Daw Aung San Suu Kyi Released from House Arrest!!

(PHOTO CREDIT: REUTERS)

YANGON, Myanmar — Myanmar's military government freed its archrival, democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi, on Saturday after her latest term of detention expired. Several thousand jubilant supporters streamed to her residence. Suu Kyi has been jailed or under house arrest for more than 15 of the last 21 years.

James: You would think that after all the abuse Aung San Suu Kyi has endured at the hands of the military dictatorship in Burma, that she'd be a broken spirit. Yet, she has weathered house arrest extremely well. She even went so far as to say that she has no ill feeling toward those who detained her. How could that be possible? As it turns out she has credited Buddhism with helping her survive house arrest. It seems likely that she was able to put into practice the Buddhist teaching of "no-self" which teaches that there is no unchanging, permanent "self" that exists separate from everything else. We don't have to travel through samsara alone because we are interconnected and interdependent with all people, things and phenomena. Nothing ever exists independent of all other things.

A tree exists because the sun exists. Suu Kyi was only imprisoned materially but since there is no "self" to imprison, she was always connected with her supporters as long as she remained aware of that essence. She could travel above those confining walls in concentrating upon the unbreakable connection with family, friends, teachers and fellow citizens. Thus, rather than sinking into feelings of loneliness and bitterness, Aung San Suu Kyi probably rested secure in being aware that she was never alone. She was interconnected with all Burmese (and the world) and therefore could weather the storm of personal imprisonment with greater ease. Because she understood these teachings it is very likely that she survived her imprisonment better than the junta leaders.

But, you might say, "How are the junta leaders imprisoned?" They are imprisoned by clinging to the delusion of "self." If one believes that there is a permanent "self" that is separate from everything else then anything that maintains the delusion of that "self" is "good" and anything that doesn't is "bad." This creates suffering when the "good" isn't around because the self is attached to the "good" in order for it to feel important. And it creates suffering when the "bad" is around because the drug-addicted self isn't being given what "it" thinks is necessary for happiness.

But it isn't lasting happiness because a dictatorship is based on the delusion that there is a "self" that is perceived to be better than everyone else. But, in order to keep that delusion inflated the "self" must constantly be on alert for threats to its fragile existence. Therefore, in order to keep this elaborate charade going the dictator (self) worries and ruminates with paranoia about losing this delusional sense of "specialness." This creates a lot of suffering inside. The dictators may not show it but they're not happy inside. A person who is at peace doesn't need to go around and control, manipulate, oppress and murder people as the Burmese junta is doing.

So, if Aung San Suu Kyi was able to over-come the quagmire of the the "self" then she was free to be at peace with her situation regardless of the house arrest. Because her sense of worth and happiness wouldn't be dependent upon if the "self" was happy, or even if it existed at all. And, while the dictators remain physically free, emotionally they are in one of the darkest, deepest prisons known to existence in samsara (self-importance). Maintaining that heavy burden of self-importance means wherever you go, your prison travels with you. Yet, Suu Kyi will always be free no matter where you try to lock-away her body. Her example helps us to remember that if she can survive decade after decade of imprisonment by dictators, then surely we can survive our daily lives. May her freedom spark a softening of relations between the junta and the strong and noble people of beautiful Burma.

~Peace to all beings~

Environmental Global Reset Button.

Recently Cambodian Buddhist monk Bun Saluth was honored by the United Nations for his environmental preservation work in preserving 18,000 acres of forest land in Cambodia. When asked about his monumental efforts he didn't hesitate to say that he was simply following Buddha's example (not just his words); When Buddha was still alive, he used trees and caves as lodging to obtain enlightenment. In this way, he has taught us to love the natural resources and wild animals.

Additionally, I would add that one of the most prominent reasons that Buddhists are often advocates for nature and animals is because of the core teachings upon interdependence. It's not so much protecting the trees out of a sense of moral superiority but rather a normal extension of being awake to the multi-layered essence of life on Earth. When we awaken to the reality that our very existence is dependent upon a healthy planet then it becomes obvious that protecting the trees (and the rest of nature) is an extension of being alive. It is also true that when we cultivate compassion for others we understand how balancing nature is integral in helping to reduce their suffering.

