To pray, or not to pray...

Funny, but even during the brief time I called myself an atheist, I did not object to people praying around me. Or to someone calling for a large "group prayer." It was their right if they wanted to pray. I'm still not into prayer as the vast majority of people practice it; to me, it is somewhat sacrilegious to try and tell God what to do. But if they want to pray, that is still their right.

However, if it is true that the military was also downgrading and demeaning other religions, this is a problem. I support the rights of officers to have a prayer before a meeting, before a battle, or whatever. I also support the rights of soldiers to pray to whichever deity they choose, in whatever manner they choose (or not to pray, as they choose).

Here's the thing: a true atheist is not going to be bothered by people praying. Why? Because he'll just see it as pointless and silly, but not offensive. Problem is that there aren't very many true atheists. Most people who call themselves "atheist" are actually "antitheist". My own definition of antitheist is "someone who hates the god in whom he/she doesn't believe." So an antitheist must antievangelize, and eliminate any chance of exposing poor, innocent people to the perceived evils of religion. Since antitheism isn't seen as a religion, it is also not seen as falling under separation of church and state. But it is a religious position, admitted or not.

All right. Done ranting (for now).

Yoga

Well... this is different. It's a refreshing change from the Christian groups that condemn yoga (and anything remotely eastern). However, I'm not sure that using the term "yoga" is appropriate. Yoga translates (more or less) as "union", referring to unifiying body, mind, and breath. I know of no corresponding idea in Christianity (feel free to correct this if there is one). As for the objection that it is pervaded by Hindu ideas...well, the original yoga certainly was. But there are Buddhist yogas as well, and no one objects to their use of the term. Taiji is sometimes referred to as "Chinese yoga." But these Asian systems are complementary (most of the time), rather than at odds with one another. I would be curious to know if the "Christian Yoga" is incorporating Christian meditation, and readings of the Bible, as the physical exercises are only a very small portion of any yoga system (which makes the late Pope's comments rather amusing to me), or if it is simply a name for Christians getting together to do stretches.

Going Inward

And so, for the first time in my life perhaps I took the lamp, and went down to my inmost self. But as I moved further and further from the conventional cerainties, I became aware that I was losing contact with myself. At each step of the descent a new person was disclosed within me...and when I had to stop my exploration because the path faded, I found a bottomless abyss at my feet, and out of it came—arising I know not whence—the current which I dare to call my life.

—Teilhard de Chardin, from 29 August Zen Calendar

Interesting that the day after I ponder the Tao, this should come up on my calendar. :-D This passage is about going beyond the labels that we have for ourselves, going deeper to the core of who we really are. And if we go deep enough, and listen closely, we find the Tao.

The Way (Tao)

Something undifferentiated was born before heaven and earth;
still and silent, standing alone and unchanging,
going through cycles unending,
able to be mother to the world.
I do not know its name; I label it the Way.
Imposing on it a name, I call it Great.

—Cleary

This is from Chapter 25 of the Tao te Ching. I posted it because I was in the mood for pondering the nature of Tao. First off, it is nearly impossible to describe in words. How would you describe the color red to someone who was born without sight? But the passage above is a good place to start. Tao is not a thing, process, or being, yet it encompasses all of these. It makes no demands, and has no plans, thus its will is always done. It asks nothing of people, and 'nothing' seems to be too much. Tao may be "mother to the world," but it is not a Creator. Creation implies a conscious, deliberate act; but when consciousness arises, one has already departed from the Tao. The Tao is not good, nor is it evil, it just is. As soon as something is perceived as good (likewise as evil), the Tao has been forgotten. Tao has no voice, yet one may hear it.

*pauses* Looking over what I just wrote, I realize how much it sounds like the Tao te Ching. There are only so many ways to describe the undescribable, I suppose.

A few final thoughts.... The Tao turns no one away. It is only a matter of whether people bother to listen or not. There are no rules or doctrines to follow. Rules are for those who have fallen away from Tao. Given a chance, people will do what is right.

Flowers and Stars

Pick up a flower in a field and you may disturb a star in the sky.
All is interconnected.
Nothing is separate.
Everything has its place, its function.
Nothing is here for nothing.
Everything is here for everything.
Take care.

—Tishan

What more is there to say?

If love were software...

This is on the same site as the Shrine Room (note: clicking on "Shrine Room" on that site takes you through the process of setting up a virtual meditation altar; I find it very soothing). I found it quite entertaining.

Religious Freedom?

