The option of suicide as a way ouy - as proposed by another - their choice - "each to their own"

 

My apologies, I feel a ramble coming on. There's something about McDonalds and a coffee that brings out the "best"in me.....mental health wise, I nearly always feel so positive, and I've stopped asking why or applying any analysis. Just accept the positive mood and give thanks, be grateful.

Well yes, to each his own....or her own......but the result of suicide is not like a preference for daffodils rather than tulips. Death is THE END or it is not. Our choice/preference doesn't really come into it.

Rambling on, I'm always surprised by the sheer lack of imagination of some "born again" fundamentalist Christians who have said things like:- "If you are wrong, you will be in hell. If I am wrong I won't know anything about it." They seem to think the only alternative to the playing out of their very own precise beliefs is oblivion, pure and simple!

But just perhaps Allah will confront them, scimitar in hand, demanding why they never fulfilled the Five Pillars of Islam. Or maybe they will, at death, then immediately feel the slap on their bum of the midwife, greeting them back into this world. Or they will find themselves drifting in some ethereal nether-world, desperately looking for a friendly face and finding none. Not to mention the possibilities of parallel universes.......Such a lack of imagination.

I'm more with Thoreau and his comment made just days before his death. An old friend, knowing that Thoreau was close to death, asked if he had any sense of what was to come. Thoreau's reply was, “One world at a time.”

I think one world is enough and that the only real extension to the present is intensity, depth, or as Dogen says, "intimacy". As I see it, too much preoccupation with the "next life" will always involve some betrayal of this one. I think knowing this life deeply, to the full, is perhaps preparation enough for anything that may or may not come after.

Then there are some Dharma teachings, expressions, scriptures that in poetic fashion speak of another concept of "time" - as not simply linear, but in a sense, as "all at once". Time is there so that all things don't happen at once, as some wag once said. This sort of thing is also the subject of many of today's so called "popular science" books.

Getting a bit technical and philosophical, greater intimacy with our present Reality, dispensing in a way with linear time, has the effect of combining ontology, epistemology and soteriology. Things are channelled into "now". All that hippy guff about "live in the now man!" can actually begin to be an existential reality.

All this, at least as I see it, speaks of Faith. Calls for Faith. As I have said before, in my own Pure Land way Faith (known as shinjin) is everything. Not salvation by faith, but that Faith (shinjin) is salvation. It is not belief in anything at all, but simple trust in Reality. That all things, no matter what, work together for the good of all - no matter so much that can seem to point otherwise. Faith, now, will be able to confront Allah or anything else when the time comes, or doesn't come.....

The path - if it can be called that - is simply saying "thank you" to everything. It can become instinctive. Good or bad - "thank you". Which is the poor mans way of bringing to be the words of the Hsin Hsin Ming ("Faith in Mind"):-

The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences. When like and dislike are both absent, everything becomes clear and undisguised. Make the smallest distinction, however, and heaven and earth are set infinitely apart. If you wish to see the truth, then hold no opinions for, or against, anything. To set up what you like against what you dislike is the disease of the mind. When the deep meaning of things is not understood, the mind's essential peace is disturbed to no avail.

As far as Christianity is concerned, Meister Eckhart once said that if the only prayer we ever said was "Thank You" it would be enough. Enough for what? Who knows, love has no why (which he also said)

And Thomas Merton of course, from his "Study of Chuang Tzu":-

The way of Tao is to begin with the simple good with which one is endowed by the very fact of existence. Instead of self-conscious cultivation of this good (which vanishes when we look at it and becomes intangible when we try to grasp it), we grow quietly in the humility of a simple, ordinary life, and this way is analogous (at least psychologically) to the Christian “life of faith.” It is more a matter of believing the good than of seeing it as the fruit of one’s effort.

The secret of the way proposed by Chuang Tzu is therefore not the accumulation of virtue and merit but wu wei, the non-doing, or non-action, which is not intent upon results and is not concerned with consciously laid plans or deliberately organized endeavors: “My greatest happiness consists precisely in doing nothing whatever that is calculated to obtain happiness … Perfect joy is to be without joy … if you ask ‘what ought to be done’ and ‘what ought not to be done’ on earth to produce happiness, I answer that these questions do not have a fixed and predetermined answer” to suit every case. If one is in harmony with Tao—the cosmic Tao, “Great Tao”—the answer will make itself clear when the time comes to act, for then one will act not according to the human and self-conscious mode of deliberation, but according to the divine and spontaneous mode of wu wei, which is the mode of action of Tao itself, and is therefore the source of all good.


