If I’m not the one inside my head, then who is?

I enjoy Zen. But I have no desire to actually practice Zen. Not formally. Too much work. Too much discipline. Too much bowing before a master who, you eventually realize, doesn't deserve veneration. I prefer the idea of being my own Zen teacher. That way, I can do as much Zen-stuff as I want, in the way I want to, when and how I want.  Which includes giving myself koans to solve. This is my new one: If I'm not the one inside my head, then who is? l really like this koan. I'm SO happy I thought of it.…

I’ve finished Sam Harris’ “Waking Up.” Guess I have, sort of.

Well, Sam Harris' new book "Waking Up," a guide to spirituality without religion, was about what I expected. Interesting. Inspiring. Well written. Not hugely enlightening.  I've already blogged about some key themes in the book here and here. Like I said in the second post, there are subtleties in Harris' message that require some pondering -- as would be expected for such ponderable subjects as the nature of consciousness and the self. Having read a bunch of neuroscience books, I wasn't surprised by reading this. Once one recognizes the selflessness of consciousness, the practice of meditation becomes just a means…

Real spirituality is realizing you aren’t a soul, or self

Just as predicted, I'm really enjoying reading Sam Harris' new book, "Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion." I'm about a third of the way through. Which is far enough to have discovered the central theme. Harris writes: My goal in this chapter and the next is to convince you that the conventional sense of self is an illusion -- and that spirituality largely consists in realizing this, moment to moment. ...Most of us feel that our experience of the world refers back to a self -- not to our bodies precisely but to a center of consciousness that…

Buddhist “emptiness” appeals to my churchless non-soul

When true believers (as I was at one time) start to give up religiosity, often they pass through various stages of withdrawal from their addiction to dogma. For me, one stage is an admiration of Buddhism and Taoism, spiritual philosophies which have an affinity with modern science and secular ways of looking upon the world. I'm still in that stage. I may never leave it. Yesterday I picked up Stephen Bachelor's "Verses from the Center: A Buddhist VIsion of the Sublime," after a long absence. It's Bachelor's interpretation of Nagarjuna's teachings about emptiness, a core Buddhist concept.  Well, non-concept. Because…

Scattered thoughts about mindfulness

These thoughts are powered by (1) a 16 ounce can of Mike's Harder Margarita, which I've never tried before, but surely will again, and (2) a 16 ounce serving of the Sisters blend from the Sisters Coffee Company in central Oregon.   This blend of alcohol and caffeine is guaranteed to produce a magnificently coherent amalgamation of scattered thoughts about this evening's chosen blog topic: mindfulness. In my own mind at least, the only mind I really give a shit about, being clueless about all others. Regarding mindfulness, I started meditating in 1969, so I've got 45 years of daily…

The Embodied Mind — interesting interview with Evan Thompson

Neuroscience. Buddhism. Meaning. Consciousness. Brain. Body. Culture. There's a lot of threads woven into a pretty persuasive view of things in a Tricycle interview with Evan Thompson: Thoroughly grounded in Western and Buddhist philosophy and learned in science, Thompson has been dedicated to cross-cultural and interdisciplinary dialogue between Buddhism and cognitive science for over two decades. Give it a read. The piece is just the right length. Not too long. Not too short. Readable in a single spiritual philosophical sitting. The only reader comment (at the moment) also is perceptive. I liked how Thompson is skeptical about the whole Buddhist…

Don’t be Big Brother to yourself, “I” watching “me”

Non-religious Buddhism and neuroscience agree on this: there is no such thing as a "self." Meaning, there isn't an "I" who is separate from "me," a soul separate from body, a mind separate from brain. Understanding this -- no, more, intuitively experiencing the truth of this -- cuts through mountains of religious, spiritual, mystical, and philosophical crap. It also makes life way simpler.  It's crazy that we humans look upon ourselves as if we are an object to be manipulated, like a smart phone or chainsaw. We're always asking ridiculous questions like, "Why don't I feel better about myself?"  There…

I’m liking Chögyam Trungpa’s take on spiritual materialism

Somehow I'd read a lot of books on Buddhism without ever becoming familiar with Chögyam Trungpa. I'd heard the name before, but had no idea who the guy was. Recently one thing led to another, which led me to buy his "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism." I'd read a short essay of his in a book on mindfulness. That spurred me to Google him, where I found that Trungpa was a Buddhist meditation master who, among other things, had sex with students, abused alcohol and cocaine, and had other endearing qualities (to someone irreligious like me). So I bought the above-mentioned book.…

