The real me

October 12th, 2007

The more I meditate the more I am becoming aware that there is something going on at an unconscious level. What? I do not know, but there is a subtle mood which percolates through into consciousness, a sense of peace, a calmness. The problem of ‘Who am I?’ and how ‘I’ can survive the dissolution of the body, which so used to exercise me because it seemed insoluble, worries me no longer. I know – strange that, I just know – that the self-conscious me is not me. That the real me has yet to be discovered. Perhaps ‘discovered’ is not the right word. It implies that there is an already existing entity hidden round the corner, out of sight, so to speak. It does not do justice to the dynamic process that is the person. ‘Achieved’ might be better.

Austerity

October 11th, 2007

I feel quieter, calmer inside. There is a deep sense of peace. No longer is there the need to entertain, or to distract myself. Noise grates and I prefer not to turn on the radio, nor do I feel the need to listen to music. One of the problems with the noises made by other people when I am meditating is that they hook the various ‘me’s’ into thinking about the relationships they represent. It is difficult letting go of these ‘me’s’, letting go of the body, letting go of everything except awareness of breathing. Underlying all these me’s – those of the present moment, those that persist in memory and those woven by fantasy – underneath all these me’s is desire (tanha), wanting this, longing for that, hungry, forever yearning and unsatisfied. Only when tanha is extinguished can I really be me – hence the need for silence and simple austerity.

It struck me this morning how natural and unforced this need for austerity is. It does not deny the goodness of the body, or the appreciation of pleasure – unlike the Christian tradition that, for many, is still in thrall to the gnostic dualism of flesh – evil and spirit – good.

Anatta

October 10th, 2007

I discovered something today meditating in the garden after cutting the grass. I managed to achieve greater concentration for longer at a time than I had been able to previously. Distractions come. Intentions, even strong ones, and wishful determination do not bring about change in a person. Even though I want to meditate and I get frustrated and angry with myself when I cannot concentrate, I am still the same person with all the wants, feelings and desires I seem to have had forever. The fact that I am trying to meditate does not mean they have gone away and that in my meditating I am a different person. As long as I, the same person, am trying to meditate then the will to meditate is just one desire among all the others. The others will assert themselves as soon as habituation, or boredom, weakens concentration.

This afternoon concentration went well and I found that I could let the ‘person’ go. There was just awareness of breathing. Everything else, sounds, body, mind, feelings – I let them all go. For a few brief moments there was no ‘me’ just awareness of breathing. Of course I have read about anatta, and I have puzzled over it, and wondered, and thought I had understood it – but it was only an intellectual grasp of a concept. You only experience the phenomenal ‘me’ when you let it go, and you have to let it go to experience the ‘not me’. Only then is the ‘phenomenal me’ seen for what it is – as the ephemeral and insubstantial, constantly changing kaleidoscope of thoughts, feelings and emotions.

Mindfulness

October 9th, 2007

It is very difficult to get a grip on this meditation thing. On one occasion it will go well and the next three or four badly. I am more and more becoming convinced that it is not just an activity among other activities, one in which you can engage and then go on to do other, very different, things. For many it is just that and I do not think it can then become anything more than a simple relaxed unwinding. Nor is it something that pervades the day, in that the morning and evening meditation produce a calming, less stressed attitude to daily events. It is not even that. It needs to go much, much deeper. It is not just a question of the effects of the morning’s mindfulness and focused awareness pervading the day, having an influence. Mindfulness itself must persist; that detached awareness and control need to apply to everything one does. I know I have read this before but the truth of it has only just struck me. It struck me yesterday afternoon walking along the field at the back. It was a glorious day, bright sun, blue sky and the singing of skylarks. Everything had such clarity and beauty – it was as though I was seeing it all for the first time. I felt as though I could stand there for hours, drinking it all in. I thought – it is easy to be mindful here, but after a while the startling clarity and newness will fade. It will become ordinary and then commonplace. My mind will look for distraction. I will want to be entertained, interested, aroused, engaged – anything to get out of this unchanging attitude. And I did just that. I came back and picked up a science fiction book and read for an hour, in spite of the little voice which kept nagging – No. No. You’ve got to stick with it.

