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~

How Do Love Your Self if There is No-Self?

Buddha is well known for teaching that there is no such thing as a "self" but something I have struggled with for some time is, "how does self-love fit into that context?" My therapist is trying to help me love myself more because I don't always have the best self-esteem. I believe the Buddha too has taught about the importance of self-love.

So, my dilemma from a Buddhist standpoint is, "how can I "love" my "self" if attaching importance (which love does to a degree) to a sense of, "self" is delusion that causes suffering? That conversation with my doctor brought this to the surface, and I'm fairly perplexed by it. One is always learning on this path, so, I'd love to hear what your ideas are upon this conundrum of mine. I have some pretty wise readers, so I am hopeful that some of you can shed a little light upon my road-block (bowing).

~Peace to all beings~

Nyogen Roshi: Everything is Contained Right Where You Sit.

~Peace to all beings~

The Oasis of Dharma.

The Self cannot be pierced by weapons or burned by fire; water cannot wet it, nor can the wind dry it. The Self cannot be pierced or burned, made wet or dry. It is everlasting and infinite, standing on the motionless foundations of eternity. The Self is unmanifested, beyond all thought, beyond all change. Knowing this, you should not grieve.

-Bhagavad Gita 2 23-25

James: This description of oneness is the kind of wisdom that initially attracted me to Eastern spirituality. As many of you know I was raised in a very strict, dogmatic Christian religion, which shaped my life in every way. Eventually as I matured into adulthood that carefully constructed, isolating world started showing cracks. I could no longer stay in the religion because I began to see it as incompatible with the world I was discovering as an adult.

It didn't fit with the new ideas, concepts and information that I had been sheltered from all those years and my world crashed down around me like a cascading crystal chandelier falling from above. For the first time in my life I felt truly alone, lost and didn't know what or whom to trust. And so like many in this world of chaos, selfishness and suffering I felt overwhelmed. Add modernity's way of diminishing peoples' value and I was living in constant fear and anguish.

I was going through my own process of seeing the true unsatisfactory nature of the real world as Buddha did. I drifted into nihilism and hated just about everything and everyone that I came into contact with and then I began reading books on Buddhism and other Eastern spiritual traditions. I began to see hope and sought out every book and teacher on the subjects that I could find. I was insatiable. It was like I had been wandering in a desert thirsting for relief and stumbling upon a cool, relaxing, refreshing oasis. Except that at this oasis there was a Buddhist master patiently sitting at the side of the clear, clean, crisp pool waiting for me to finish guzzling the water. The water was like the initial gratification of finding Buddhism before realizing that was just the tip of the iceberg. It was as if he smiled and said, "Water is nice but you must find the infinite oasis for lasting relief."

This master (Buddhism) began teaching me not only how to survive the suffering of thirst (greed, anger, delusion--suffering in general) but taught me how to survive traveling through the desert (samsara) in a way that wouldn't be so painful and discouraging. So that one day I would reach my destination (Nirvana--liberation from traveling from life to life in an infinite cycle of suffering) and no longer be lost wandering the disorienting desert (samsara). This of course was the Dharma. I had spent too long just looking for the next oasis (immediate gratification) instead of trying to actually find the way out of the damn desert altogether!! It took Buddhism to show me that life changing discovery.

I was no longer looking through the self-isolating eyes of individualist, materialism. I zoomed out and saw the bigger picture, which made me smaller and I found some much needed relief in that reality. Saying that feeling small made me feel relief might sound odd to those new to ideas of the Higher Self or Oneness. Or to those use to the materialism of the West. However, it helped me feel for the first time that I wasn't alone and that I didn't have to take on this overwhelming world alone.

I was apart of a much bigger essence that could never be diminished, tarnished or taken away regardless of what this sometimes mean and nasty world could present as an obstacle. It gave me a feeling of belonging, true belonging that could never be taken away because how do you take away everything that is? How do you take away Oneness? How can you separate the molecules that make up your body from the molecules that make up the air that surrounds your entire body? How do you then separate the air molecules from those that make up the radiation from the sun that keeps all things on Earth alive? And how do you separate those radiation molecules from dark matter and gravity? So if we are both this body AND air, earth, water, fire, space dust, dark matter and who knows what else--how can you feel alone and lost after knowing all of that? As the quote says,"Knowing this, you should not grieve." It's easy to diminish an individual but impossible to diminish the totality of the all that exists.

