A Scientific Buddha?

”… this belief in essences that must be destroyed in order to bring an end to suffering and rebirth.” – D.S. Lopez, The Scientific Buddha

Donald S. Lopez has written a clear book on Buddhism called The Scientific Buddha. Although it aims to critically scrutinize the notion of “The Scientific Buddha,” it comes across as a positive and very stimulating read, placed somewhere between science and religion.

The Scientific Buddha is based on several lectures, which gives the book a cozy feel. It begins with an introduction to Buddhism and from there, it moves on to the birth of the scientific Buddha. The problem, for Lopez, is that “some even went as far as to declare that Buddhism was not a religion at all, but was itself a science of the mind.” The author tries to convince the reader that Buddhism really is a religion. Partly he succeeds.

The debate is not new, but due to the increased focus on Buddhism and mindfulness in the West, many are trying to locate the real Buddha. Perhaps to gain authority. Personally, I don’t share this need for locating an origin, so in part, I am not convinced that it is such a big problem. And perhaps for this reason, I don’t find his argument that effective. After all, Buddhism may or may not be a religion (many scholars agree and disagree), but it has never been a religion in a Christian or Muslim sense. For example, the Dalai Lama has beautifully stated, “My religion is kindness.” The Buddha responded to life, not some transcendent demands. Furthermore, science can become a religion for some as well. So for me there is plenty of room for the Buddha somewhere in the middle.

The historical Buddha was a prince born into wealth and decadence, until he one day left his castle and experienced life in its full, that is, as suffering.He then began a journey, that was either religious or scientific, to create a way out of suffering. This journey he later shared as his teachings. Thus, the Buddha as scientist requires that the Buddha really was once a man called Gautama Siddhartha before he woke up under the Bodi tree.

Lopez shows how some have tried to place Buddhism in various scientific contexts, for example, evolutionary theory. While I agree that these contexts don’t make much sense, it doesn’t make the Buddha more religious either. However, once Lopez started talking about the problem with karma, mediation and the contemporary use/misuse of Buddhism, it became obvious that he knows his Buddha from the depth of his heart to the tips of his fingers writing this book. This embedded knowledge of Buddhism makes the book a very enlighten read.

From the third chapter onwards, Lopez goes more directly into the heart of Buddhism. ”The cause of the world is karma.” He discusses about the four noble truths, the cultivation of seeds, the three forms of sufferings, how nirvana is the end of rebirth, and how truth is something we have lost and now must find again. He mentions this to emphasize his point that the Buddha is religious, not a scientist, and yet it seems like the real Buddha is neither of the two extremes. There is an element of experimentation in Buddhism. Whoever the Buddha was and is – real or abstract – there is something in the practice related to his name that makes both religion and science too rigid or limited to grasp. He appears to more like a philosopher, for example, like Pierre Hadot understands “philosophy as a way of life,” not some abstract exercises.

Regardless of the debate whether Buddhism is religion or science, there has been a tendency to overemphasize the positive elements of Buddhism without paying enough attention to the role of suffering, including the suffering caused by some Buddhists. For example, the process of cultivation also means that creation goes hand in hand with destruction. Recently, the Buddhist majority in Myanmar has been critiqued for discriminating against the Muslim minority. Thus, perhaps not all Buddhists show loving-kindness and compassion.

Still, the reader may ask: Was the Buddha a scientist or a God? This either-or thinking is what causes suffering, I think. Following the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze, I would rather ask, “What does the Buddha make possible?”

Let me give an example. If mindfulness is the heart of Buddhism, then, at least, it shows that the heart of the Buddha was pure. That, however, does not suggest that all teachers of mindfulness are pure rather than strategic business consultants; it just means that such forms of “mindfulness” only leads to mindlessness. A few rotten apples don’t cause a heart failure. In light of this, then, I am most comfortable with the Buddha being neither a scientist nor a God, but an extraordinary human being. He, or his followers, showed what the human being is also capable of doing. That’s enough.

