The Visitor

This morning Val came downstairs and asked me to peer out into the soccer field behind our house to see if I could recognize something about 50 yards beyond our fence. It looked like a grey, medium sized animal, like a badger. It had a bit of a round, lopsided look, so I revised my guess to an armadillo, who, having been abducted from his native Southwestern home, and having regained conscious in the middle of a field in New Jersey, endeavored to curl up in a ball and wait it out. However, the stillness of this mysterious figure struck me as being more plant than animal. I settled on a fungus instead, and wondered out loud if it might be a large mushroom - perhaps, the largest one on record in New Jersey - that sprang up amidst all of this rain. Neither my long distance glasses nor the zoom function on either of our phones was enough to resolve this mystery, so we put on our sneakers and cautiously trekked out to it, with Maggie barking from the patio in protest. It did not move as we drew closer. We slowed our pace to give it a chance to react while there was still some distance between us. When we were very close to being on top of it, we paused. The grey sky grew still. The birds grew quiet. Our senses sharpened, like our ancestors on the African plains.  It was an old, discolored and partially deflated basketball :-)

What Does True Transformation Look Like?

What does transformation look like? Nothing. That's what. I see people posting pictures of themselves or others in bathing suites or bikinis as proof of transformation. I see people posting updates on their financial success or the financial success of their cohorts as proof of breaking the chains of their former lives. I propose that this is just trading in one illusion for another, one set of chains for another. Of course, I can't offer any advice on true transformation, because I really don't know, but that is the point ;-)

Pious Possessions

There was a great and noble King that ruled over what used to be 8 separate kingdoms. His armies defeated lesser Kings, and, upon finding themselves part of his kingdom, his new subjects rejoiced in his ability to govern with fairness and efficiency. One day an enlightened monk who wondered through the kingdom wearing only rags and carrying only his rice bowl arrived at the entrance of the castle and asked for an audience with the King. There was a festival that day, and everyone was celebrating in a field a short distance away. The King said to the monk, "leave your bowl here, let us walk to the festival, and after we talk, I will fill your bowl with rice and give you a place to sleep for the night." As they walked, the monk began to recite his tried and true message: "You are successful and happy, and you bring success and happiness to others, but you still do not know your true self, and, therefore, have not achieved true happiness, nor been able to bestow this on your people. So long as you cling to your worldly possessions and concepts, you trap yourself in karmic sorrow, and you trap your people in karmic sorrow. I ask that you put yourself under my tutelage, so that I can help you find your way to the way." Just then, someone cried out, "the castle is on fire!" The King turned and saw his castle engulfed in flames, but then he looked around and saw that everyone was already a safe distance away at the festival, so he said, "everything I care about is already out of harm's way." The monk turned and saw the same scene and shouted, "my rice bowl!", and began to run towards the castle. As he watched the monk run straight towards his burning castle, the King said, "farewell, master".

-----

This is an adaption from a much shorter Zen teaching whose origin and author are, as yet, unknown to me, but, to be sure, it is probably 1000s of years old written by someone who is more modern than I will ever be.

Hidden Treasure

There was once a monastery in a remote province, situated on a very busy east-west path, such that nearly every traveler would stay for the night. The monastery was run by five elderly monks.

It was not always that way. There used to be 40 monks of varying ages, but as they started to pass away of old age, their numbers diminished, until, finally, seven remained, including the master.

On the eve of his death, the master transmitted his Buddha mind to the most enlightened of the six, but the morning after, both the master and his disciple were dead, the latter having died of a stroke.

Left without a master, aging and barely able to operate the monastery, the monks tried to impress upon their guests the simplicity and beauty of their way, but no one, not even the weariest of travelers, showed any interest in joining them.

After one of them fell ill and almost died, the monks decided, out of sheer desperation, to seek advice from a mystic living in a nearby forest. They traveled for half a day to reach his cabin. He greeted them from his garden and invited them into his sitting room.