*sighs* In a country founded by people who left because their religion wasn't tolerated...all we've learned is not to tolerate anyone else's POV. Whatever your religion, so long as it harms none, you should have the right to practice it. You should have the right to pass it on to your children. You should have the right to proclaim it on high if that's what floats your boat. To be fair, there is currently a practice of protecting every religion except Christianity...but when I read things like this, I have to wonder if it's simply backlash. As for Bush's infamous comment that witchcraft isn't a religion... bull.

Wicca FAQ
Wicca in Detail
Pagan Info
Pagans in Detail

(Links all from Religious Tolerance and Wikipedia)

Silly Activity

Ran across this on a blog that I read:

1. Grab the nearest book.
2. Open the book to page 123.
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the text of the sentence in your journal… along with these instructions.
5. Don’t search around and look for the “coolest” book you can find. Do what’s actually next to you.

So just for kicks, I tried it. The nearest book to me was The Traveler's Phrase Book, and on page 123 there was a map of Germany and the word Germany. So I looked for the next nearest book, which was The Iron Flute by Nyogen Senzaki.

Page 123, fifth sentence: "The old pine tree grows on a snow-covered rock."

The funny thing is that I absolutely love to go through a forest or along a river and see the trees growing straight out of solid rock. They always make me smile. Of course, I'm not usually out in the winter, so I've never seen this on a snow-covered rock. :-)

Turning Over the Pail

Three monks, Hsüeh-fêng, Ch'in-shan, and Yen-t'ou, met in the temple garden. Hsüeh-fêng saw a water pail and pointed to it. Ch'in-shan said, "The water is clear, and the moon reflects its image." "No, no," said Hsüeh-fêng, "it is not water, it is not moon." Yen-t'ou turned over the pail.

—Nyogen Senzaki, in The Iron Flute

I've been meaning to post this for a while... This is one that I think is worth thinking about, without me giving my interpretation (or even the interpretation in Senzaki's commentary). It's a beautiful and profound little story.

Dragons

Every so often, I "see" dragons during my meditation. So I started looking for information. The most useful site is linked above. As for what it means, I suspect it's rather like dream symbolism: what the dragon means to me is more important than any traditional lore surrounding it. However, since I tend to think in terms of Chinese tradition, there's probably some value in reading up on their dragon legends. :-) Don once told me that visions/sounds, etc., during meditation are like signposts on the road. They tell you you're headed in the right direction. But you shouldn't get caught up in "playing" with them, mentally. That would be like stopping the car because you'd seen the sign indicating your exit was coming up. Apparently Don's signpost is to "hear" big band music (which he doesn't particularly like).

Missing Out

"What, you don't hear the babbling of the stream over there? You don't hear the chirping of all the birds? You don't hear the leaves rustling in the wind? You don't hear the rodents scurrying about the forest floor? Damn it, boy, there is an orchestra playing for you and you haven't heard a thing."

—Stuart Alve Olson,The Jade Emperor's Mind Seal Classic

I see people out walking, jogging, with earphones on. Not just in the city, where it might be reasonable to cover up the sounds of traffic, but out in the wild. In the forests. They can't hear the natural music around them, so they substitute artificial. More than that, they don't SEE the beauty around them. At least in some American Indian tribes, children were expected to describe everything they'd seen and heard every time they returned from an excursion. I think our society could benefit from such an attitude. From a practical perspective, awareness of your surroundings is the most important self-defense skill. From an aesthetic perspective, people miss out on so much!

Translations Galore

I recently aquired the Thomas Cleary translation of the Tao te Ching... which brought to mind the differences and difficulties in translation. Just to give an idea, here are several translations of the same passage (from Chapter 3):

Not putting high prices on hard-to-get goods causes the people not to steal.

—trans. Cleary

Not prizing property that is hard to come by will save them [the common people] from becoming thieves.

—trans. Ames and Hall

If the sage does not buy treasures then the people will not want to steal them.

—trans. Kwok, Palmer, and Ramsay

Not collecting treasure prevents stealing.

—trans. from online source

Prize no rarity, and men are freed from thievery.

—trans. from Douglas Allchin

By not setting high store on things difficult to obtain, he [the sage] prevents the people from becoming robbers.

—trans. from F.H. Balfour

Do not value rare treasure, so that people will not steal.

—trans. from Beck

If we cease to set store by products that are hard to get, there will be less outright thieves.

—trans. from Byrn

Okay, there are a ton more, but you get the idea. The thing that immediately struck me about Cleary's translation was that he uses "price" instead of "value". The value translation makes more sense, because the price itself is irrelevant if people do not place value on the object. So I started hunting through other translations, and Cleary's is the only one with this particular nuance. It almost implies the same meaning, since setting a high price generally indicates that SOMEone places high value on it, but I prefer the other translations in this instance.