What kind of book is it? The Scientific Buddha debates the role of the Buddha, but it also serves as a very clear introduction to Buddhism. And it does so exemplarily. It opens a debate further. Yet, although Lopez tries to convince me wrong, I am not converted. I think the problem with extraordinary human beings being put into categories is that so many have a need for a God or a Guru in their life. There are no God’s only different forms of life.

Smagen af en følelse

En af mine gamle venner yndede at sige, at man skal høre sandheden fra børn og fulde folk. Det hører med til historien, at han drak, og han sagde, mange sande ting.

Jeg tænkte på ham fornylig, da jeg deltog i et seks-dages meditationsretreat på et kloster ved Costa Brava kysten. Her refererede underviseren – i et af hans Buddhistiske causerier – til filmen Inside Out. En tegnefilm! Det slog mig, at der vitterligt er noget om klicheen: sandheden, fuldskab og børn. Børn er sjældent fulde, men de udfordrer deres forældre. Dagligt. De modner dem.

Nu har jeg set Inside Out. Og den er ganske interessant (om end midten føles lidt lang). Den viser, hvordan følelser interagerer og kæmper om kontrollen i vores mentale kontrolrum. Glæde. Væmmelse. Vrede. Tristhed. Frygt.

images

Filmen handler om pigen Riley, der er 11-12 år. Hun flytter med sine forældre til San Fransisco, hvorved hele hendes følelsesliv sættes på en prøve. I filmen udspiller dette sig ved, at følelsen Glæde ønsker at være den dominerende. Uanset hvad der sker. Glæde har altså svært ved at træde til side, selv når andre følelser synes at virke mere passende i forhold til situationen, fx vrede, frygt eller tristhed på grund af flytning, ny skole, nye venner, tab af venner, osv. På den måde hæmmes et mere modent forhold til følelser.

Følelser er svære, fordi de synes uden klare grænser. Det kan dog være givende at være opmærksom på følelser, når de opstår. Hvad forårsager dem?

Følelser er forbipasserende gæster i ens liv. I Buddhismen lærer man ikke at identificere sig med disse. Gradvist kan man opleve forskellen mellem ”jeg er vred” og ”det er vrede.” Det er svært, men frigørende. Som alt andet forandrer følelser sig også. Selv en forelskelse forandrer sig og bliver til kærlighed og hårdt arbejde. En anden måde at se dette på, kan man ved hjælp af en af hjerneforskningens mere interessante opdagelser, nemlig begrebet neural plasticitet eller den plastiske hjerne. Denne opdagelse understreger, at vores hjerne forandrer sig gennem hele livet. Af samme grund er det også muligt, at blive bedre til at håndtere eller navigere i forbindelse med de følelser, som suser igennem en.

Nyere studier viser, at glæde og lykke i stor grad hænger sammen med evnen til at ”smage” på følelser, fx smage en positiv oplevelse, og derved lade denne smag gennemtrænge ens aktiviteter. Smagen kan ligeledes imprægnere tidligere aktiviteter i skæret af denne. Som et ordsprog siger: det er aldrig for sent, at få en bedre barndom. Denne ”smag” hænger sammen med, hvordan man kan kultivere ens velvære. Det vil sige, at man giver slip på følelser som grådighed og had, mens man prøver at kultivere gavmildhed, medfølelse og kærlighed. Man accepterer ærligt ens motiver, mens man oprigtigt prøver at fremme mere af det, som fremmer velvære, fx gavmildhed.

Modning eller visdom drejer sig om at blive mere bevidst omkring, hvad der foregår i ens mentale kontrolrum. Lytte til den indre stemme.

En af forskellene mellem depressive og ikke-depressive personer er bl.a. forbundet med en fastholdelse af ”smagen” af glæde. Hos den depressive er denne aktivering forbigående, hvorfor hjernen ikke for alvor når at ”smage” følelsen. Jagten på lykke bliver flad og stressende og, af samme grund, deprimerende. Personer der besidder denne kapacitet formår derimod at forblive eller forlænge aktiviteter i denne region af hjernen.