Rather a long quote, but every word seemed pertinent.

Well, I must go. Sorry, I did say a ramble was coming on.

The Circle of the Way

 

Back in McDonalds. Good karma today, I ordered a plain filter coffee and received a cappuccino, a more expensive drink. A sprinkling of chocolate on top.

My mind wanders at times, reading this story* just reminds me of my grasping self, never satisfied by the moment, always looking for more. Not particularly power in my case, but always full of anticipations and epitaphs. Also it has some correspondence, at least in my mind, with the words of Dogen in Genjokoan:-

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.

It becomes more and more awful to be this little nugget of "self" imposing itself and all its little views upon the world, seeking "justification", sometimes even in competition with others. Far better allowing the 10,000 things to suffuse and soak into the emptiness of "self", to respond accordingly.

"What are the teachings of a whole lifetime?"
"An appropriate statement"

How can anything be truly appropriate if it is dredged up from the past, already lurking in the mind, waiting for its moment?

I also think that this constant reaching for more relates to all concepts of "transcendence". I've never liked the word - something above and beyond, imposing itself - even in some Faith Traditions demanding worship! It all seems to have to do with betraying this world for something "other", not yet here.

........the Buddhist doctrine of means in which the means in question is not transcendence of duality but realization of it.
(Hee-Jin Kim, on Dogen)

Sorry, my mind just flits about, perhaps still imposing itself () but I blame the coffee!

Anyway, to finish, more words of Dogen, simply because I love them. He is speaking of continuous practice....

On the great road of Buddha ancestors, there is always unsurpassable practice, continuous and sustained. It forms the circle of the way and is never cut off. Between aspiration, practice, enlightenment, and nirvana, there is not a moments gap; continuous practice is the circle of the way.

Those words always seem to bring me back to now, where the journey is home, where the mind/heart finds peace.

* The story:-

More Is Not Enough - The Stone Cutter

There was once a stone cutter who was dissatisfied with himself and with his position in life.

One day he passed a wealthy merchant's house. Through the open gateway, he saw many fine possessions and important visitors. "How powerful that merchant must be!" thought the stone cutter. He became very envious and wished that he could be like the merchant.

To his great surprise, he suddenly became the merchant, enjoying more luxuries and power than he had ever imagined, but envied and detested by those less wealthy than himself. Soon a high official passed by, carried in a sedan chair, accompanied by attendants and escorted by soldiers beating gongs. Everyone, no matter how wealthy, had to bow low before the procession. "How powerful that official is!" he thought. "I wish that I could be a high official!"

Then he became the high official, carried everywhere in his embroidered sedan chair, feared and hated by the people all around. It was a hot summer day, so the official felt very uncomfortable in the sticky sedan chair. He looked up at the sun. It shone proudly in the sky, unaffected by his presence. "How powerful the sun is!" he thought. "I wish that I could be the sun!"

Then he became the sun, shining fiercely down on everyone, scorching the fields, cursed by the farmers and laborers. But a huge black cloud moved between him and the earth, so that his light could no longer shine on everything below. "How powerful that storm cloud is!" he thought. "I wish that I could be a cloud!"

Then he became the cloud, flooding the fields and villages, shouted at by everyone. But soon he found that he was being pushed away by some great force, and realized that it was the wind. "How powerful it is!" he thought. "I wish that I could be the wind!"

Then he became the wind, blowing tiles off the roofs of houses, uprooting trees, feared and hated by all below him. But after a while, he ran up against something that would not move, no matter how forcefully he blew against it - a huge, towering rock. "How powerful that rock is!" he thought. "I wish that I could be a rock!"

Then he became the rock, more powerful than anything else on earth. But as he stood there, he heard the sound of a hammer pounding a chisel into the hard surface, and felt himself being changed. "What could be more powerful than I, the rock?" he thought.

He looked down and saw far below him the figure of a stone cutter.

Labels, definitions and conclusions

 There is a time and a place for labels and for definitions (conclusions, especially final ones, I'm not so sure about) Yet as I see it they can become harmful if we seek some degree of freedom of mind.

Take sexuality (the word often attracts interest and attention....) As I see it there is a wide and full spectrum between the world's most effeminate gender conditioned female and our world's most macho male. We all find ourselves within the spectrum, each unique. Sadly labels can take over and in looking at others they draw forth their pernicious effect - we see the labels not the person before us.