Thich Nhat Hanh says in his new book, "The World We Have" that, The situation the Earth is in today has been created by unmindful production and unmindful consumption. We consume to forget our worries and our anxieties. Tranquilising ourselves with over-consumption is not the way. Just like eating a bunch of sugar instead of a meal will give you a rush of artificially inflated energy followed quickly by a depressing physical crash; so to will trashing out planet lead to a crash of the "good times" followed by a deep and painful awakening to a very different world.

I've never been much of a doomsday alarmist but the over-consumption of just about everything by humanity is really starting to show and take its toll. Our greed has over-fished our oceans, poisoned our air, desecrated our forests and swollen our Earth with over-population. It is an unsustainable lifestyle and that centuries long, unskillful behavior is harvesting some sobering karma. I'm not the kind of person who stands on the corner of a busy street, ringing a bell and warning of the "end of the world" but I do see a radical change coming, and I believe awareness is the best tool to adapting.

I can see a time in the near future when our instant, electronic world will crash and fail like an old car in the Mohave desert. This will return us to a simpler way of life where the grocery store is a garden, where the animals are more valuable than cars and where being able to work with others in co-operation will mean the difference between survival and calamity. It won't destroy all of humanity but we'll have to relearn how to live a life similar to that before the industrial revolution, which will be a tough transition for some who lived the delusion that the party would go on forever. We lived through the ugly days of the "Dark Ages" when life was bleak and people died in droves and currently we're living a life of excess that is the exact opposite.

And interestingly, I think it might be a good thing for humanity to get this wake up call because it'll force us to hit the reset button on how we see the world and our resources. It will also mean that we don't have to live again in the "Dark Ages" but we also can't live the life of never-ending consumption either. We'll have to find that sweet spot, or the middle ground where life is the most sustainable. It'll be a shock at first but in the end I think we'll see that living the "hungry ghost" life of over-consumption was never really realistic in the first place.

~Peace to all beings~

You Left Hand Isn't Superior to Your Right.

The sound in this video is of poor quality so you'll want to turn up the volume.

James: I call Thich Nhat Hanh my teacher for many reasons: He's straightforward, uses simple explanations that explain deep concepts, has a knack for knowing how to teach the western mind, has a great sense of humor and is very kind and compassionate. His left hand, right hand analogy was a revelation to me when I was first studying Buddhism because it really helped me see the big picture of interdependence, interconnection and no self. I hope you enjoyed it too!!

~Peace to all beings~

Adapting to Rising Heat.

This post started as a comment in regards to Genkaku's post about the current heat wave on the East coast of America. Thanks Genkaku for the inspiration:

The Earth is our only home but for too long humans have forgotten our close interdependent relationship with her, which has led us to neglect the relationship and abuse her. Yet as we know well from studying the Dharma, we can not hurt the environment without hurting ourselves. We can ignore science all we want but the reality is that it's been getting warmer and warmer at a faster pace than prior warming periods. Direct observations have linked it to fossil fuel use. Seeing how corrosive factory and car pollution is to the human body I will trust science when they conclude that it's changing our climate adversely. Schooling has a funny way of doing that. Science has been right in countless ways because it is based on direct observations and experiments, which incidentally is not entirely unlike the Dharma's teachings of awareness and mindfulness.

This isn't a political issue because we all physically and emotionally suffer when our environment is degraded but besides that it affects the only home we are lucky to enjoy. Regardless of how we got to this point of a warming climate, I think our society needs to adapt to nature better and follow the rest of the world that take siestas (afternoon naps) during the hottest parts of the day. Let nature do it's thing and not fight it. We should take the opportunity to rest and take a nap. What a novel idea!! When I lived in West Africa the whole place would nearly completely shut down between the hours of noon and 2pm. It's only two hours but many Americans would see that as lost productivity, and that unwillingness to accept limitations causes a lot of suffering. Both physically and mentally. It's not being lazy as the American, Puritan work ethic would suggest. It's being aware of our limitations and being fully accepting of the present moment.