I Inside Out erkender følelsen Glæde, at følelsen Tristhed ikke er skadelig i små doser. Tværtimod. Den kan slå os omkuld, men også lære os at komme på fode igen. Tristheden fremmer refleksion og styrker ens værdier. Hvad er vigtigt? Hvem kan hjælpe? Selvfølgelig kan tristhed igennem længere tid udvikle depression, men i mindre doser vækker den ofte gavmildhed eller generøsitet hos den anden (sågar en selv, såfremt man evner at tage vare på sig selv). Jørgen Leth er eksempelvis kendt for at have et lettere deprimeret sind, hvorfor han bl.a. bor afsondret og mindre forstyrret på Haiti, men han er også en generøs digter. Han digter plads til det, som er i færd med at blive. Dette evner han, fordi han er opmærksom og nærværende – måske ikke hele tiden – men i hvert fald med en imponerende styrke i dele af sit liv.

Det er altså Tristheden, som bringer pigen Riley tilbage til hendes forældre. Tristheden overtager styringen. Det sker i det øjeblik hun tør blotte sig, og vise sin sorg på grund af alt det tabte. I dette øjeblik møder hun – heldigvis – forældrenes rummelighed.

Tanken er vel, eller kald det filmens morale, at vi alle sammen til tider støder ind i nogle – måske endda os selv – som har det svært. Ligesom os, vil enhver anden, gerne leve et liv, der er mindre lidende og utilfredsstillende. Det de mangler for at kunne komme videre, er ikke en neoliberalistisk peptalk om hvorvidt den stærkeste overlever, men omsorg og medfølelse.

Apropos medfølelse. I går afsluttede jeg et kursus i Filosofisk vejledning med en ”loving-kindness”-meditation. Lider de studerende? Ja. Kedsomhed. Usikkerhed. Tvivl. Plus alt det andet: sygdom, død, tab osv. Flere af de studerende smilte efterfølgende. Mere end de plejer. En enkelt sagde, ”What the fuck?”

Ja, what the fuck. Det er jo bare et liv. Og et liv, der ikke undersøges og afprøves, er, som bekendt, ikke værd at leve. Det mente Sokrates i hvert fald.

Mindfulness: A movement?

“Thirty years ago, ‘mindfulness’ was a Buddhist principle mostly obscure to the West,” Jeff Wilson writes in Mindful America. Today, however, it has managed to reach nearly every institution of American society (a tendency that is growing in Europe as well, although more slowly). How did this happen?

In Mindful America, Wilson explores the origin of the mindfulness movement. The book offers one of the first critical descriptions of the movement, which is focused on more that the movement’s practices. A key point is that mindfulness could only grow by distancing itself from Buddhism as a religion. This process took place in the 1980s through magazines, films, TV programs and, in particular, through bringing mindfulness into a medical context, where it later would open up a completely new field of research. Whether Buddhism really is a religion is something that has been debated before the era of mindfulness, but it is true that mindfulness (or the Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction or MBSR-program of Jon Kabat-Zinn) would probably not be a part of more than 700 medical schools, hospitals, and health care programs worldwide if it were “sold” as religion.

Wilson wants to be neutral in his study, but this is difficult for him. “I do happen to be a Buddhist but am drawn to study mindfulness because of its prominence in the United States,” he writes. Being a Buddhist is both an advantage and disadvantage in his work. Wilson knows what he writes about, but it colors his perception at times. For example, he can’t help but see mindfulness as a second-rate Buddhist practice. He sees the maneuver of bringing mindfulness from Buddhism into a non-Buddhist context as problematic—a purely business practice; he fails to notice the extent to which it actually has contributed to something such as wellbeing.