But worse, we label ourselves. Define ourselves. We can become a hard centre, identifying ourselves as this or that. A unique person, full of potential, yet congealed into a finished product from which the world about us, and those in it, are judged and placed into their appropriate catagories. Yet, born in another time, another place, the "self" we are often so defensive of, sometimes so proud of, would have had another centre, different conclusions.

Which is why the zens speak of seeking our original face before we were born. That seeking can make life a great adventure, one full of surprises. And words like "grace" and "mercy" can begin to find a place in our unfolding lives.

The Source

"The Almighty divided Himself into two high spirits - God and Satan"

 The question has been posed:-

Does this imply that 'Almighty' and 'God' are not the same? That's interesting.

So Almighty placed Satan there to accomplish a certain function? So, why is Satan regarded as evil

As I see it the confusion created by all this (at least in the Abrahamic Traditions) goes back to the need of the Jewish/Hebrew tradition to confront another strong Tradition at the time, Zoroastrianism. This posited TWO gods, opposed to each other. Ahura Mazda, the god of light, and Angra Maunyu, the god of all evil.

The Jewish response, found in the Old Testament, is Isaiah 45:7:- I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

As far as my own experience and understanding is concerned, speaking generally, Christianity (particularly in the Protestant Reform - literalist - Tradition) has never actually come to terms with the full implications of this. i.e. That the ultimate Source is ONE, and that that Source has given rise to the opposites - and thus that ALL opposites do not, cannot, "exist" in the same sense as the Source (which is existence/being itself)

I have had to move "east" for greater clarity. With such texts as the Tao te Ching:-

The Way that can be walked is not the eternal Way.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of Heaven and Earth.
The named is the mother of all things.

Therefore:
Free from desire you see the mystery.
Full of desire you see the manifestations.
These two have the same origin but differ in name.
That is the secret,
The secret of secrets,
The gate to all mysteries.

All this is not academic, at least for me. It implies praxis, practice (the attempt to live fully and truly) and not to rest simply in theory, in continuous questions. To be "one" with the Source, and in being "one" with it, to then allow the diversification of the opposites - yet not being "deceived" by them, or seeing them as eternal verities. To "hang loose" just a bit! It implies compassion and empathy. We are all one.

Unfortunately, most of this is dismissed as "mumbo jumbo", for the birds. Each to their own.

 But the birds don't know they have names.

Relative and Absolute

 As promised (or perhaps "threatened"......) a few further thoughts. Jumbled as usual. Thoughts on morality, the "good", objective and relative and suchlike.

Its probably been gathered by some that I am into what is loosely called "inter-faith dialogue". That being so I have been denounced from all sides. One favorite is "there can be no dialogue between truth and error", with the "truth" obviously being the sole possession of my denouncer! I have been called the "antichrist" by convinced Christian believers, and told by fellow Buddhists to stop "the inter-religious bullshit" (obviously by someone in need of reading a relevant Sutta on Right Speech)

Anyway, I waffle as usual, which is what happens when I get my coffee in McDonalds.

As I work out my own salvation in fear and trembling (as the Good Book has it) my heart rests in dialogue, in the hope of unity. What comes to one will come to all.

Rather than the strident voices of the "One Wayers" I prefer the more insightful voices of the Christian mystics, those such as St John of the Cross and Meister Eckhart. Such have been recognised as "dharma brothers" by many Buddhists, in fact by any who value the Living Word rather than the Word as Text.

Eckhart has said:- “In giving us His love God has given us the Holy Spirit so that we can love Him with the love wherewith He loves Himself.” D T Suzuki recognises such words as pointing to the prajna wisdom of zen, “one mirror reflecting another with no shadow between them.” Yet it also points to a fundamental division between those who would believe in Buddha, or Jesus, and those who seek to become as Buddha was, or to become Christlike, "one" with God.

As I see it, this relates to the promise contained in the Old Testament that in the fullness of time the Law will be found written on human hearts, and not only upon tablets of stone. I think this can be relevant to this whole unending argument about "relative" and "absolute" as far as morality is concerned. Objective "right" and "wrong", set in stone, embedded in belief in some transcendent Being who also writes books and demands obedience and Who in fact becomes more and more incredible the more we try to think about "Him".

The furthest I have got in my own thought is in reflection upon the words of a zen master, Yun-men, who was once asked what were the teachings of a whole lifetime. He answered:- "An appropriate statement".

For me, this becomes more and more profound. An appropriate statement, or act, appropriate there, then but for no other time. Objective. Not relative. Yet there is a constant "becoming", an advance into novelty. Radical freedom.