I think we push the human body in our modern society too much. We have delusions about what the human body can take and how far we can push it but the human body is perfectly aware of the moment and it's capacities. Whether we accept those limitations or not the body will shut down when the present moment finds it unable to function. Our mind might ignore the present moment but our bodies are finely tuned to it.

Perhaps we can learn from that and accept our limitations instead of forcing and pushing everything. In today's western world (I can't speak for elsewhere) we're over-worked, get less sleep and eat bad food in an impossible chase to "save time" and stay one step ahead in this fast paced world. And I can't help but wonder if that's partly why there's been such an increase in anger, hatred and selfishness. So I say we slow down a bit and bring about noon siesta time here to America.

PHOTO CREDIT: Napping monk by Brian Keathley on Flickr.

Tugging on Nature is Tugging on all Things.

When one tugs at a single thing in nature, one finds it attached to the rest of the world.

-John Muir

James: I propose that while all environments are helpful, nature is one of the best places to understand interconnection and interdependence. It is sometimes difficult to see the importance of interconnection in the concrete mazes of our cities where we have sacrificed a sense of community on the altar of individuality. It's still possible to witness the interconnection in city life but difficult with all the shiny, bright distractions. Yet walking mindfully through nature's wonders (forests, mountains, jungles and beaches, etc) it is immediately clear that there is a rhythm. There is a well balanced community that exists in a constant state of co-operation. Glaciers feed streams, streams become rivers, which water trees and other plant life.

The green foliage grows high and deep providing ample food for the deer, which in turn shit out seeds for future grass plants elsewhere in the forest providing for a constant migration and survival of that vital plant. It is hard not to feel small in such a intricate yet vast natural system of interdependence. Yet it's not feeling small in a depressing way but rather feeling apart of something. In the city it's as if we are in a sanitized, isolating bubble bouncing erratically without much control but bouncing into one another from time to time. Yet not long enough to form much of a bond.

Often in nature, if one plant goes extinct then it can throw the whole system of interdependence off, which can eventually bring down the entire eco-sytem. We humans are no different but we think we are. We think that we can worship individuality and not face the consequences of living in this illusion. Yet the consequences of basing our culture around individuality couldn't be clearer. We think that man has become so smart that we have mastered nature and don't need her but obviously this is a delusion based on our greed to consume endlessly. Our greed is so ravenous that we are killing our own host--Mother Earth. We are shitting where we eat, sleep and live. Yet like a drug addict destroying the lives of everyone around them, we push on thinking we can out smart nature. Oh foolish man.

~Peace to all beings~

Biocentrism.

I have recently come across an interesting science theory call Biocentrism as proposed by scientist Robert Lanza. I was fascinated with the many connections between it and much Buddhist philosophy. I will give you a quick run-down of what Biocentrism is about via wikipedia, which isn't the best source but it's the easiest for my purposes but I encourage you to read about it further. Biocentrism posits that life created the universe and not the other way around as traditional science has taught us. This blends nicely into the Buddhist concept that reality is what our limited and deluded mind makes of it. The seven principles of Biocentrism are as follows. Note the similarities between it and Buddhist thought:

1). What we perceive as reality is a process that involves our consciousness. An "external" reality, if it existed, would by definition have to exist in space. But this is meaningless, because space and time are not absolute realities but rather tools of the human and animal mind.

2). Our external and internal perceptions are inextricably intertwined. They are different sides of the same coin and cannot be divorced from one another.

3). The behavior of subatomic particles, indeed all particles and objects, is inextricably linked to the presence of an observer. Without the presence of a conscious observer, they at best exist in an undetermined state of probability waves.

4). Without consciousness, "matter" dwells in an undetermined state of probability. Any universe that could have preceded consciousness only existed in a probability state.