I soon realized, however, that it isn't as easy as just making that discovery--it takes a lot more than discovering a mine to find enough to gold to free you from poverty. It's not easy following the path of Dharma but I have seen enough to know that it sure is worth it and better than the alternative. It's easy to forget to look at the compass (not practice the Dharma) while traveling toward the end of the desert (samara) so I keep meditating and breathing my way toward liberation. The funny thing is that in reality there is no desert!!

~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~

Diamond in the Ruff.

Meditation is many things to me. It is the ultimate medication--like garlic it's helps just about everything.

Today's meditation was like sitting under a water fall after a long day of marching through a steamy, exhausting jungle. As I sat there each breath washed away grime of delusions built up in my mind to once again reveal the Buddha nature within all things.

In keeping with the three jewels imagery I see Buddha-nature as a perfectly cut and brilliant diamond buried in the mud of the delusions, greed, anger within the hologram of the self. It gives me perspective to see the self as a suit coat that one wears to work. It can be put on but also taken off and that it only has form when I wrap myself in it.

It is not permanently strapped to me though at times I get so used to it and I forget that I'm wearing it and those are times of delusion thinking that the suit coat gives me comfort but it is a false sense of comfort. It might bring slight warmth (pay raise) for a time but sooner or later it will become constrictive (attachment to money and power) and cause great discomfort (suffering) and must be shed. The trick is for me to be mindful enough to realize that I don't need the suit (self) to realize retirement (Buddhahood) from the work place (samsara).

But let's get back to the diamond--even when all those layers of mud, dirt and silt cover that diamond of Buddha-nature its essence never dulls or changes. Buddha-nature is indestructible and never loses its luster and pure essence regardless of what covers or conceals it. A diamond can wait for eons locked inside a dark, dirty and hard chunk of rock but it's pure nature never changes. It waits locked inside our karma to be unveiled to bask in the vast openness and freedom of Buddhahood to reflect the glorious light of Nirvana.

PHOTO CREDIT: Click here.

~Peace to all beings~

Practicing Impermance Through the Destruction of Buddhist Heritage.

The Sunday Times, Feb 8, 2009

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- The 200-year old Buddhist heritage in South Western city of Pakistan - Swat, is now in danger with local Taliban militants threatening to destroy the regions one of the precious museums, media reports here said. The besieged Swat museum which is now under the threat of Pakistani Taliban. It houses pre-Islamic heritage, mainly Buddhists artifacts and Buddha statue of Gandhara era.

"The museum will be reopened only after peace returns to the valley," says its Curator Aqleem. But it must be protected from Taliban, too, to be reopened. The Taliban has threatened to wipe out the symbols of pre-Islamic cultures in Swat and the museum has become a prime target of the militants - a repository of relics dating as far back as to the 3rd century BC, the Dawn reported this week (Wednesday). Swat museum is rich with many pre-historic artifacts and statues mainly belonging to the Buddhist civilization of the South Asian region. Its Buddhist statues are supposed to be the few remaining representations of the Gandhara art.

In November 2007, the militants blew up a historic Buddha statute in the Jihanabad area of Swat causing irreparable damage to the seven-meter tall historic statue. After the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddha statue of Afghanistan in March 2001, the meditating statue in Swat was the most precious one, according to the Curator.

James: As an historian and an art lover I am dismayed by this tragic destruction of these Buddhist relics and the region's ancient heritage. When I first read this story I could feel anger rise inside of my mind as well as frustration wondering why someone would do such a thing? Then I realized that a part of me sees a threat to Buddhism as a threat to myself or more accurately the ego-self.

I think this stems from the part of me who enjoys Buddhism for its "trappings," which means the statues, architecture of temples, the history of Buddhism, incense, the bells, the monk robes and on and on. These things are wonderful to be sure, they have their place and I don't see anything wrong in enjoying them in so far as I realize that they are not permanent nor can they bring me lasting peace, happiness and freedom from afflictive emotions such as desire.

It doesn't do me any good to be attached to a statue of Buddha who was a man who taught against attachment!! How silly of me. If Buddha were around to see my thought process and how attached I was toward a bunch of old, empty statues then he would probably smash them himself!! This fear is for the destruction of Buddhism, which has become a very important part of my life and unfortunately seeped into my self-identity/ego.