In the meantime, of course, as unenlightened, as only stumbling along, maybe we need sometimes to defend the "law" on the "tablets of stone", try not to run before we can walk. As Merton has said:-

Our real journey in life is interior: it is a matter of growth, deepening, and of an ever greater surrender to the creative action of love and grace in our hearts.

I would quibble over Merton's use of the word "interior" - as a zen guy has said, "if consciousness ends in the skull how can joy exist?" but I am with him.

Just to add, as my coffee is not yet cold, those words of Merton comes from his volume of letters, "The Road to Joy" (letters to old and new friends) Merton had received a letter from the young daughter of an older correspondent, a letter that contained a picture of a house. Merton wrote back, saying how lovely the house looked, but that sadly there was no path up to the door. The young girl replied by sending another picture of the house, this time with a path leading up to the door. Merton then wrote of the road to joy “which is mysteriously revealed to us without our exactly realizing.” Which is my own Pure Land way of hakarai, of no-calculation, where things are made to become so of themselves, for the earth brings forth fruits of herself.

ALL COMMENTS WELCOME - THANK YOU.

The Death and Birth of God.

 An eye-catching thread title. Might even get a couple of views.....

Back in McDonalds, coffee in hand. Well, I have a Blook (explanation elsewhere) that consists of various notes gathered over the past few years in my cyber-notebook. In some sort of order, but not much of one. I love various quotes jumbling against each other, random correspondences, unlikely support for one thing found in another unlikely spot. I suppose, part of the Pure Land way of hakarai (no-calculation) where things are made to become so of themselves beyond the calculating of our minds, its "logic" and its conditioned machinations.

"For the earth brings forth fruits of herself" as the Good Book says.

Anyway, I waffle. This morning a couple of cybernotes from a section on Jung popped out.

The first:-

Viewed in a broader context of Western intellectual history, Nietzsche at the end of the 19th century proclaims the death of God while Jung in Liber Novus presents the rebirth of God at the beginning of the 20th century.


(Ha ha......how's "Liber Novus" for an arcane reference........)

The second:-

With the Red Book identifying the individuation process as the royal road to rediscovering soul and “God,” Jung revises the traditional Christian teaching of imitatio Christi. Simply being a devout Christian does not suffice anymore. Instead, the new form of spirituality requires searching for the inner Christ, who stands for the sacrifice and willingness needed to take one’s own life into one’s own hands while staying faithful to one’s essence and one’s love. As opposed to remaining in an infantile attitude of imitation, the individual is asked to find a place for Christ in his heart and then follow his independent path during a process of personal growth, living his own life just as Christ lived his.

The second quote supports the first. At least as I see it and understand it. I think we have to get away from historical events happening outside of us, disputing them, "believing" in them (or not) Trying to justify ourselves because we "believe" and have opened the gate. The one gate. The only gate. The Narrow Gate.

As I see it, there is no gate. We are within, we are accepted, purely by having been born. This is Grace. To be realised not appropriated by our choices and decisions.

This relates to Universalism. That what comes to one will come to all. All to do, at a fundamental level, with our reality as Persons. A reality far different from Individualism. Yes, we are individuals, but first of all we are persons. Persons can only be in relationship, in inter-being, with other persons. Ultimately, only in relationship with all other persons. Forgetting "afterlife" (ultimate restoration of all things) this holds NOW. In opening to others now, those of other ways, of other cultures, of other times, we surely find Christ......or Buddha......or Tao. Or maybe just our true selves. No one can be left out.

Anyway, as I delved in my Notebook, a few more quotes from the Jung Section. Food for thought, for pondering, in between cracking another few levels of Soda Candy Crush Saga...

All the greatest and most important problems are fundamentally unsolvable. They can never be solved, but only outgrown.

Life has always seemed to me like a plant that lives on its rhizome. Its true life is invisible, hidden in the rhizome. The part that appears above ground lasts only a single summer. Then it withers away – an ephemeral apparition. When we think of the unending growth and decay of life and civilizations, we cannot escape the impression of absolute nullity. Yet I have never lost a sense of something that lives and endures underneath the eternal flux. What we see is the blossom, which passes. The rhizome remains.

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. This shift touches our depths, opening us to larger dimensions, to the ineffable mystery of life and death, and leading us onto spiritual transformation

The spirit of this time would like to hear of use and value. I also thought this way, and my humanity still thinks this way. But that other spirit forces me nevertheless to speak, beyond justification, use, and meaning.

(This last from "The Red Book", C G Jung)

Last:-

Thinking is difficult, that’s why most people judge.