5). The structure of the universe is explainable only through biocentrism. The universe is fine-tuned for life, which makes perfect sense as life creates the universe, not the other way around. The "universe" is simply the complete spatio-temporal logic of the self.

6). Time does not have a real existence outside of animal-sense perception. It is the process by which we perceive changes in the universe.

7). Space, like time, is not an object or a thing. Space is another form of our animal understanding and does not have an independent reality. We carry space and time around with us like turtles with shells. Thus, there is no absolute self-existing matrix in which physical events occur independent of life.

James: Then there is this following excerpt from a different article about how scientist Robert Lanza rediscovered this idea that Buddhists have believed for eons. It is a nice image of what is being talked about with this theory and startlingly reminds me of Indra's Net metaphor:

The farther we peer into space, the more we realize that the nature of the universe cannot be understood fully by inspecting spiral galaxies or watching distant supernovas. It lies deeper. It involves our very selves. This insight snapped into focus one day while one of us (Lanza) was walking through the woods. Looking up, he saw a huge golden orb web spider tethered to the overhead boughs. There the creature sat on a single thread, reaching out across its web to detect the vibrations of a trapped insect struggling to escape. The spider surveyed its universe, but everything beyond that gossamer pinwheel was incomprehensible. The human observer seemed as far-off to the spider as telescopic objects seem to us. Yet there was something kindred: We humans, too, lie at the heart of a great web of space and time whose threads are connected according to laws that dwell in our minds.

James: As Nobel physicist John Wheeler once said, “No phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.” I look forward to reading more about this theory as I am very fascinated with interactions between science and Buddhism. If everyone and everything is interdependent and interconnected then I see no reason why Buddhism and science have to be mutually exclusive. It seems to me that many of the theories posited by both are quite similar.

PHOTO CREDIT: University of Chicago Press

~Peace to all beings~

Interdependence in World Politics.

Recently American President Barack Obama traveled to Russia and with the help of his Russian counterpart negotiated a deal to reduce nuclear weapons between the two countries. For too long America has seen itself as the only important country in the world, which has bred the three poisons with alarming but predictable speed: Greed, hatred and delusion. Thankfully America now has a leader that better understands how interconnected the world is and just how destructive and counterproductive the "us vs. them" mentality can be. I thought this quote from Obama about interconnection in world affairs was refreshing talk for a political leader because politics is all too often used to exploit people, money and power:

There is sometimes a sense that old ways of thinking must prevail; a conception of power that is rooted in the past rather than in the future... In 2009, a great power does not show strength by dominating or demonizing other countries... As I said in Cairo, given our interdependence, any world order that tries to elevate one nation or one group of people over an other will inevitably fail. The pursuit of power is no longer a zero-sum game - progress must be shared.

James: A verse from the Tao Te Ching comes to mind:

If you want to govern the people you must place yourself below them If you want to lead the people you must learn how to follow them.

Tao Te Ching v.66, Paragraph 2.

Barack Obama isn't a perfect leader but it is refreshing to hear a leader speak of interconnection, interdependence and the oneness of all people and cultures.

~Peace to all beings~

Is Buddhism Masochistic?

Author Ben Dench certainly isn't the first person to claim that Buddhism teaches self-annihilation and nihilism but I wanted to touch on his article because there is still a lot of misinformation in the west in particular about Buddhism. For example, many Americans continue to think we Buddhists see Buddha as a Creator God to be worshiped. Dench insinuates that the Buddhist denial of the self is escapism and abandonment of life. Unfortunately Mr. Dench like many critics of Buddhism seems not to have studied the issue enough to understand what Buddhists mean by the denial of self.