“Beat Zen, Square Zen, and Zen” — great Alan Watts essay

Back in 1958 Alan Watts wrote a classic essay, "Beat Zen, Square Zen, and Zen." Beat and square, back in the 50's, were words roughly equivalent to our "cool" and "lame." Or "hip" and "traditional." A beatnik bore some resemblance to today's hipster. I was just ten years old in 1958, so wasn't able to embrace the beat generation thing. Had to wait until the 60's to dive into the next counter-cultural evolution: hippies. A few days ago I came across Watts' essay in a compilation of three of his writings, "The Wisdom of Insecurity" (one of my all-time favorite…

Reduce the chatter of your inner anchorperson

The 24 hour cable news channels are a fairly recent invention. But the voice inside our head that chatters away almost non-stop likely is as old as modern human consciousness. There's a lot of similarity between so-called news anchors and our own inner commentator. (Who is it? Me? But it's giving me advice, berating me, encouraging me, talking to me. So how could it be me? Assuming there even is a "me" for the voice to be or not to be.) They both spend a lot more time recollecting the past and musing about the future than reporting on what…

Halfway through “10% Happier.” I feel 5% better now.

I'm glad my Amazon guilt led me to buy Dan Harris' "10% Happier" in the charming Paulina Springs Bookstore in Sisters, Oregon.  Whenever I visit the bookstore, usually once a month in spring and summer, I do my best to buy something. This assuages the guilt I feel from buying books via Amazon the rest of the time. So when I saw a copy of "10% Happier" last Sunday, I ended up purchasing it after thumbing through the book. Previously I'd read reviews of Harris' book that made me wary of adding one more meditation/ mindfulness title to my extensive…

We have a conventional self, but not a soul-self

For good reasons I don't believe in a human "self." Or a non-human self either. But this doesn't mean that I deny people exist.  This notion of no-self can be confusing. To some, no-self implies oneness. Yet it is obvious that I am me and you are you. We have different bodies and different brains. There are connections between us, but we are distinct entities. I've found it difficult to explain both to others and myself how the non-existence of a self is compatible with the existence of individual human beings. Re-reading part of "Living As a River" today, I…

“Buddhist Biology” book paradoxically embraces free will

This happens to me a lot, in my now-churchless frame of mind. I'll buy a book that seems to be in my sweet spot: scientific, yet also philosophical, with just enough of a spiritual-but-not-religious tone.  Like Goldilocks, not too much, not too little. Just right. I don't mean to sound like a crotchety literary perfectionist. I realize that the reason I like to read books is because they're written by people who aren't me. I enjoy reading stuff I don't agree with. So long as I can understand the author's reasons for saying what he or she does. With "Buddhist…

Spirituality should be based on reality

Since I bought it, my go-to book for reading prior to my morning meditation/quiet time has been David Barash's "Buddhist Biology: Ancient Eastern Wisdom Meets Modern Western Science."  My previous posts about the book are here and here.  For me, it's a home run in the spirituality without supernaturalism ballpark. In the same genre of Stephen Bachelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs," yet more satisfying in certain ways, being based on solid science. Albeit with a healthy dose of modern secular Buddhism viewpoints. The core of Barash's book, which I've almost finished, is that three principles underly Buddhism in all of its…

Not-self a teaching of Buddhism, not Hinduism

It is extremely simplistic to speak of "Eastern" religions as if they all are much the same. Actually, they aren't. For example, in some regards Hinduism is closer to Christian theology than to Buddhist teachings. Case in point: not-self. Buddhists call this anatman.  The doctrine of anatman (or anatta in Pali) is one of the central teachings of Buddhism. According to this doctrine, there is no "self" in the sense of a permanent, integral, autonomous being within an individual existence. What we think of as our self, our personality and ego, are temporary creations of the skandhas. Hinduism also uses this term. But…

Buddhism without supernaturalism leaves reality

For me, giving up religious addiction isn't done "cold turkey," all at once. It's a gradual process. I discarded the most ridiculous notions early on, but afterwards I find myself letting go of faith-based beliefs bit by bit.

Buddhism and Taoism are examples of this. 

I've given away quite a few of my books in these genres that I couldn't bear to read any more. Even Zen books. Just because spirituality comes in an "Eastern" guise doesn't mean it is free of the dogmatism and supernaturalism that infects Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. 

So now I'm only able to enjoy Buddhist and Taoist writings that make scientific sense. Or at least aren't opposed to a rational, experiential understanding of everyday reality.

Which explains why I've started reading "Buddhist Biology: Ancient Eastern Wisdom meets Modern Western Science." I read a review of David Barash's book in New Scientist. 

(In case the review disappears from the New Scientist web site, I'll include it as a continuation to this post.)

Here's some excerpts from the first chapter that I resonate with.

