THIS IS SOMETHING I WROTE AS A BASIC DEFINITION PAPER WHEN I FIRST STARTED LEARNING ABOUT BUDDHISM.

Exercise 6: Buddhism (www.thebigview.com/Buddhism/fourtruths.html)

Buddhism revolves around the teachings of a man named Siddhartha Gautama who became disillusioned by the material trappings of the world, and sought a better way of life. He became enlightened after intense meditiation On he nature of suffering.

Buddhism focuses on an intensely pragmatic path of mental cultivation through meditation on what Buddha called "The four noble truths", being: 1. Suffering ,2.the origins of suffering,3.the end of suffering known as "Nirvana" and,4. The path to the end of suffering.

1. Suffering: during life we all encounter forms of suffering be it through sadness,anxiety,anger,or depression. And although there are good, positive forces in life such as comfort, and happiness. Life in it's totality is incomplete and imperfect because the world is imperfect and always changing.
Thus we are never able to keep the perfect parts of life and soon have to experience negativity in order to appreciate the good.

2. The origin of suffering is attachment: Attachment is seen as not just all physical objects or status symbols but also include the idea of " the self" which according to Buddhism is a delusion. What we call "self" is just an imaginary entity and in reality we are just a part of the universe.

3.The cessation of suffering is attainable: this can be obtained through what is called "Nirodha" which means the unmaking of sensual craving and conceptual attachment. This "truth" says that suffering can end through human activity, simply by removing the causes of suffering. By attaining the end of suffering one can reach Nirvana. Which means "freedom from all worries,troubles, complexes, ideas, and fabrications.)

4. The path to cessation of suffering: The fourth "nobel truth" addresses how one can overcome suffering through making a gradual path of self- improvement known as "The Middle Way" in that it is the path between the two extremes: the first being the path of excessive self-indulgences and, secondly, the path of excessive self-mortification

Walking this path leads to the end of the cycle of reincarnation and may take many lifetimes to obtain.

"To conquer oneself is a greater task then conquering others."-Buddha

Exercise 4; Lesson 4: "Mindwalk" movie review and reflection

 

Movie Length 1:48:08 

6/15/14; 6/25/14; 6/29/14; 7/02/14;8/31/14;10/10/14;10/12/14;10/16/14; 10/22/14;10/23/14; 10/26/14

 

This is a replacement for the summary/reflection up "The Field" by Lynn Mctaggart. This film is based on "The Turning Point" by Fritjof Capra.  I apologize for the length of this final initiate basic studies exercise but there’s so much content that resonated with me that I wanted to do it justice.

This movie starts with the introduction of Jack Edwardsplayed by Sam Waterson; as a Congressman who is dealing with the loss of a United States Presidential campaign and trying to decide if he’ll run for Congress again. In his recuperating from his loss he contacts an old friend Thomas Harriman played by John Heard; andthrough there discussion Jack is invited to visit as a way to recover while Jack decides if he wants to run again to keep his seat in the Senate.

While driving through the country side his friend reflects jacks character describing jack as "Behind the innocent there’s a calculating politician but behind that politician is an innocent who’s still American enough he doesn’t lie well. He means it" The opening credit’s play as they park the car and walk through a swamp to a castle in the distance.

9:00- 13:40 (12:45)

The Men discuss each other lives and their combined resentments towards said lives back in the USA.  Jack being upset over the loss of the presidential election; and Thomas about why he stays in France.  Thomas brings him to a castle ruin/cemetery where they watch a tour group and walk around for Jack to get perceptive.

12:46- 13:40

"Did they really think that their bones to keep to Judgment day?"

"You got to remember for them judgment day was right around the corner. They expected it almost hourly. (Just like us) I wouldn’t say so. Judgment day, for us it’s different. It’s an interruption, a violation, a break in our concept to time—the bomb, the big one. Judgment day for them was the ultimate day off. Not the ultimate off day. There wasn’t any mechanical time, time was season to season, Dawn to dusk, Sabbath to Saint-day and everything led toward Judgment day. That was the reason everyone was alive. Judgment day was the day of deliverance. . . Like Sunday, when you get the times delivered. Time was sacred. They’d ring a bell in the morning, they’d ring a bell in the evening. And these times would change little but the rhythm of their era was so different from ours that I don’t think that we can even imagine."

