These issues, of course, are caused by a whole variety of things, most totally within the hands and decision making and the (non)equitable distribution of tax revenues across our entire society by successive UK Governments. They have failed, and over the past ten years, under Tory "austerity"  - a political and economic choice, never a necessity - such issues have been exacerbated by constant cuts in funding, as well as the out-sourcing of various tasks to private enterprise which would surely have been better left under state control.

Obviously the Tories were unwilling to allow any of this to be laid down at their door, while the euro-sceptic wing of the Party were growing ever greater in their agitation and disruption of the smooth running of the Party Machine. To put the divisions to rest, party leader and UK PM Dave Cameron offered a Referendum on UK membership of the EU to placate the euro-sceptic wing, believing that the result for Remain was "in the bag".

The rest, as they say, is history, with Leave achieving an unlikely and largely unexpected victory. During the referendum campaign it was often implied that "all things would be on the table" should Leave gain victory. A possible return to being just members of the Single Market/Customs Union (like Norway) or other options, all possibly to be part of any deal negotiated. 

However, once victory was gained the mantra of "Leave MEANS Leave" was given air for the very first time, driven by the Tory Right who now saw their chance to hijack the vote for their own vision of a sovereign UK, making its own rules, and regaining control of its borders. And, obviously, a UK of de-regulation, low wages and low taxes. All now "the will of the people" where those who opposed this were portrayed as "anti democratic", the Press even using words such as "traitors" and "enemies of the people" to those who in any way stood in its path.

Just 37% of the total electorate were now the entire People who could not be denied. UK democracy, a product of 800 years of organic growth,  of a great Constitution ( however "unwritten" ) now stood or fell according to whether or not a Referendum Result was upheld - a Referendum of proven lies, misinformation and of a Leave Campaign that has since been fined  for breaking electoral rules -  rules explicitly designed by our Parliament to "ensure fairness, confidence and legitimacy at an electoral event".

A brief pictorial representation of the "Greatest Democratic Exercise in UK History"

The astonishing thing about the Leave victory was that just after the result ( Dave "I will stay whatever the result" Cameron having resigned ) all the prominent  Leave campaigners never sought the top job -  in which they could have led the negotiations - but instead withdrew and allowed a Remain voter, Theresa May, to become the new PM.

 Soon after losing her overall majority in an ill-called General Election (against much advice), soon after Triggering Article 50 ( against much advice, as she then actually had no plan ) Mrs May began negotiations in earnest. Again she rejected the advice of many to seek a cross party consensus and chose instead to tread her own path, her eye apparently very much on the so called ERG (European Research Group ) wing of her party, the ardent euro-sceptics and Leave MEANS Leave advocates.

The ERG group outline their demands

After almost two years of negotiations "The Deal" surfaced, immediately called "a turd" and a "suicide vest wrapped around us to be detonated by Brussels" by prominent Brexiteers, and much else by others who recognised immediately, if for totally diverse reasons and purposes, that "The Deal" was in fact the worst of all worlds and for any pro-EU Remainer, far worse than the deal we already have as EU members and which has been enjoyed for over 40 years, supporting in the main prosperity and economic growth.

It has now failed for the third time to be passed by the UK parliament, the votes bringing in there wake what is now being seen as the greatest constitutional crisis for the past 300 years. And alas, I would judge, the UK becoming the laughing stock of the world.

Nigel Farage, "man of the people" who when addressing those in Parliament Square of the "Leave MEANS Leave" persuasion, told them that they were brave to come into "enemy territory".

As I write, protesters are in Parliament Square, led by Nigel Farage and other Brexiteers (plus Tommy Robinson, of whom I will say nothing) crying out that democracy has been betrayed, democracy is dead (a large cardboard coffin is being wheeled about) and other slogans and soundbites. Which seems, in our now divided land, par for the course. The divisions within one Party have now been spread, like a virulent disease, to all corners of our great country. I could genuinely weep.

Here is not the place to argue the Remain case. I will simply say that in my opinion, given all likely scenarios, prospects and possibilities, the actual deal and relationship we now have with the EU is the best possible in the real, practical world. Total national sovereignty and "control of our borders" are chimeras  - the first because of the realities of our inter-connected world where totally unilateral decisions are impossible (total "sovereignty" must always be prepared to yield to a vision of the unity of nations seeking communion with each other for the common good of all)  the second because for all intents and purposes, by explicit EU directives, we already have all the control we need (e.g we can refuse entry to any EU national posing a "threat to public policy", and we can also deport any EU National deemed to be any such threat - over 5000 being deported in 2017) 

There is now no ideal solution to the situation in the UK. Polarity and division are rife. On a broader stage, taking a wider view, this can be attributed to the realities of our "post truth world". Each of us is born into a particular culture and grow into a particular world view. Unless we seek deeply, we simply find ourselves with an instinctive view on many things, a view we have never explicitly chosen as such, but a view we nevertheless then  consolidate by shopping around for whatever facts support it, discarding all others. This is then our "self" which is so precious to us, a contingent shallow self with no grounding in any reality worth the name. Born into another culture at another time, our "self" would have been different. Such then is life, "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."

Obviously, it need not be like that. I am considering full retirement into what I term the Pure Land (in my own rather whimsical way) To be honest, the ways of this world demand too high a price on me to contest for much longer. I am at heart a vulnerable person, in no way a revolutionary. At almost 70 years of age, a quieter and more contemplative life calls.