Wilson favors a certain kind of origin of mindfulness as if there were only one right way to practice Buddhism. A bit similar if one were to criticize contemporary American pragmatics like Robert B. Brandom or Cheryl Misak because they diverge from the founding fathers Charles Sander Peirce and William James. Evolution is creative. Furthermore, the Dalai Lama looks positively on the matter of how Buddhism or aspects of Buddhism may contribute to reducing suffering in the West.

Having said the above, I still believe that Wilson has written a book that was highly needed. As with all things when they become popular, mindfulness attracts people who are mindful for the sake of money, not for the potential liberation of one’s mind. For example, one so-called mindfulness author writes, “mindfulness helps you fall in love,” while another writes, “what can that moment-to-moment awareness do for our sex lives” and “another bonus of eating mindfully is that it improves self-esteem.” Of course, by targeting sex and food, mindfulness is stretched to fit a need among white middle-class people. In addition, the focus on self-esteem (and worse, on identity) is problematic since among the more serious teachers of mindfulness, the “self” is a process. After all everything changes; everything is impermanent.

The critique that Wilson raises can be raised for the majority of the self-help industry. It targets people who seem to be existentially frustrated, perhaps even bored, rather than those that suffer socially or financially. A title like The Monk Who Sold His Ferrari, for example, tells us all we need to know about whom the book is targeting.

Mindful America does a very good job in exploring the mindfulness movement. In its transition from a Buddhist practice strictly for monks to a practice for mainstream Americans, it has had some ups—but mostly downs. The book is not an introduction to mindfulness; rather, it locates this transition in a sociological and cultural setting. It that sense, the need for mindfulness tells us more about the times we live in than about the actual practice itself. Sometimes it can be attractive to become what you’re not.

As Wilson says, “Today mindfulness is, quite simply, everywhere.” This assertion is both true and false. As a commercial concept it is indeed everywhere, but as a practice, it is not. If it were, the world would be a little bit more caring. Actually, if people were mindful then they wouldn’t buy books about mindfulness and sex and shopping and accounting, but simply be mindful.

This review was published in Metapsychology (Volume 19, Issue 32).

Er du opmærksom?

Fornylig var jeg i Zürich for at undervise i sportspsykologi og mindfulness. En regnfuld eftermiddag, søgte jeg på vej tilbage til mit hotel i læ i en større boghandel. Denne modtog mig med en stabel af bøger om mindfulness. Mindfulness og sex, mad, opdragelse, stress, parforhold og så videre og så videre. Der var flere end 50 titler.

I USA er mindfulness alle steder; i Europa synes tendensen at være den samme, om end udviklingen er lidt bagefter. Det er på sin vis forståeligt, da der er tale om en attraktiv måde at være i verden på, men det er også en udvikling, hvor noget populært kommercialiseres. Men selvom mindfulness nok er alle steder, betyder det langt fra at alle er fuldt tilstede. Det ville svare til at alle, der går rundt i en Messi fodboldtrøje, spiller fodbold ligesom ham. Moralen må være: brug din sunde fornuft, når du orienterer dig i dette felt.

Siden firserne har der været et stadigvæk stigende fokus på mindfulness i en vestlig medicinsk sammenhæng, der dog først for alvor kulminerede i 2000’erne. Den amerikanske biolog Jon Kabat-Zinn har været en katalysator for at fremme mindfulness i en ikke-buddhistisk kontekst. Han er skaberen af Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR-program) tilbage i 1979. MBSR er i dag institutionaliseret på mere end 700 medicinske universiteter, hospitaler og sundhedssystemer rundt i verden. I Danmark kan man eksempelvis uddannes i MBSR på Århus Universitet. Dette program er udførligt beskrevet i Kabat-Zinns bog Full Catastrophe Living. Det handler blandt andet om at genskabe en balance mellem ens krop og sind, hvilket sker gennem kropskanninger, yoga og meditation. I de seneste år har der været flere psykologiske forskningsresultater, der viser at mindfulness har en healende effekt på stress, smerte og andre mentale lidelser. Faktisk er Kabat-Zinn så populær (sammen med en voksende skare af mindfulness-forskere og alverdens mindfulness-programmer), at buddhistiske munke refererer til ham, når de skal fortælle om meditationens lyksaligheder.