They told him about the events that lead them to their current circumstance, how they tried and failed to engage travelers to join their ranks, and how, if the situation did not improve, the death of any one of them would make it impossible to continue running the monastery, which would end the succession of masters in their monastic lineage, and would leave many travelers with nowhere to turn during their long journey.

The mystic reflected for 3 hours. He sat motionless and expressionless - his eyes fixed on the wall opposite him. The monks were so entranced by this, that they sat equally still and quiet for the entire duration. He then stood up and asked the monks to walk with him to his garden. As they walked out of his cabin, he began to speak in a quiet and monotone voice:

"I do not know why fate brought you to the circumstance you find yourselves in today, or how you might better engage your guests to join you, or what will happen to weary travelers if the monastery closes, but I do know one thing."

By this time the monks had reached the mystic's garden. The mystic himself never left his doorway. He just spoke louder as the monks got further away, which created the Illusion of closeness. The monks paused and listened intently. The flowers in the garden swayed within a soft breeze.

"You need not concern yourselves with your lineage, because one of you is already a great Buddha."

They turned in unison and began to clamor as to who, but the mystic abruptly closed and locked the door. After 30 minutes of knocking and pleading, they gave up and began their long journey home in a somber mood.

In the days that followed, not knowing who among them was the great Buddha, they treated each other with newfound reverence and comported themselves with newfound grace.

In the weeks that followed, this mutual reverence and grace permeated every aspect of the monks' behavior. The guests took notice. The word spread. Within six months, 10 travelers stayed on to live their way. After a year, 30 more joined. When asked by new disciples, "who among you is the master?", the monks would answer, "all of us and none of us."

-----

Note: This story is adapted from a much shorter Zen teaching whose origin and author are, as yet, unknown to me, but is probably 1000s of years old and written by someone who is more modern than I will ever be.

Can’t Hurt My Habits

I would not ordinarily recommend books in pairs, but, on this occasion, I am compelled. Book #1 is ‘Can’t Hurt Me’ by David Goggins, a truly awe inspiring book by an awe inspiring man. His childhood story makes you want to give him a long, empathetic hug. His adulthood story makes you want to bow your head in reverence. That being said, if you transcend the Hero’s Journey in his life story and take stock in the imbalanced life he has embraced in service of stripping away every comfort and convenience to get to the raw person underneath, you will recognize the necessity of his ways for him, and, perhaps, for 99.9% of you, the impracticality of his ways for you. That is where Book #2 comes in: ‘Atomic Habits’ by James Clear. One of the most succinct, plainly worded and insightful treatments of the art of forming positive habits. To the extent that our foundation is the sum total of our habits, on top of which we operate with discretion, I can think of no better companion to ‘Can’t Hurt Me’, because it will give you a ladder and a step by step path towards something ‘bigger and badder’ in your life, without asking you to hurl yourself with a catapult. What’s more, because ladders are more accessible, and more accommodating to more people, this practical guide also, I think, leaves more room to take others with you as you go. It is not as Romantic as the lone man taking down a grizzly bear, but have you seen the Revenant?

The Reason In Your Heart

When I meditate, I focus on my heartbeat instead of my breath. To begin with, one can notice one's breath even in a disquieted state, so I find that focusing on it can lead to non-meditative meditation, whereas you have to be pretty quiet to hear your heart. Next, since I cannot consciously control the pace of my heart, I find that tuning into it connects me to a cycle beyond myself, to whatever my heart is synchronized with out there, if anything. Finally, as I tune in to my heart, I learn how to slow it down by effecting the things I can control - my thoughts, my breathing, etc. This is true in life as well. Whether it be habits or preparedness or courtesy or kindness, there are so many things that we can control which benefit the things we cannot control immensely. If you can influence the rhythm of your heart, you can influence the reason in your heart, and the reason in your heart can transform everything you do into pure joy. 

Two Stories

Two Stories. One apocryphal. One not. I will let you discern.