Later
Mindfulness is more than just being aware of what you are doing. It is being rooted. In meditation being aware is the easy part, but this only really becomes mindfulness when it connects. There is awareness of breathing; awareness of the mind skittering about and being brought back to concentration on the breathing again; awareness of the body, the stomach rising and falling, of an itch, of external noises. All these constitute awareness but it is a shallow awareness, just of the surface of things, of transient phenomena. It is possible throughout the day, more or less, to be aware like this, to cultivate the semi-detached stance of an observer at a little distance from oneself. But, just as yesterday, it palls. And there is always the centripetal force of the body drawing the mind into subjective immersion in feelings, moods and sensations. All this is the awareness of the individual apart, of an entity among other others. It is not awareness of the depths.

Being aware is like looking at the surface of the sea, seeing the dancing reflections of the sun, the rolling waves, the gulls, boats, people swimming. Then you put on polarised sunglasses and the reflections and glitter of the surface vanish and you can see into the depths, into the deep down shadows and the shallow shades of green. Mindfulness is being aware of the depths of being and the interconnectedness of all things. The problem is how to acquire and how to wear throughout the day those ‘polarised glasses’.

Contemplation

October 8th, 2007

Thoughts raged this morning, provoking feelings of helplessness and futility. Like a river delta my life is a series of shallow streams meandering slowly in search of the sea. If only it was channelled, it would flow with energy and purpose and, who knows, it might even get to a destination – not just come to an end, petering out into a morass at the edge of the sea. This of course is why the contemplative life, as a way of life, evolved in the first place.

There needs to be a framework which includes those things that are conducive to meditation and contemplation, and which excludes those which are not. The stark beauty and simplicity of monastic art and architecture, an icon, a cloister, a Zen garden, are like the surface of a clear, still pool of unimaginable depth. If the water is disturbed only the surface can be seen, but when it is still and silent one can gaze into the depths. When one emerges it is as though the cataracts which covered the eyes of the senses and the mind had been removed and people and the world are seen with a clarity and a beauty that is breathtaking.

In contrast, the garish colours and discordant noises, the vapid laughter and effusive gushings, the hurt, and the anger, and the bitterness of ordinary life lead either to a numbing hopelessness, or a self-destructive anger. It is a hedonistic world of the senses and it is a despairing world of anguish and suffering. It is a world of the blind who do not know that they are blind, who do not know or understand who they are, or where they are going, or even that there is a destination. In this aimless existence many are would-be escapists, some into the vicarious lives of soap-opera characters, some into the insensibility of drug addiction; others pursue money, or pleasure,or power. In spite of this there is so much warmth and humanity. There is love and self-sacrifice. There is a general unarticulated hunger for the Truth, if only one knew what it was.

Soul

October 6th, 2007

I woke up this morning thinking about this question of self. The problem for most of us, at least in the West, is that we see ourselves as substantial and enduring entities. I am the same person I have always been. I may have changed physically, and many of my ideas, my likes and dislikes, even my values may have changed, but I am still the same person I always was. This is the common perception.

This perception is reinforced by the Christian idea of a soul. In some way my soul is me. It was directly created by God at the moment of conception. When I die the soul will leave the body and go to Hell, Purgatory, or Heaven where it will wait until the Last Day and the General Resurrection, when the bodies of all who have died will rise and be united with their souls. Then those in Purgatory will join those in Heaven for an eternity of blissful happiness while those in Hell will remain there for ever.

When one looks carefully at this worldview a number of questions emerge. Is the soul substantial, i.e. the essence of a human person; that which makes it what it is? This is the Christian position, one which is based on Plato and Aristotle. It is dualistic, the soul is separable from the body and has an independent existence after death, at least for a time, until the General Resurrection. The earlier New Testament tradition, on the other hand, is not dualistic. The person is a living body. If there is to be life after death it can only be for a risen body.

Of these I prefer the NT version. One can imagine oneself as a mind within a body, detachable from it, at least notionally. But more generally our experience is that body and mind are two aspects of the same thing. Each affects the other profoundly. The idea of a detached mind, or soul, raises many problems. How can a soul, a mind, a purely spiritual entity have feelings, emotions and moods?

Past and present

October 5th, 2007

Meditation gets you firmly fixed in the now. Only the present is real. We can only act, only be, now, in the present. Yet the past weighs heavily on us. We carry it into the present ‘now’. If only I had said… If only I had not done… If only… We are constrained by what we have done, or left undone, by regrets, by guilt. The past no longer exists; it is over, finished, it cannot be changed yet its power to affect the present still lives on.