Mindfulness er en psykisk- eller mentalintervention, hvor den enkelte træner sindet. Den vigtigste del af mindfulness er meditation. I Waking, Dreaming, Being refererer filosoffen Evan Thompson til flere studier, hvor EEG skanninger viser, at meditation kan forandre hjernen. Sådanne EEG skanninger siger selvfølgelig intet om selve kvaliteten heraf, blot at der sker nogle elektroniske aktiviteter i hjernen, når vi gør forskellige ting. Ens hjerne ændrer sig også, hvis du tømmer en flaske gin.

61uJ7oDfQJL._SX329_BO1,204,203,200_Meditation er en unik form for mentaltræning. Der findes forskellige former for meditation, men indenfor mindfulness opererer man ofte med to former – og gerne en kombination. Den ene fokuserer på at styrke ens koncentrationsevne. Her fokuserer man på et objekt, fx hvordan ens åndedrag passerer ens næsebor. Ind og ud, ind og ud. De fleste vil her opleve, at ens tanker lige så stille (eller hurtigt) driver væk fra ens næsebor. Distraheret af mere interessante tanker eller følelser. Når personen, der mediterer bliver opmærksom på at han eller hun ikke længere er fokuseret på vejrtrækningen, er vedkommende instrueret til at bringe sindet tilbage til åndedraget. Dette sker venligt og – meget vigtigt – uden at dømme ens manglende evne til at forblive koncentreret for mere end et halvt minut. Gradvist styrkes ens koncentrationsevne. Den anden form for meditation forsøger, at kultivere ens generelle opmærksomhed. Denne praksis kaldes bl.a. ”valgfri opmærksom”, ”åben opmærksomhed” eller ”åbent nærvær”. Her er den mediterende opmærksom på det, der nu engang måtte dukke op. Vedkommende accepterer dette, fx tanker og følelser, hvorefter vedkommende giver slip og vender tilbage til en åben opmærksomhed. Der er ingen forventninger. Den, der mediterer er åben for alt.

Ideen med at give slip er vigtig, da mange har en tilbøjelighed til at fastholde tanker og følelser, fx at identificerer sig med sine følelser, selvom følelser aldrig er andet end gæster i ens liv. Grundpræmissen i buddhismen er, at intet er permanent. Ofte lider vi, fordi vi krampagtig prøver at holde fast i en illusion, fx den at vores kroppe ikke ældes, at vores forældre ikke dør, at vi ikke selv dør, at vores mave ikke er slatten, osv. Dette skyldes bl.a. at vores sind ikke ældes proportionalt med vores manglende hårpragt.

I Waking, Dreaming, Being beskæftiger filosoffen Thompson sig med hjerneforskning, meditation og filosofi. Han er en befriende guide i dette skæringsfelt, idet han er vidende om alle tre felter, men han oversælger ikke en meditationspraksis som løsningen på alle verdens lidelser. Snarere forholder han sig åbent til de erfaringer, som mere end 2500 meditationspraksis har generet. Men han konfronterer også disse med de sidste 100 års vestlige hjerneforskning og psykologi. En simpel, men vigtig pointe er, at hvordan vi er opmærksomme konditionerer, hvad vi er opmærksomme på. Vi kan eksempelvis være opmærksomme på, hvordan vores gerninger her og nu, påvirker vores fremtidige handlemuligheder. Min skjorte lugter rigtig sløjt, fordi jeg ikke har været i bad i tre dage, end ikke skiftet tøj. Et andet eksempel er miljøet. Hvordan vi behandler naturen i dag har betydning for næste generation. Så såre simpelt. Ikke desto mindre er der mange, der ikke er opmærksomme på, hvordan de er opmærksomme, fordi de blindt fokuserer på, hvad de mener, der er værd at være opmærksom på, fx titler, status, prestige, magt og, selvfølgelig, penge.