A(nother) poem by Basho

Summer moon—
hands clapping,
I greet dawn.

I love the simplicity of haiku (in English it's not a syllabically correct haiku, but likely it was in its original language). So few words, such beautiful ideas. This one captures the feeling of watching the sky lighten in the morning, stars gradually giving way to blue sky. And there's a sense of respect for the sun as well.

Perfection

The perfect blossom is a rare thing. You could spend your life looking for one, and it would not be a wasted life.

Perfect... They are all... perfect...

—Katsumoto, in The Last Samurai

The first line is spoken to Nathan Algren at the beginning of his enforced stay. The last line is said as Katsumoto lays dying. To me, the juxtaposition represents the difference between seeking Zen and becoming Zen. A seeker is looking for the one thing, the one truth that is just right. One who has become Zen has given up differentiating between things and truths. Everything is perfect, just as it is. Though it is difficult for many of us (including me) to always see this perfection.

Freeing the Mind

The mind has been resting on objects all along, and so it is not used to independence; suddenly without resort, it is hard for it to remain at rest spontaneously. Even if you can pacify it for a while, it scatters in confusion again. Govern it as it arises, so that it does not become agitated. Eventually, after a long time, it will become tuned and tamed, able to be at peace naturally and spontaneously.

—from Practical Taoism by Chan Po-Tuan, trans. Cleary

This passage struck me as my experience in meditation this morning. My mind would not simply let go, but would cling to objects and ideas, images and forms. Partially this is my own fault for trying to let go rather than allowing myself to let go, but partially it is simply that my mind is not used to letting go. It clings to the familiar, the images and ideas, for fear of getting lost in nothingness. Perhaps someday, my mind will become "tuned and tamed," but I suspect that is a long way down the road.

The Question of Existence

"If there's no meaning in it, that saves a world of trouble as we needn't try to find any."

I might make a similar comment about the Taoists. Since the Taoists make no claim that the Tao exists, it saves them a world of trouble in trying to prove that the Tao exists.

Just compare the situation with the history of Western religious thought! Good heavens, the amount of debates, battles, bloodshed and torture over the question of whether God does or does not exist!...The Sage has no need to affirm the Tao; he is too busy enjoying it!

—from The Tao is Silent by Smullyan (shortened considerably by me :-)

Smullyan's book is an interesting (and entertaining) read. The segment above is part of what convinced me to buy it and read it. For some reason, I'm inpsired to turn it into a parable.

A native guide was leading two tourists through a rough area. A loud, deep rumbling began on the track ahead of them. "Ah, it is an automobile. We should get out of the way," the guide tells them, and steps off the track. One of the two tourists nods, the other scoffs. "There's no such thing as an automobile! It's just a stupid legend!"

"Maybe it does," says the other tourist. "I mean, what else could make that noise?". And they stand on the path and argue. The guide listens for a while, and finally pulls them both to safety moments before the automobile races by. "Whew, that was close," the second tourist says.

"Ha! We still don't know whether the automobile exists!" says the other.

Moonlight

On the tips of ten thousand grasses
each and every dewdrop contains the light of the moon.
Since the beginning of time,
not a single droplet has been forgotten.
Although this is so,
some may realize it and some may not.

—Dogen (28 July Zen Calendar)

"Moon on the water" is often used in Buddhism as a metaphor for the reflection of the divine nature in each being (or sometimes as the reflection of a particular Boddhisattva). Beyond that, I think the poem speaks for itself. Just as a note of interest, there is nothing in Tibetan Buddhism to prevent the Dalai Lama (or any other enlightened being) from having more than one physical incarnation at a time. Just as the moon may be reflected millions of times over, so may a single individual. I do not know whether this is common to all forms of Buddhism, but I suspect it is.

Guan Yin

This is the area that Bataan set up in the front of the practice area at taiji camp. The statue is of Guan Yin (often spelled Kwan Yin) with a dragon. Sometimes when I looked toward the statue, it seemed like the dragon was expanding outward into the room, flitting amongst all of us taiji players. Interpret that how you will :-). Guan Yin is variously considered a goddess, a Boddhisvatta, and a Taoist Immortal. The last two are often considred equivalent, and they are how I tend to think of her. The closest western equivalent would be a Saint. Legend has it that she was all set to enter Nirvana when she turned around and vowed not to do so until all beings on Earth could enter with her. The wikipedia link in the title is rather dry, so here is a more interesting one.