The discussion of Judgment day as being viewed as a day to day eminent occurrence is strange to me; I know that there’s a lot of discussion of ‘The End Times’ in pop culture and fringe Christian groups but to truly believe that it’s just around the corner –as opposed to an idealized anti-paradise; or morality tale about the end results of "sin"- is very strange.    

These discussions move into how they (the earlier societies) viewed time; just sunrise to sunset; season to season.  There’s a beautiful freedom in that.

17:40-18:18: Another discussion of time and its importance as well as the meaning of the invention of the clock as a thing for marking time.

Jack: "This thing (Clock) has been functioning for hundreds and hundreds of years. Since before the recording of modern times.’   "This is different from the kind of time you were talking about before- sunrise to sunset; Sabbath to Sabbath isn’t it? This is mechanical time "

Thomas: "You bet it is... this clock; this machine is what constitutes humanities basic break from the world of nature"

Thomas to Sonia: "Wouldn’t you think so?"

Sonia: "The clock did much more than that. It became the model of the cosmos and then they mistook the model for the real thing. People came up with the idea that nature was just a giant clock, not a living organism but a machine." (18:05-18:18)

Thomas: That’s exactly what I’ve been trying to tell (Jack) . . . "

The discussion of Time is very significant to me as a member of the current society that has to have every second accounted for; is bombarded by negativity and as a society disrespectful for the past.  

While viewing the clock they meet and befriend a Norwegian Scientist named Sonia Hoffman played by Liv Ullman (who we glimpsed for a moment earlier in the movie) and the majority of the film revolves around the three friends discussing different ethical, theological, psychological "opinions" in a great series of discussions. 

The rest of this review will focus on the major themes of their discussions, my opinions of these themes, and what I learned from this film.  I might not discuss every single little topic change but will instead focus my attention on the topics that made an impact on me either positively, negatively or neutrally.

The main theme of this movie is the interconnection of everything in the world as well as discussions of different views of philosophy, religion, and world views.

The next image continues the imagery of the clock as an extension of the teachings of Descartes; and they discuss the falsity or acceptability of that idea. 

Sonia: "Descartes was the primary architect of the view that sees the world as a clock. A mechanistic view that still dominates most of the world today, and it seems to me, especially in politicians. . . ."

This view of the world bleeds into a discussion of the interconnection of all the worlds’ problems and an inherent falsity of looking at them as disconnected items. Be it Population control, education problems; and the self-replication of these problems within debt, poverty, the destruction of the rainforests, and global warming.

26:16-27:43

Sonia: "You can’t look at one single of our global problems in isolation trying to understand it and fix it. Of course you can fix a fragment of a piece but it will deteriorate a second later because what it was connected to will have been ignored. We have to change everything together at the same time; the ideas, the institutions, the values. . ."

Jack:". . . Yes the problems are complex but you’re just looking at the dark side because it shows are incapacity to respond. Communications, data banks, technology; we have the tools to deal with these problems even if they are more complex."

Sonia: "But don’t you see that all these new technologies. They cause more problems than they solve. In medicine, for example, there’s been an overwhelming increase in technology, but the costs have spiraled concurrently. It’s become medicine for the rich and public health hasn’t improved significantly, although public health would improve dramatically if we just changed our eating habits for example. But instead the experts are occupied with making artificial hearts but if our agro business had (been) better instead of chopping down the rainforest in order to make cattle ranches in order to produce more and more red meat- which is one of the (leading) causes of heart attacks- then maybe we wouldn’t have to spend so much of our money on artificial hearts . . . . This is all examples of interconnectedness..." (27:43) 

This description of all the interconnections between the problems of the world and the daunting task of fixing some of these problems can be overwhelming. The enhancements in technology in regards to medicine are wonderful but in my opinion, if there’s no forests we’re going to need artificial lungs instead of artificial hearts.  Regardless there is so much money out there tied up in defense contracts, weapons, and machines of death and war and I feel that if we as a culture changed our focus from surviving and killing others to a more globally friendly and peaceful focus and tried to fix our pollution, find a eco-friendly artificial fuel instead of oil/gasoline; and actually try to heal the world because everything is connected.   Trying to change ones viewpoint from seeing things as unconnected bits of things to seeing them as deeply connected and impacted by each other is, in my opinion, the main theme of this movie. Reshown to us through different examples.

 

36:00-38:10

The trio leave their discussion of politics and technology and stumbling upon a couple of children goofing off in a torture chamber; as the trio enters the children run away.