He says, "In Buddhism, the existence of a self is denied and the goal of Buddhism is to snuff out the flame of consciousness and cease reincarnation." Wow, sounds pretty bad if that's was the truth. We don't seek to "snuff out the flame of consciousness" but rather the flame of desire. As I understand it, (to over simplify this) In Buddhism consciousness is simply awareness of being. In Buddhism our current state of being is limited by much suffering. So why would a person not want to be free of suffering one day? None of us wants to suffer and so at it's core Buddhism seeks to snuff out suffering--not happiness and a sense of meaning as Mr. Dench seems to insinuate.

Now, concerning the idea of denying the existence of a "self"--There are differences a bit on the view of the self between Theravada and Mahayana so I'll speak from the point of view of a Mahayanist. Buddhists deny a permanent self because upon closer inspection through meditation and contemplation it is seen that the idea of a self is a delusion. Thus if something is a delusion then why would we want to embrace it? The understanding of this idea of the "self" being a delusion hinges upon the Buddhist teaching of Dependent Arising, which says phenomena rise along side each other in an interdependent fabric of cause and effect. This is because of that--and that, and that. This computer exists because minerals exist, chemicals exist, engineering exists, designers exist, assemblers exist and so on. Without all of those existing in unison--there is no "computer" as such.

We think we are an individual but if that were the case then we'd have to have appeared in this life without the influence of parents--we'd be an anomaly. Instead we have the DNA of both our mother and father who have their DNA as a result of their mother and father. You have a name but it was given to you by your parents. You have interests but they were developed because of certain conditions and influences, which arose from the infinite pool of potentialities of life. You can not say for example that you'd be the same "permanent self," which you claim that you are now if you had been born under different circumstances. The human manifestation is ENTIRELY dependent upon innumerable factors.

It's not, "You are nothing--period, end of sentence." It's more like, "You are nothing because you are apart of EVERYTHING." That said, however, the word "nothing" carries too much negative meaning. So instead how about saying, "You have no permanent self not because you're a bad person or a loser but because that "self" is LIMITING your enjoyment, peace and meaning. It's holding you back instead of allowing you freedom." When you realize that you are BOTH "you" AND everything else--How can you NOT see the "self" as limiting and imprisonment??? I like the analogy used by many that "I" am a wave:

D.T. Suzuki has the analogy of a wave on the ocean as symbolic of man’s sense of self. A wave arises on the ocean and looks down and sees the ocean all around. It says, “ I know that I am because I am not the ocean nor am I all the other individual waves, I exist separate from them”. It has separated itself from the ocean to know itself as an individual wave. This separation actually creates the ‘self’; it is both an act and a fact of this separation. Now it makes all its judgments as a separated self. In this act it is also separated from itself, it knows that it is but not who it really is. Now it tries to go outward to find itself but it cannot. When it goes inward it is also problematic, why, because the act of going inward is still the act of separating from the ocean to be able to go inward.

So this wave is alienated from itself, it’s surroundings and the ocean. But the fact of the matter is, who is the wave fundamentally? Is it the individual wave? No, there’s really no such thing. So who is looking for this awakening? The fact is that the wave is really just a manifestation of the ocean; it never was separated in reality but only knew itself as separated. It has to stop the ego process, the act of separating, in the hope that the ocean can rise up to see itself as both the wave and the ocean. It is one hundred percent wave and one hundred percent ocean, not at any point ever separated. The wave seeking the ocean/enlightenment/nirvana is the ocean seeking the wave. When the breakthrough occurs it is not new or just starting but a realization of what always really was. This is a non-dual duality. Both itself as wave and ocean.

JAMES: So we can quickly see that we are variations of the same essence repeating itself in beautiful, myriad ways in a timeless state. How can an individual wave feel that it has more meaning as just a wave then as a wave AND the entire, beautiful, amazingly diverse ocean!! Thus, Buddhism doesn't say, "You have no self (you're not an individual wave)...Thus you're worthless." If Buddhist teachings stopped there as Ben Dench seems to be implying then yeah, that would be pretty miserable. If that's what someone thought Buddhism to be then I can see why someone like Mr. Dench would say it's masochistic and leads to feelings of meaninglessness. However, you just read in the wave story--that's not the end. I think some people hear, "You have no self..." along with words like "emptiness" and that's all they hear. That would indeed lead to wondering why in the hell anyone would want to follow Buddhism!!