Tilsvarende hænger vores måde at være opmærksomme på også sammen med tidens opskruethed. I dag har ingen tid til at læse David Foster Wallaces Infinite Jest. Dette er en synd (såfremt ikke-religiøse kan anvende denne term?)! Af samme grund skal man selvfølgelig også være påpasselig med ikke at gøre mindfulness til en del af kapitalismen vækstlogik, hvor vi hele tiden føler skyld (et andet religiøst begreb!), fordi vi ikke mediterer nok (ligesom vi måske heller ikke dyrker nok motion, spiser nok salat, drikker nok vand …). Pointen er, at ingen bør meditere, læse Wallace eller noget tredje på grund af skyld, men fordi de er motiveret af en kærlighed til livet.

Ewans skriver et sted, at Vispassaná meditation (også kaldet insight meditation) kan ændre den rytmiske måde, hvorpå hjernen organiserer sansninger. Intensiv vispassaná meditation kan ændrer hjernens hang til at fortabe sig – ”mind wandering”. I stedet for kan den fastholde koncentrationen i diskrete erkendelsesøjeblikke. Hjernen bliver bedre rustet til at kunne rumme, hvad der end måtte komme i næste øjeblik. Pointen er, at meditation styrker den enkeltes sansemæssige erkendelse, ligesom meditation styrker ens evne til at fastholde ens fokus på et givent objekt – fra det ene nu til det næste. For nogle er det motivation nok. For andre er den kolde Estrella øl endnu ikke væltet af pinden.

Waking, Dreaming, Being kommer vidt omkring: drømme, død, bevidsthed og en masse personlige anekdoter. Selvet er en proces, ikke noget statisk. Når jeg drømmer, er “jeg’et” i drømmen mig, men ikke desto mindre er “jeg” en anden. Alt sammen er ganske glimrende fortalt. Det er svært ikke at blive lidt klogere sammen med Evan Thompson. Apropos bøger, så er det for mange kutyme, at købe en bog i en boghandel. Jeg købte nu ingen bøger i Zürich, da ingen kunne fastholde min koncentration. I stedet for købte jeg en ny stor notesbog, som jeg skrev disse ord i.

Philosophy for Everyday Life

I published the essay “Philosophy for Everyday Life” in Journal of Philosophy of Life.

Abstract: The aim of this essay is two-sided. The first is to illustrate to what extent philosophy can contribute to our everyday living. The second is to illustrate how. The implicit thesis that I try to unfold in this experimental essay is that these two sides—what and how—constantly intermingle. Although the philosophical approach takes its inspiration from the French philosophers Gilles Deleuze and Michel Serres, as well as from modern secular mindfulness, the main consideration in any philosophy that contributes to our life must be the coherency of our approach to life. Philosophy is a way of relating to life, which, among other things, requires awareness. This essay, therefore, does not present a single way of living that is beneficial but instead advocates a form of life that is philosophical.

You can read the complete essay here.

Move to Mars

In The Practice of the Wild, the poet Gary Snyder writes, ”The world is our conscious, and it surrounds us. There are more things in mind, in imagination, than ‘you’ can keep track of – thoughts, memories, images, angers, delights, rise unbidden.”

We are formed by the world. It resembles the mystery of our minds. Still, the world is suffering: Water shortage. Climate chaos. Mass poverty. Mass migration. Terrorism. Financial greed. And so forth.

What to do? In the same essay, Snyder stresses, ”An ethical life is one that is mindful.” Becoming mindful is the challenge.

Of course, we all know it. The world — our planet — needs our care to survive. Yet, it seems as if the planet is wrapped more in sweet and symbolic words than actual concrete actions. Saving the planet has become a moralistic quest. We have forgotten, “the shared ground of our common biological being,” as Snyder writes, that is to say; you have more in common with a lion than what differentiates you from it.