Full disclosure: I have been a practicing biologist for more than four decades and an aspiring Buddhist (or "Buddhist sympathizer") for about as long, but I am definitely more the former than the latter. I have no religious "faith," if faith is taken to mean belief without evidence. 

Indeed, I have a powerful distrust of organized religion and a deep aversion to anything — anything — that smacks of the supernatural. Give me the natural, the real, the material, every time.

…I am a Buddhist atheist, a phrase that may seem contradictory but that has legitimacy not only in my case, but as a description of many others, of whom the former Buddhist monk and current scholar and author Stephen Bachelor is best-known.

…By contrast, it is hard to imagine a Muslim or Christian atheist, since the terms are oxymoronic: they contradict each other.

…a "Christian" who doesn't believe in the divinity of Jesus would seem not only a poor Christian but no Christian at all. Interestingly, Jewish atheists are comparatively abundant, probably because unlike Islam and Christianity, whose followers are defined as those who espouse the tenets of their religion, Jews are defined as much by their ethnicity as their religious beliefs. There are also many "Jew-Boos," people who identify both as Jewish and as Buddhist.

…High on the list of Buddhist absurdities are the phenomenon of iddhi, supernatural events that are supposed to be generated by extremely skillful and committed meditation. They appear often in Buddhist texts and I don't believe a word of them.

…The traditional Buddhist cosmology is, however, very specific, and more than a little weird, with the world composed of thirty-one levels. 

…A final example in which I (and many other Buddhist sympathizers) part company with traditional Buddhist beliefs concerns the doctrine of reincarnation…. For those of us interested in reconciling Buddhism with science in general and biology in particular, traditional reincarnation remains a pronounced and irreconcilable outlier.

…the present book will likely trouble those otherwise gentle Buddhist souls who so revere Tenzin Gyatso that they append to his name the honorific "HH," His Holiness. "The Dalai Lama" is okay with me, since that is how this particular gentleman is widely known, but even though I greatly admire him for his kindness as well as his wisdom, I cannot swallow the notion that he is any holier than thou, or me, or Charles Darwin, or anyone else. Either we are all holy (whatever that means), or no one is.

…I hold to the position that Buddhism in its most useful, user-friendly, and indeed meaningful form is not in fact a religion in the standard Western sense of the term. Rather, it is a perspective, a philosophical tradition of inquiry and wisdom, a way of looking at the world that is often perverted into a kind of "sky-god" faith complete with other nonsensical rigamarole, but, in its more genuine form, is anything but that.

Here's the New Scientist review:

Cold Mountain poems — Zen without dogma

Like I said before, I'm thinning the herd of my Zen Buddhism books. Even many of them are too religious'y for me now.  But I'll probably keep "Cold Mountain Poems," translated by J.P. Seaton. I was reminded of the book when I read a story in today's Oregonian about another translator of Han Shan who lives in Port Townsend, Washington: Bill Porter, a.k.a. Red Pine. I just ordered Red Pine's translation of Cold Mountain poems. I liked what was said about his translation approach in the Oregonian story. Red Pine says he couldn't write an original poem if he tried. He says…

When did humans start making life itself into a problem?

We all have problems in life. Life wouldn't be what it is, if it didn't involve problems. Every day we need to find food, water, shelter, and other necessities of life. Even when these are available, other problems arise. What is most important to do from moment to moment? How do we maintain good relationships with other people? What pleasures should be pursued and pains avoided? Since we are mammals, other types of animals share these concerns. Our two dogs, for example. (Of course, these pampered pets pretty much have the necessities of life handed to them by their supposed…

Mindfulness or Mindlessness video — good points about meditation

Thanks to a Tweet from David Chapman, I spent thirty minutes this morning watching a video of Robert Sharf talking about "Mindfulness or Mindlessness."  Demonstrating my own approach to the subject, I paid some bills while concentrating as much as I could on what Sharf had to say. Which was pretty darn interesting, albeit involving quite a few abstruse Buddhist terms. You should watch the video yourself if you want to know exactly what he said. Below I'll share some recollections of his talk, along with my own take on the themes that resonated with me.   Don't assume spirituality…

Attachment and detachment are equally good

I'm not big on the whole detachment thing. Strikes me as horribly unnatural. Why should we give up attachments, desires, cravings, longings? Than again, why shouldn't we? If someone feels like being attached to someone or something, great. Go for it, dude or dudette. If someone feels like detaching from someone or something, also great. Let loose, let go. There's no problem in wanting and not-wanting, clinging and releasing. Each of us does this countless times a day.  I just had a desire for a sip of coffee. I attached my fingers to the handle of my cup. I lifted…