So If I dig deep enough I can see that what I'm truly afraid of is losing that "self" even despite all the meditating and working on letting go of the self. It's a bit like a virus that keeps mutating to stay alive looking for nooks and crannies to embed itself into thinking the last place I'll look is in structure of Buddhism itself. In other words, in the relics, traditions and history of the religion.

I shouldn't see this destruction as a loss but a chance to practice one of the most important and liberating teachings within Buddhism-impermanance. Traditions are wonderful, so are statues and architecture but in the end I must remember that they are merely fingers pointing to the moon and not the moon itself. This all said I don't think that we should just let all our museums be destroyed and looted (if we can prevent it) because even though they are just objects they do offer some benefits to society. It's just that I need not become agitated when objects/relics do disappear or are destroyed. Everything must go in the end and no amount of Buddha statues and relics is going to deliver me from samsara.

~Peace to all beings~

What is the Zen of Pornography?

What does this article have to do with Zen? Not much except the author's attempt to make a two sentence statement about pornography into a koan. Other then those two sentences there is no other reference to Zen or Buddhism. YET. Yet the title of the post is, "The Zen of Porn: If Pornography is Everywhere, Is It Nowhere?"

Upon reading that I thought that the article was going to be about some Zen Buddhist porn star or something. Instead it's an article about one woman's crusade against pornography.

I don't want to get into the debate about pornography itself (Though I will say that I consider pornography along with much of sexuality to be a personal matter). That said I found it somewhat disrespectful that she was using the Zen label to draw attention to an article about pornography. It appears to me that once again Zen has been misused for a catchy, "cool" title.

I know that it's often better to ignore this kind of thing but it seems at some point we need to say something if for no other reason than for self-respect. Yes, it's important not to get angry with every misuse of our Buddhist labels but it's also important to value our traditions--and ourselves. I don't think we need to get offended at every misuse of Buddhist labels either but at some point it comes down to showing courtesy for other beliefs and people.

Yes, it's important for ourselves to not get attached to simple words but simple words also carry sacred energy and meaning too. At some point we have to say something or we'll end up with Zen toilet seat covers and Zen toilet paper. Yes, it's important to keep the peace and not get personally invested in such disrespect but it's also important to stand for something.

Imagine saying, "The Christianity of Porn," you'd get bombarded by people finding offense and rightly so. Sometimes you have to draw a line. Yes, Buddhism is more than words but there is still a tradition to it and it would be sad if we just let all of our traditions disappear. True we don't need all of those things to practice meditation but then don't we just become someone who happens to meditate?

If Buddha is just a word then why do we take refuge in it? Don't we do Buddha's gift of the Dharma to us a bit of a disservice? Maybe I'm not a "real Buddhist" but I like some tradition and sacredness in my beliefs. I enjoy having things to respect and find meaning and value in.

Some people just don't know any better so I'm not saying we should insult them back but I am advocating that we educate whenever we have the opportunity.

~Peace to all beings~

Zen Master Franz Kafka?

You need not do anything.
Remain sitting at your table and listen.
You need not even listen, just wait.
You need not even wait,
just learn to be quiet, still and solitary.
And the world will freely offer itself to you unmasked.
It has no choice, it will roll in ecstasy at your feet.

~Franz Kafka from his poem, "Learn to Be Quiet."

James: It's somewhat hard to imagine the brooding Franz Kafka as a student of mindfulness but here he is teaching it with just as much clarity as many monks!!

Then there is this Zen-like comment from Kafka regarding his relationship with Judaism/spirituality (he was known to show interest in Judaism especially later in life), "What have I in common with Jews? I have hardly anything in common with myself and should stand very quietly in a corner, content that I can breathe."

His questioning of what he has in common with "himself" and what that "self" even means seems like an almost koan-like statement. The whole of the quote sounds as if it came from a Zen Master trying to teach a novice that the label "Buddhist" is not important but rather the essence and teachings of Buddhism. For example, being present to be content with the basic things in life such as standing (or sitting) in a corner and breathing.

PHOTO: Franz Kafka by Anthony Hare 2003.

~Peace to all beings~