As the wonderful Neil deGrasse Tyson says, the same iron in meteors is the same iron that pulses through our veins--that's what Buddhist's are talking about when they deny the reality of the "self." It's the idea that we are larger than our individual "selves"--we are interdependent upon each other, which gives most people a tremendous sense of well being and meaning. Does that sound like nihilism to you?

Individualism is much more limiting and alienating than Buddhism as individualism's answer for all life's problems is extreme self-indulgence, which doesn't bring peace and lasting happiness. When self-indulgence doesn't work we deny everything and become angry, bitter and nihilistic. Buddha taught to avoid EITHER extreme of eternalism or nihilism. After trying to live both extremes himself he came upon the idea of walking the middle-path of neither extreme and finally he found peace. So when it's understood in this light it, no self actually gives a person GREATER meaning in life--not less. This is the context that is missing in the Dench article but I realize that in English the terms no-self and emptiness sound like annilation, pessimism, fatalism and nihilism.

~Peace to all beings~

Epicurus and Buddhism.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"-Epicurus.

James: This is the quote that introduced me to the ancient philosopher Epicurus who has since become one of my favorites. So I began to study Epicurus and found that he had much in common with Buddhism and its non-theistic nature.

What I was most interested in was that he believed and taught "that events in the world are ultimately based on the motions and interactions of atoms moving in empty space." This sounds very similar to the pivotal Buddhist belief of interdependence or dependent co-arising, which says that nothing exists separate from anything else. All is interconnected in a web of cause and effect.

This includes sharing the belief that something can not come from nothing and therefore the Universe must be endless yet because of his belief in a shifting, interconnected web of atoms that same Universe can not be unchanging. It was his belief that the Universe is eternal but only in the sense that it goes through cycles of birth and death along the way. Yet another shade of thinking, which can be found in Buddhist philosophy. As well as a theory that can be found is still found in modern day science via the cyclic theory of the Universe.

He was also dedicated to over-coming pain and fear, which is not unlike the dedication that we Buddhists seek to over-come what we would call suffering in general. He taught that curbing desires are important if one wants to avoid that pain and fear, which is another teaching shared in Buddhism. This included going into the detail as to how desires cause suffering such as mentioning indulging too much on foods because it leads to pain that one might not be able to afford such delicacies in the future. The idea of short term happiness doesn't bring long term happiness.

He did believe that some pleasure is important, which has led some to believe he was a hedonist but he was more of a believer in the middle path of moderation. True he was no Buddhist monk following every precept. However, most argue that his ultimate definition of pleasure was actually tranquility, which is more akin to the Buddhist definition of enlightenment. This is because tranquility is defined as a state, which is free from stress and emotion; an untroubled state free from disturbances; a peaceful state. Enlightenment being (using a very basic definition) a nirvanic state of being freed from desire (emotions) and suffering (stress).

Epicureanism was often seen in ancient Greece as being a godless philosophy but while Epicurus denied being godless he also believed that if there were any gods that they most likely were ambivilant at best toward human beings. Thus they would not pursue punishing or rewarding us in this or any other life. In other words the idea being that a belief in a god or gods isn't important to man's day to day actions. In comparison Buddhists also usually do not concern themselves with a god as it is seen as irrelevant to realizing that the human condition is repleat with suffering and that praying to a god does not end our suffering. When we are honest with ourselves we realize that we are the only ones who can end our suffering.

Some Buddhists believe that there are gods living in a god realm but that they are like the gods of Epicureanism where they do not have power over human beings. These gods in Buddhism are subject to the same suffering as we human beings. According to these Buddhists being a god is a distraction where one is more concerned with pleasure and self adoration than certainly concerning oneself with human beings, meditation and over-coming the cycle of suffering. The problem is that even for these gods their pleasures and good karma run out eventually.