Saving the planet is our responsibility, some say. Some even wants to save it, because they feel guilty. They are concerned about the fear of suffering from future guilt, as when our kids or our friends kids confront us, “Why didn’t you do anything?” However, guilt, fear, and responsibility … I am not sure that it works. At least it doesn’t seem like it’s working. Instead, I suggest that we save the planet out of love.

It’s that simple. We need the planet because we love the sun, the rain, and the wind. We need the planet because we love how we are connected with every being that breathes. We need the planet because we live here; our memories, love stories and miseries are embedded here. We don’t love the planet because we need it for something as vague as career, status or prestige.

Out of love. That’s the best intention for everything. Out of love we plant small seeds, then we nurture them, take care of them, and we do so because deep down we know that survival of the fittest doesn’t rule the world (only capitalism works that way). On the contrary, in life it’s compassion, care, and love that rules. It’s because I care that some life will go on living.

Do you care?

An ethical life is mindful, well, a mindful life is one that tries to live here and now in our bodies. Here and now is also how Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari defined utopia in What Is Philosophy?, ”Utopia does not split off from infinite movement: etymologica1ly it stands for absolute deterritorialization but always at the critical point at which it is connected with the present relative milieu, and espe­cially with the forces stifled by this milieu, Erewhon, the word used by Samuel Butler, refers not only to no-where but also to now-here.”

Utopia. Nowhere is always now and here. We don’t need more contemplation, not even higher ideals or moral categories. Rather we need to connect with the present. Becoming more mindful. Mindfulness of the body, for example, can be practiced by watching the breath when goes in and out, listening to the sounds, noticing the smells in the air, becoming aware of what we put in our mouth. Awareness is the key, not judgment. Mind and body are indistinguishable like Alberto Contador and his bike.

To love is not an intellectual project. Don’t your lips shiver when you kiss your lover? Do you love your kids out of responsibility? Out of guilt? No, because that’s not love. You love them because you love them.

Don’t you love the place where you live? If not … move to Mars.

For more on mindful philosophy, I have published the essay “Philosophy of Everyday Life” in the Journal of Philosophy of Life.

The Spirit of Meditation

In recent years, there has been a growing interest in Buddhism and mindfulness meditation as well as some new-age philosophies that are often nothing more than pale imitations of Buddhist techniques. The interest is obvious. We live in an achievement-orientated, performance based culture and we are constantly forced, and even force ourselves to do something, and to set new goals and so forth. The result is that we become less aware and experience more narcissism, stress and depression.

In Sarah Shaw’s The Spirit of Buddhist Meditation we are told “When the mind is restless, that it is time to develop the factor of awakening that is tranquility, the factor of awakening that is concentration and the factor of awakening that is equanimity.”

Meditation can in other words, help us to become more mindful. “Mindfulness is the true refuge of the mind, mindfulness is manifested as protection, and there is no exerting or restraining of the mind without mindfulness.”

After I finished reading this book I didn’t know whether I should be impressed by or doubtful of all those people who claim to be mindful, because it requires diligence and self-control. It’s certainly hard work.

For those who are interested in Buddhism it can — especially for newcomers — be difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff (such as much of New Age thinking). As Shaw stresses, “a good tradition, teacher and friends, along with text, are the best ways of finding out about meditation for oneself.” Shaw is a knowledgeable teacher and a caring friend.

She deals solely with the Buddhist tradition, although that doesn’t mean that she is critical towards the important contribution to mindfulness made by Jon Kabat-Zinn and others, it is simply that her focus lies elsewhere. Shaw wants to show us how the texts have always been an important part of sharing Buddhist practices. In addition, she attempts to illustrate that Buddhism compared to other religions is less dogmatic. Rather it consists of good advice that comes from experience, or to put it differently: if one wants to wake up, then it is not enough to believe, one must act, and for example, meditate.