Related:- Satirist and political pundit Jonathan Pie has his say on Brexit seven days before the "leaving" date of 29/03/19

And from the "New Statesman" just after the Referendum result, under a headline that stated that Boris Johnson (arch brexiteer and yet another front runner for the next leader of the Tory Party and possibly PM of Great Britain ) "peddled absurd EU myths" and that then "our disgraceful press followed his lead", this article followed:-

Press coverage of the referendum was designed to inflame xenophobia and our worst “Little 

England” instincts. The pound plummeted, the Prime Minister resigned, stock markets plunged and the UK began to unravel, as did the post-1945 world order. Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Marine Le Pen and Isis were celebrating the Brexit vote but that didn’t stop our disgraceful national press from crowing. “Take a bow, Britain!” the Daily Mail declared. “So long, farewell, auf Wiedersehen, ADIEU”, the Sun quipped in a headline. The Daily Telegraph proclaimed the “birth of a new Britain”.

They and others – the Express, the Morning Star, several of the Sunday papers – were claiming victory: a victory achieved after a relentless campaign of lies and Soviet-style propaganda about the European Union that long pre-dated the referendum. Indeed, it was a campaign that began in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when Boris Johnson, who had been fired by the Times for making up a quotation, was the Telegraph’s correspondent in Brussels.

Johnson did not invent Euroscepticism but he took it to new levels. A brilliant caricaturist, he made his name by mocking, lampooning and ridiculing the EU. He wrote stories headlined “Brussels recruits sniffers to ensure that Euro-manure smells the same”, “Threat to British pink sausages” and “Snails are fish, says EU”. He wrote about plans to standardise condom sizes and ban prawn cocktail flavour crisps. He set up Jacques Delors, who was then the European Commission president, as a bogeyman and claimed credit for persuading Denmark to reject the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 with a Sunday Telegraph splash – “Delors plan to rule Europe” – that was seized on by the Nej campaign.

To Johnson, it was all a bit of a jape. “[I] was sort of chucking these rocks over the garden wall and I listened to this amazing crash from the greenhouse next door over in England as everything I wrote from Brussels was having this amazing, explosive ­effect on the Tory party – and it really gave me this, I suppose, rather weird sense of power,” he told the BBC years later.

That many of Johnson’s stories bore scant relation to the truth did not matter. They were colourful and fun. The Telegraph and right-wing Tories loved them. So did other Fleet Street editors, who found the standard Brussels fare tedious and began to press their own correspondents to follow suit. I know this because I became the Brussels correspondent of the Times in 1999 and suffered the consequences.

Soon, a Europe of scheming bureaucrats plotting to rob Britain of its ancient liberties, or British prime ministers fighting gallant rearguard actions against an increasingly powerful superstate, or absurd directives on banana shapes, became the only narratives that many papers were interested in. They were narratives that exploited our innate nationalism, distrust of foreigners and sense of superiority. They were narratives so strong that our political leaders mostly chose to play along with them.

The EU is arrogant, bureaucratic, wasteful and meddlesome. It desperately needs reforming. But post-Boris, its great achievements – cementing peace, uniting the continent, creating the world’s largest single market, enabling its citizens to travel and live anywhere they choose, busting mono­polies, improving the environment – have gone largely unreported. Similarly ignored is that Britain has many natural allies in Europe and has enjoyed some significant successes: competition policy, free trade, eastward enlargement. The French now regard the EU as a plot to impose Anglo-Saxon economics on the continent. True, we lost the argument on the euro and the Schengen Agreement, but we won opt-outs.

With a few honourable exceptions – such as the Financial Times, the Timesand the Guardian – the referendum coverage was merely a supercharged version of what had gone before. It was led by the biggest broadsheet (the Telegraph), the biggest mid-­market paper (the Mail) and the biggest tabloid (the Sun). And it was based on myths: that we pay £350m a week to Brussels, that we can continue to enjoy access to the single market without freedom of movement, that millions of Turks are heading our way because their country is about to join the EU, that immigrants are destroying the NHS rather than keeping it going.

The coverage was designed to inflame xenophobia and our worst “Little England” instincts. Loughborough University found that 82 per cent of all referendum stories, adjusted for newspaper circulations, were negative. The conventional wisdom is that newspapers don’t matter any more but they do when just 635,000 votes for Remain ­instead of Leave would have averted this national catastrophe. They do when the press is a primary source of information for millions of Brits. They do when most of our papers have relentlessly portrayed the EU as the monster of Johnson’s fertile imagination, not just for a few months, but for more than two decades.

The referendum was a chance for our national press, particularly the tabloid press, to restore its standing after the phone-hacking scandal and to prove its continuing worth to the British people. Sadly, most newspapers chose wilfully to deceive, mislead and inflame. They decided to follow Johnson’s lead by peddling lies and phoney patriotism. They helped him to hoodwink the millions of poorer, less-educated Britons – those who will be the first to suffer from Brexit’s consequences – into voting against their own interests.

Johnson campaigned against a myth of his own creation, with the result that a mendacious pundit, one who achieved prominence by writing entertaining but dangerous nonsense, is the odds-on favourite to be our next prime minister.