Epicureanism certainly does not mesh with Buddhism completely but Epicurus did teach many similar ideas. I wanted to do this post because I enjoy discovering how western and eastern philosophy and thought can be connected. We focus too often on how different we are and sometimes I wonder if that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. The connections and shared ideals are there if we really want to see them and embrace each others cultures.

~Peace to all beings~

Obama, Buddhism and Taxes.

With great respect and admiration of John McCain I am elated that Senator Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States of America. Of course mainly this comes from my political views but I do want to speak of his ability to unite America and the world.

Barack Obama seems uniquely positioned to be a political leader able to unite people of all races, religions and citizens of the world. He may not know of the Buddhist teaching of interdependence but that is exactly what he has cultivated. He has been able to inspire people from all over America and the world with many different political views that we have more in common than not and that we have a responsibility to help each other. He has reminded us that the division of the past 8 years has caused a lot of suffering both here in America and in the world.

In reality he reminds us that we are dependent upon each other if we want to increase happiness, success and peace in this world. He reminds us that we aren't America being the world but America being apart of the world again. In many ways his election surpasses politics and speaks to a greater hope and vision for America and the world. It is a historic moment that despite your politics you can't help but rejoice for what it means to overcoming our differences and barriers in regards to race. We took one step further in America last night in realizing the true oneness of all beings that is our reality.

His domestic vision is nothing short of an understanding of the interdependence of suchness. In other words if certain Americans have been financially successful in this country it is not simply because of a person's hard work. It is greatly dependent upon the efforts of others that have helped position them into the place where they reap great success. Perhaps they were born into a wealthy family that enabled them to go to university and earn a degree, which helped them earn a lot of money. Or perhaps a certain teacher inspired them to be interested in learning and If it wasn't for them they probably would not be in the position that they are in. Just the very fact of being born in America where opportunity abounds requires sharing of ones good fortune.

Maybe their karma has given them great opportunities such as being born with a gift for a profession that is highly valued in society. However, it is that very same karma, which demands that they give back to others through (for example) paying more taxes so that others might be able to better care for their family. Or so that even more people will be able to afford the health care that all beings deserve. How can we stand by and watch people suffer from sickness when we perhaps can afford to pay a little more in taxes to ease the suffering of sickness for our fellow beings? Yes karma blesses us but if we greedily do not want to share our fair share of that good karma with others then that good karma will undoubtedly disappear away from our next birth.

If one is took look mindfully at money we can not help but realize that in reality it is not ours--nothing is ours. There is nothing that we can say that we did independent of others. In some way we are all effected for better or worse by others. This is not to say that I believe in a communist society because I don't but it does say that to whom much is given, much is required. We only need look at the sharing of resources that occurs in monasteries to understand how sharing a certain amount of wealth is a value greatly shared by Buddhism. Especially if we believe that Buddha and monks are our examples of how to improve our karma to achieve liberation from samsara.

Being in a higher income bracket and therefore paying more in taxes is also a way to guard against the power of the ego-self. Money often causes more problems then not as it is an attempt to rid ourselves of suffering through things that do not last nor grant lasting happiness. The ego-self then says, well we're not happy because we don't have enough money, we need more!! How often do see the rich celebrities of the world suffer greatly despite their mountains of money? They become hungry ghosts. In the end money is nothing more than another attachment and I personally find that I get more happiness from giving money to the needy than buying another t.v.

~Peace to all beings~

Selfishness is "Heaven and Hell"

I once heard a story about a visit to heaven and hell. In both places the visitor saw many people seated at a table on which many delicious foods were laid out. In both places chopsticks over a meter long were tied to their right hands, while their left hands were tied to their chairs. In hell, however much they stretched out their arms, the chopsticks were too long for them to get food into their mouths. They grew impatient and got their hands and chopsticks tangled with one another's. The delicacies were scattered here and there. In heaven, on the other hand, people happily used the long chopsticks to pick out someone else's favorite food and feed it to him, and in turn they were being fed by others. They all enjoyed their meal in harmony.