The Spirit of Buddhist Meditation can, therefore, be viewed as a rich introduction to the multiplicity of Buddhism, but also — and perhaps more likely — as a thorough guide for the more experienced meditators, or those who are already familiar with the philosophy of Buddhism. The book is littered with illuminating phrases, such as “What is required is that we try to live here and now ‘in our bodies'” — “You breathe in and out all day and night, but you are never mindful of it, you never for a second concentrate your mind on it. Now you are going to do just this” — “if we cannot control our minds, it will be impossible to control our actions and speech.”

A wide range of Buddhist writings on meditation are investigated and those already familiar with reading original Buddhist texts will appreciate the mixture of anecdotes, practical tips and endless repetitions within the same text. Sometimes this repetition can become a little boring unless, of course, one really pays attention to the minor differences that the text unfolds. Perhaps, the texts are written like that on purpose to cultivate our awareness.

Another reason for the repetition is that many of the texts come from an oral culture where the teacher would chant aloud. This of course explains why the reading can, at times, be a challenge. It is like listening to a love song on the stereo. Without the instruments, the rhythm and pauses, the experience can often seem more flat.

The Spirit of Buddhist Meditation explains the eight fold path of meditation, how meditation is practiced (sitting, standing, walking) and provides instructions on how to breathe, explaining why breathing is the foundation of a spiritual practice. (I may add that the word spirit comes from the Latin spiritus, which is a translation of the Greek pneuma, meaning breath). We also learn why there is no sane reason for clinging on to anything. The goal of Buddhism is to release one from the cycle of existence (Nibbána) and here the meditator enters a sphere of nothingness where, if you believe it, birth is caused by death. However, if you don’t believe in reincarnation, and I am skeptical; then you can still be open-minded and admit that we do not know for sure what happens when we die. For most meditators though, the experience of death may be beyond reach unless a life lived in retreats is desired. Despite this, with some practice and guidance it may be possible to experience that “space is infinite”, even though this concept can make most people feel dizzy thinking about it. If this is possible, then we may also understand that “consciousness is infinite.”

Everything is interconnected but this is not only a Buddhist idea as it can also be found in ecological thinking, or in the works of Spinoza or Deleuze. We may cultivate an experience through meditations. Again, the point of Shaw’s study is not the engage with other philosophies or psychological traditions, but to show the richness within the Buddhist tradition.

The Spirit of Buddhist Meditation will most likely attract people who already meditate, or those who would like to do so. However, it can also serve as a useful introduction to Buddhism in general, as well as act as an inspiration for people who work in the growing service industry, helping people recover from the negative effects of modern day capitalism.

41+3KAc1LmL._SX301_BO1,204,203,200_

Published in Metapsychology (Volume 19, Issue 23).

True Detective

I have published the essay, True Detective: Pessimism, Buddhism or Philosophy?
The aim of this essay is to raise two questions. The first question is: How is pessimism related to Buddhism (and vice versa)? The second question is: What relation does an immanent philosophy have to pessimism and Buddhism, if any? Using True Detective, an American television crime drama, as my point of departure, first I will outline some of the likenesses between Buddhism and pessimism. At the same time, I will show how the conduct of one of the main characters in True Detective resembles the paths of Buddhism and pessimism, even though he is ethical in a strictly non-pessimistic and non-Buddhist fashion. Last, I will try to place these findings in perspective through the French philosopher Gilles Deleuze’s thoughts. Hereby, I hope to illustrate that joy, not suffering, is basic to human existence, and how human beings may overcome a spiritual pessimism.
Read more here.

Stillhet

Today I am out with a small booklet entitled “Stillhet” (Silence). It’s a philosophical essay written after a twenty day pilgrimage that I took with the artist Jeppe Hein this year in Norway.

The essay is a sidekick for the main event: Hein’s exhibition at Galleri Nicolai Wallner. See more here.

The essay (with illustrations by Jeppe Hein) can be downloaded here.

Stillhet

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