That was very badly put. It treats the past as though it was some external force, some extrinsic agency which shaped and determined us. But this is not the case. The past does not exist. Only ‘now’ exists and in this ‘now’ are memories. What you are now is the result of what you thought and did in previous ‘nows’. I can understand now why many Buddhists understand reincarnation, not as a succession of lives, but as being born continually into the present. We are born anew into this moment, this present ‘now’. We emerge from the womb of past ‘nows’, shaped and determined by them. If we do nothing the impetus they generated will carry us into this present moment, passively accepting that shaping and determination. We will continue to act and react as we have done previously. Our freedom to change, to remake ourselves now is constricted by the inertia of memory. We may talk about fate, or say, ‘I am what I am,’ or, ‘What will be will be.’ These are either excuses for our inability to take charge of the now, or they are an inference to cover up our lack of understanding of what it means to be a human person.

In meditation, as I focus all my attention on my breathing and on being aware simply of this present now, I realise that I am not my mind, no more than I am my body. Like a butterfly constantly fluttering about, my mind is rarely still. Quite independently of my will, which is trying to remain focused on my breathing, it keeps up a constant inner dialogue with itself, delving into memories, embarking on voyages of fantasy, flittering from one topic to the next. One moment it is anxious, the next fearful, then dreamily nostalgic. It is quite another world this inner world of the mind and it has very little to do with this real world of the present now – unless, of course, I allow it.

Mead and Watsuji say that the social self is an achievement. What we have achieved has depended on how much control we took of the present moments. How much control we can take depends on the influence of the past and the social context of the present. For some these can be liberating, for others they can be oppressive. It also depends on our vision of what it means to be human. It is tragic that there are so many people who have been damaged by their past and present experiences and who have little hope of being able to change because they have no other vision than that of their present context.

Meditation is not easy. It takes great effort to maintain concentration. Eventually, however, comes mindfulness and the acute awareness that only the present now is real; that the past can influence this now only if it is allowed to; that what I am is what I make myself to be in this moment. Memories, moods and feelings can all be ignored, relegated to another time and place. Only now is real and now I can be…? What I can be depends on what I understand and on what I believe.

The psychologist T. S. Lebra sees the structure of the person as having three dimensions : the interactional self, the inner self and the boundless self. The interactional, or social, self is an ongoing event, the result of the developmental process of education (especially language) and moral socialisation. The inner self is the ongoing dialectic between the I and the me constantly bringing forth new syntheses. It is a world of feelings and fantasies, moods and imagination. The boundless self – that is the most interesting one of all. It is the self we all need to discover.

Understanding ‘nothingness’

October 4th, 2007

Yesterday while driving I wrestled with the concept of sunyata, nothingness, or emptiness. It suddenly struck me that the mind is not very good at dealing with this. In fact it cannot grasp ‘nothingness’. We have two blind spots in our vision, one in each eye, yet we are not aware of them. The mind fills in what is missing. If we look through one eye we are not aware that there is a hole in our vision. Similarly we are not aware of the periphery of our vision. This is why the representation of looking through binoculars in the cinema, seeing through a template like a figure-of-eight on its side, strikes us as false. We just do not see like this. To see the periphery of vision we would have to see it as the dividing line between vision and no vision. But we cannot see ‘nothing’. ‘Nothing’, by definition, does not exist.

Normally what we understand as ‘nothing’ is relative nothingness. We say the room is empty, nothing in it. We do not mean this literally because, literally, it is not a true statement – there is air, magnetic fields etc. What we mean is ‘nothing of significance’. The boy says he is doing nothing. What he means is nothing of significance, or nothing he should not be doing, or he might be telling a lie. By ‘nothing’ we usually mean ‘empty’, a box, a room, space, or we mean non activity. Emptiness is not nothingness. It implies a container, walls, a boundary of some sort. By ‘nothing’ what we mean is ‘relative nothingness’, or nihility as Nishitani calls it.

‘Absolute nothingness’ cannot be grasped. There is nothing to be grasped. Absolute nothingness does not exist as we understand existence. Most people understand the cosmos to be the result of the explosion of the Big Bang expanding outwards into space. Before the big Bang there was no space. There was nothing. The Big Bang initiated both something – matter and energy, and nothing – the relative nothingness of the empty space between the stars. Whether the Big Bang emerged from absolute nothingness we have no way of knowing.