When African hunters want to capture a monkey, they carve a hole in a tree that has an opening just large enough for an average monkey's hand to fit through, and then they hollow it out by adding some additional width and depth. Then they create a trail of salt rocks - like sugar for monkeys - leading up to the tree, and then place a few in the hole as well. An unsuspecting monkey comes along, finds a salt rock and then follows the trail to the tree, eating along the way, whereupon they put their hand in the hole and grab the salt rocks within. The monkey's open hand fits through the hole on the way in, but it's closed fist does not fit through the hole on the way out. At this point, the hunters surprise the monkey, thereby causing him to clench his fist even further, thereby capturing himself.

We trap ourselves by our unwillingness to let go of what we have.
We subvert the whole for the part.

A famous Guru in India gave a Friday night talk at a local community center about finding inner peace and happiness. The talk went into the late hours of the evening. After it concluded, a man from the audience approached the Guru and asked if he could speak with him privately. The Guru replied, "It is very late, and I get up very early, so I don't have much time, but tell me what is on your mind." The man begins, "My life is meaningless. I have nothing in it that brings me joy. I have no reason to live. I suffer every day and have reached the point where I would rather be dead." The Guru reflects for a moment and replies, "I can help you, but our first conversation will be a long one, so I will clear my schedule for you. Come to my house at 5am tomorrow, and we will spend the entire day together." The man replies, "5am? That is too early. I like to sleep in on Saturdays."

We keep ourselves trapped by clinging to our habits and our identities.
Even in the face of urgency.

Dogillusions

When I take Maggie for walks, I do it "hands free", as it were, with a very long leash that I attach to her harness and then let drag on the ground behind her. I give her freedom that is, in fact, merely an illusion of freedom, and I break this illusion in a shocking way when I step on the leash to prevent her from going astray. Eventually, we arrive at a field near my house where I unleash her completely, and where she, upon realizing that the leash is off, begins to run around but not run away. It is unclear if her continued proximity to me has to do with independent good behavior or if she still expects to be snapped back if she gets too far away. In effect, at this point, I am not sure who, between us, is perpetrating the illusion. Well, today I left her in the back yard when we got home, so that I could remove my muddy shoes and then retrieve her from the deck, so that I could wash my muddy dog. When I went out on to the deck, she was gone. I went back through the house to the front door to see if I could intercept her before she got too far, and she was sitting right in front of the door, patiently waiting for me to let her in. Maggie is a lot smarter than I give her credit for. Perhaps we need no illusions between us?

Climate Change

I was recently engaged in a thread regarding climate change, wherein I encountered the following arguments to discount the science and impetus for action that underlies it:

1. Data is being interpreted in a nefarious manner to support ulterior economic and political motives
2. Fluctuations in weather have always been at play, therefore trends in climate can be discounted
3. Irrespective of point numbers 1 and 2 above, almighty God will ensure that, no matter what we do which might influence the climate, everything will work out fine 

I, personally, have no interest in whether or not someone believes that climate change is an issue, but, rather, am interested in whether or not we can embrace a more common sense way to live in better harmony with our environment.

This is tantamount to quitting smoking in the mid 20th century, when there was no hard evidence that smoking caused cancer. To the extent that even a moderately intelligent chimpanzee knows well enough not to pick up a burning stick and heartily breath in its smoke, I find it perplexing that the apex primate would purposefully do just about the same thing ;-)

Still, to take action, one has to be believe that there is a reason, so let's talk about that.

With regard to point number 1 (nefarious data interpretation), it is a non-starter, because the very premise would indicate that whether data is being interpreted in favor of climate change or against it, the interpreting party has some nefarious, ulterior motive. Therefore, it makes no sense to debate the issue, because I could just as well assume that the man on the street has an ulterior motive, just like NASA and the bulk of the scientific community.

With regard to point number 2 (weather vs climate), equating the weather to the climate is like equating one's neighborhood to the country, which can lead someone living in an upscale neighborhood to conclude that there is no opioid epidemic, or someone living in an impoverished inner city neighborhood to conclude that the entire country is ravaged by an opioid epidemic.