The characters in the picture stand for heaven, earth, and man. Heaven (Tian) I recognize. It is the one with a sort of 'A' figure with a line on top. Man is the bottom figure, something like the Greek letter 'nu'. The middle one I have probably seen before, but don't remember. By process of elimination, though, it must be earth. In taiji, earth stands for our rootedness, our ability to disperse force into the ground. Heaven stands for our straightness. We try to keep a perfectly straight spine, suspended from the headtop. One of my favorite images combines these two: we are like plants, about to break the surface of the soil and come into the light; our legs are like our roots, extending into the earth; our head is the tip of the plant, reaching for the surface. So what is the role of 'man' in all this? (Oh, Bataan made a point of translating it as 'human') Well, in terms of Chinese thought, Earth is below, Heaven is above, and Man stands between. Anything above the surface of the earth is 'heaven', btw. In terms of the body, the lower Dan Tian (an energy center in the lower abdomen) is the 'in between'. So our legs are earth, our spine (and arms, to a lesser degree) are heaven, and the waist is man.

I have to wonder how much beyond the earth's atmosphere this idea of 'heaven' technically extends. If it extends to the edge of the universe, the picture seems unbalanced to me. My suspicion is that it doesn't extend much beyond the atmosphere, but does include our perception of things beyond the atmosphere. So it would include the starlight that we see but not the star itself. Hmmm... Unless I extend it to the orbit of the earth, it would include sunlight but not the sun. I have no idea if that might be a problem, or if it is anywhere near what the ancient Chinese had in mind. :-D

Freedom

Most people tend to delude themselves into thinking that freedom comes from doing what feels good or what fosters comfort and ease. The truth is that people who subordinate reason to their feelings of the moment are actually slaves of their desires and aversions. They are ill-prepared to act effectively and nobly when unexpected challenges occur. as they inevitably will.

—from A Manual for Living by Epictetus, trans. Lebell

This could have been written by a Buddhist, but Epictetus was a Greek stoic. Some would disagree with me, but I consider desires themselves to be perfectly natural and harmless. It is attachment to those desires that is the problem. It is one thing to wish that the summer heat would break, another to rail against the continuing heat and rant about the injustice of it all. Admittedly, wishing for coolness is stepping out of the moment, but once the desire arises (of itself), the thing to do is examine it and decide if it's useful. Most often, it is not, so then let the desire go. If it is useful (perhaps there is some shade not far away), then act on it.

The Birds and the Fish

A monk asked, "What is the fact of my nature?"
The master said, "Shake the tree and the birds take to the air, startle the fish and the water becomes muddy."

—from The Recorded Sayings of Zen Master Joshu

Over the time I've pondered this poem, I've considered dozens of possible meanings. One of the more obvious ones is that things behave according to their nature. When the birds are startled, they take flight. When the fish are startled, their rapid movement muddies the water. At the same time, this instinctive reaction causes loss. The tree is now empty. The water is no longer transparent. But then is the problem with the birds and fish themselves, or is it with the one who startled them in the first place? Or is there any difference? Another thought...by taking flight, the birds reveal their presence (assuming the tree is covered in leaves or needles, anyway). Would it not be better to cling to the tree as it shakes and remain hidden? The fish hide themselves by muddying the water, but they also obscure their own path. Perhaps that is the message: our automatic reactions can either drive us from the path or hide it from us.

Thoughts...

No quote for today... I have several in mind, but they are at home and I am not, and I am not sufficiently advanced to transcend space yet ;-). I was sitting on a bench today. To my left was a "barren", dry hillside. Directly in front of me (and across a street) was an artificial forest of trees planted by residents. To my right, a parking lot.

I looked between the hillside and the trees, and it was the hillside I found most appealing. It is dry, mostly dirt. A few desert plants cling to life, and likely support a small population of animals. The trees are quite beautiful in their own right: a mix of species that would be unlikely to grow together in the "wild." Yet the trees did not appeal to me so much as the hill. Why? Because the trees require support. Take away the humans, and most of them will die. A few may be drought tolerant and survive, but the rest would die. And they were placed in their location. On the hillside, seeds blew in or were carried by animals; roots spread. No one had to 'cause' it to be what it is. It is 'of itself so,' to borrow a term from Alan Watts.

And the parking lot? To be honest, I noted its existence and otherwise ignored it. It is a dead thing to me. Now, an old parking lot, full of cracks and crevices, with plants and weeds clinging to life... That is alive. Why? Because no one is forcing it to a particular shape any more. It is simply existing, changing, living. A maintained parking lot is constantly forced back into shape: cracks patched, lines repainted. It is not allowed to be 'of itself so.'