When we go to sleep there is a hazy awareness of time passing. When we wake in the morning we know – experientially, not just by deduction – that time has passed. There were times during the night when we were dimly aware. There were dreams. When I had my heart op, however, I experienced ‘nothing’ while I was unconscious. One moment I was lying in the operating theatre, the next I was waking up in the recovery room. There was no interval, no awareness of time having passed, although by deduction I knew that it had. The two moments were instantaneous, one merging seamlessly into the other. Try as I would I could not recall either the extinction of consciousness nor the moment of waking. One moment I was awake in the operating theatre, the next I was awake in the recovery room. This hiatus bothered me. It annoyed me that I did not have the faintest glimmering, not just of the interval, but that there had even been an interval. Only by deduction did I know that time had passed. ‘Nothing’ cannot be experienced but it can be deduced.

Neither the relative ‘nothingness’ of empty space, or non-activity, nor absolute nothingness as I have described it are what Buddhism means by ‘nothingness’, or ’emptiness’ (sunyata). More on this later.

Simple Awareness

October 3rd, 2007

I am still a beginner at meditation. Some days it goes well, others, like today, badly. The nagging question at the back of my mind is this question of concentration on simple awareness, nothing more. There is a feeling that I should be doing something, praying perhaps, otherwise I will not get anywhere. I do not believe this is true, nevertheless the nagging doubt is there. There is also the temptation to deal with this rationally, by thinking it through. There is plenty in my reading to persuade me otherwise. Yesterday I came across this in Nishitani:

Our ability to perceive reality means that reality realises (actualises) itself in us; that this in turn is the only way that we can realise (appropriate through understanding) the fact that reality is so realising itself in us; and that in so doing the self-realisation of reality takes itself place.
(Religion and Nothingness p. 5)

It is a hard and difficult struggle getting there – it may, perhaps, be the most difficult thing I have ever done. Meditation is like trying to balance on a knife edge. Once one is out of the mind and focused on the simple awareness of breathing there is the danger of habituation. There is very little new sensory input and so the body and then breathing, gradually disappear. I notice tension round my eyes, a sign that I have begun to think. Back to concentration on counting breaths again – and so the cycle goes on, back and forwards. Yesterday and the day before I managed to hold the concentration on counting the breaths quite well. Today I did not manage it at all. It struck me that this problem I have of making sense with simple awareness is similar to that of wrestling with koans. There is no rational answer. Insight, enlightenment, satori, or whatever, will only come when one has broken through that barrier.

Now

October 2nd, 2007

Meditation went much better this morning. The usual problem of constant distractions and then, in desperation, I remembered that counting the breaths rather than a mantra is advised by many. It had never appealed to me before, striking me as too cold, methodical and impersonal – the mantra, after all, had meaning although one did not attend to the meaning. The trouble with the mantra is that it is easy to habituate and then you are no better off than before. So I started counting. It worked very well. It kept my attention focused on the breathing and the fact that it was a sequential progression meant that one was less likely to habituate.

Just simply being aware does seem rather a waste of time, especially if what you want to do is pray. Perhaps you want to cry ‘out of the depths’ of anguish, or simply be still in the presence of love, or sing praises filled with awe and wonder. At these times sitting still, leaving thoughts and feelings on one side to simply be aware goes against the grain. But then, on another day there will be no exultant feelings, no tortured anguish, just a dull apathy, heavy with boredom. And you wonder where all the fine thoughts and feelings have gone. Even the pain of suffering almost seems more bearable than this tedium. But you make the effort and you concentrate on counting the breaths and simply being aware.

Later, when you allow yourself to think discursively again, you realise that meditation has distanced you from your thoughts and feelings; that however exhilarating or agonising these feelings were they were not permanent. The only thing you can be absolutely sure of is that they will change and that you have no control over them. Yesterday you may have felt touched by the infinite love at the heart of being, today you may be dull and weepy, tomorrow you may be wracked by suffering. Nothing is fixed, or certain, or permanent. There are no guarantees about the future. It is then that you begin to realise the importance of simple awareness in meditation.

The fact that it distances you from your thoughts and feelings and that it gives you a perspective from which to be aware of them so that you are not caught up in them is immensely valuable. You are no longer their prisoner, one day up, the next day down. You have begun to find the still point.

The various me’s, or selves, are very real. Those of the past – the child of a mother and father, the friend, the lover, the victim etc., are not dead. They reside in memory and it only takes some little trigger – a scent, a sound, a snatch of music – and their powerful feelings and emotions become real and alive again in the present. Once more we are caught up in the world of this former me and the memory is always tinged with sadness. If it was a happy time there is sorrow that it is no more. If it was a sad and bitter time the memory of it floods into the present. Thoughts of, ‘If only…’ and, ‘What if…’ cloud the mind. The past can weigh heavily, a burden that encumbers the present. The secret is to let it go. Only this now is real.