Local versus global points of reference can very easily lead one to miss the global trends, which is the key distinction in climatology. Of course, in order to see trends, one has to leverage data, and to the extent that point number 1 invalidates the interpretation of data, point number 2 seems irrelevant.

With regard to point number 3 (God), if we need not worry about climate change, or, perhaps, any other natural or man made phenomenon, because God will guide us through to a favorable conclusion, then why have vaccines or antibiotics or chemotherapy? Why have pollution controls in factories or catalytic converters on cars? Why have seat belts or smoke alarms or seismic wave detectors?

If there is a God, then he (I use the word loosely) bestowed us with faculties so that we can better take care of and navigate through the world he created for us. To abandon the reason he gave us as unnecessary because of some paternalistic notion is foolish. As you might guess, I am not a biblical scholar, but I have read quite a few quotations pertaining to personal responsibility.

With that, let us consider climate change in the vein of Pascal's Wager.

This proof, put forward by Blaise Pascal in the 1600s, postulates that, in the absence of clear evidence for the existence of God, or not, one would be better served believing than not believing, because the penalty for believing in error is very low, and the penalty for not believing in error is very high.

In our case, it is even more universal, because, in the case of Pascal's Wager, one member of a single-exclusive-deity religion can opt to believe but still not be inoculated from the perspective of a member of a different single-exclusive-deity religion, i.e. because the other fellow believes in the wrong God, as it were.

You can debate whether or not the penalty for investing in Green technology and divesting from Grey/Brown technology is too high, but to the extent that advances in technology continually make the cost of being green lower and lower, I think any such debate loses merit over time.

The fundamental question here, for me, is: Can we endeavor to foster better harmony with our environment without having to agree on the facts of climate change?

You Make Your Own Luck, Or Not

I have never been so arrogant as to think that all of my planning, hard work and skill in achieving a particular objective was derived from anything other than good luck. Nor have I ever been so apathetic as to think that all of my planning, hard work and skill in an unsuccessful pursuit of an objective was derived from bad luck. To be sure, through diligence and tenacity, we make our own luck, but, in the final analysis, we still have to be very lucky, whether it be some factor from the distant past, such as where we were born, our parents, our teachers, our friends, our partners, or some contemporary factor, such as a new acquaintance or 'lucky break' at precisely the right moment. By that same token, through our actions, we also make our own bad luck, and though we can reason that chance plays a part in either good or bad luck, I contend that we should always lean towards being excessively grateful for anything we accomplish, and thoughtfully introspective for everything we try and fail to do.

Who are you again?

There is a not-so-famous quote from [I think but cannot verify] C.S. Lewis that goes something like "the man who gets on the train is not the same man who gets off the train", which describes how our journeys transform us. This is not so noticeable in our every day acquaintances, such is the transparent nature of incremental change, but it is noticeable in our infrequent acquaintances, including the closest of family and friends that, through circumstance, have become distant and infrequent. On several occasions, I've been struck with the notion that the person I just spent time with is 'not that person anymore'. Of course, they are still who they are, but, from a relative perspective, where I am the observer, they are no longer who they were, and I don't recognize them anymore. This can, of course, be a very sad realization for the attachments of the past, but also a happy one for the entanglements of the past, if the transformation opens up the possibility to reconnect without the baggage. Turning the observation inward, there is probably no more transparent transformation than the one that we undergo and observe, but it bears witnessing nonetheless, and, perhaps, the realization that 'I am not that person anymore' can be liberating, especially if one has not yet mastered living in the present, or, alternatively, motivating, if one has lost a redeemable quality that they covet. In either case, recognizing when someone has transformed, or when you have transformed, to a degree sufficient to say that they or you are 'not the same person anymore' is useful, in terms of engaging old people in new ways, and helping them understand who you are, beyond the framework of who you were. Who are you again?