--Shundo Aoyama Roshi

James: Now I don't believe in a physical, separate "Hell" or "Heaven" from the ones that we create and live in right here, right now. However, I agree with this parable in the sense that it points out the problems that come from being selfish, dualistic and trying to fight the Universal Law of inter-dependency and co-arising.

When we try to go it alone then we will always suffer sooner or later but when we work together we all grow, benefit and reduce our collective suffering. This all reminds me of the story of the monkey and the orange:

Apparently there is a trick to catching monkeys. You find a tree with a hole in it and put and orange in the tiny, tight hole. Then wait until the monkey arrives at the tree to take the orange. According to the story the monkey will hold onto the orange which prevents him from freeing himself from the hole in the tree because he is so greedy and thus you can come up and grab him without much fighting. I remember reading from Dr. David R. Hawkins (who's books are fantastic by the way) that the ego is so selfish and deluded that it will is willing to let the body die in order to get what it wants--such as drug addictions.

May we all always remember that liberation and true freedom comes from remembering our interconnectedness and striving for the good of all. If we only look after ourselves then we are sowing the seeds to our own destruction because as Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me (Matthew 25, verses 31-40 in the Christian Bible). So in other words when we hurt others we are hurting ourselves. In not caring about the environment or thinking that animals are not our equals we kill ourselves because as the animals, plants, fish insects, etc. go--so goes man.

PHOTO: The Dalai Lama in profile.

~Peace to all beings~

Buddhism and Atheism

As a Buddhist (if you are) do you also consider yourself an Atheist as well? I guess it depends on how technical you want to get.

Technically Buddhists are Atheists because we do not believe in a God or Savior--we are our own Saviors. The Buddha was not a God but rather was a highly intelligent man who mapped out a path to great and everlasting peace whether in good times or bad.

Being a Buddhist Atheist, however, does NOT--I repeat--does NOT mean that Buddhists are nihilistic (and I do not meant to imply that non-Buddhist Atheists are all nihilists either). Yes we believe that all things are empty but that simply means empty of any independent existence. It is a concept that propels us to act in a benevolent way toward others, animals and non-living things as our happiness is directly connected to the happiness of others and non-living things.

Some Buddhists believe in Amitabha Buddha who is said to be able to save followers and bring them to a Heaven like existence called, "The Pure Land"--Thus the name "Pure Land Buddhism." Do Pure Land Buddhists believe in a type of "God??" In a way they do as the belief isn't about working out one's own liberation but praying to and relying upon a sort of deity to liberate and "save" them. It is a very "faith based" school relying upon their faith that Amitabha will bring them salvation through his grace. Sounds to me like a similar role to that of Jesus Christ. Of course I certainly am not a scholar in Buddhism so I welcome other views and opinions on this matter. I would love to hear from adherents of the Pure Land school on this matter.

Personally I would call my myself an "Atheist Buddhist" If I have to throw dualistic labels around as I do not believe in a personal God. However, I can not prove or say that a form of "God" absolutely does not exist--no one knows for sure.

This dove-tails into Richard Dawkins De Facto Atheist definition (which is where he says he sits--as do I):

There is a very low probability that a personal "God" exists but short of zero. I can not know for certain but I think "God" is very improbable, and I live my life on the assumption that he is not there.

The only way that I believe in a "God" is to say that we are all "God." Because, again, understanding the interdependent, interconnected nature of True Reality I believe that if there is a "God" it seems that it would be a force rather then a person. This is because such a force would be so Enlightened that it would have to be beyond all form and definition.

I also believe in a type of "heaven" but I believe it is a state of being--or enlightenment to use that awkward phrase. In other words, heaven is what we make of the present moment and place--not a place outside ourselves. I believe that together we can create a heaven on Earth.

In the end, however, I just do not concern myself with the question too much as I think practicing the middle-way is the most important use of our energy. Nevertheless, I just felt like discussing it a bit today. I hope my ramblings made some sense.

~Peace to all beings~