Jack: "Why does that make me angry?"

Thomas: well probably because they (the children) don’t want anything to do with us. They don’t believe in us. There isn’t any reason why they should Jack, except for their own eventual aging.

Jack: They don’t notice where they are. They think this is the movies, but this room is absolutely contemporary. Everybody’s got a torture chamber now. They don’t even notice them.  (To Sonia) Are you going to say this is part of your crisis of perception, too?"

Thomas: Maybe we’re all led a little towards death, like wolves to the weak, or maybe people are just shits, hmm?"

Jack: You’d like to blame this on Descartes. I’d like to blame it on anybody. But it’s such a part of human history, I . .

Sonia: Well I don’t know about Descartes. But I do know that Francis Bacon presided over the Witch Trials of king James the first at a time when millions of women were tortured or burned for practicing folk medicine or worshiping Pre-Christian Goddesses or simply because they were unusual. . . . I don’t believe it was a metaphor when Francis Bacon wrote that ‘Nature had to be hounded in her wandering, bound into service, made a slave. ‘He even said that scientists with their new mechanical devices had to torture natures’ secrets out of her.  Did you notice how he uses "Her" when describing Mother Nature? As if Nature was nothing but a Witch? . . . . Yes. It’s actually fair to say that this room represents a crisis of perception. . . . ." (38:10)

This idea that the natural world needs to be reined in has gone from being a simple ideological and religious disagreement between the pre-Christian pagans and Christians; and because Christianity focuses on the next world they completely disregard this world; add in greed and human need to consume and you get a world utterly destroyed for the betterment of humanity; this is like a surgeon faced with a patient whose heart and kidney being damaged and instead focuses all their attention on saving the kidney. It won’t matter because without the heart to pump blood there is no life.

I have some very deep feelings in regards to the history of persecution of nature worshippers by Christianity; but while I have these feelings; this isn’t the point of this section of the initiate training and is covered in previously posted entries.

Sonia goes on to connect this idea of nature being something needed to be condemned and controlled to our current treatment of this planet.

(38:30- 41:41)

Sonia: "But hasn’t modern science, technology, business done exactly what Francis Bacon preached: tortured our planet? Didn’t we just implement the old patriarchal idea about man dominating all?

Jack: I don’t know Sonia, Let me be the devil’s advocate for a minute. How much have we really tortured and hounded the planet? You could say not much compared to what the ice ages did to the world, for example. And who says that nature can’t cope? We’re all scared to death about the disappearing ozone layer but we only started studying ozone layers about 10 years ago  ( The 1980s). It could be that these so-called holes in the atmosphere have been appearing and disappearing again since the beginning of time. Couldn’t it?   Or it could be that nature has a healing mechanism we don’t even know about. It could be that this hysteria about ultraviolet rays is nothing more than that, Just hysteria.

Sonia: That’s exactly what they said about the Germanforests and look at them now. More than half the trees in the black forest are dying.  We can’t explain it anyway. We simply cannot take the risk. . .  Lakes can die, entire oceans become polluted, topsoil, forests, water, poisoned,dead. . . . Things can change so much at the hands of man. Nature becomes fragile, rain becomes acid. 

Thomas: (to Sonia) I agree with everything you said. But why this patriarchal fixation? In Salem those women witches were betrayed by other women.  Phyllis Schlafly, a woman, has written that God’s greatest gift to mankind was the atom bomb. These are women. Why can’t you say what is patriarchal is what’s evil in both men and women?. . . .Unless you happen to believe these women were brain washed by men like Patti Hearst?

Sonia: Why are you so scornful? Look there are two great functioning principles in this entire world: Man or male principle. ..Aggressive, dominating, whatever; and the female principle; nurturing, caretaking, gentle, whatever. What I am saying is that these two principles may have been in a rough balance but now the men- And yes I do think it is the men- have created tools and weapons, both intellectually and physically to bring these two principles way out of balance. We have been placing mechanistic tools in the hands of power oriented patriarchal people. I am saying you men are out of control now! And I; we; you; we are the victims. So what’s the risk? What’s wrong with giving the female principle an opportunity?

Thomas: And I say let’s get out of this room. It’s having a torturous effect on our relationship. 

(41:41)

Back in 1990 when this film came out and in the 1980s when the book that this movie is based on was written the effects of the hole in the ozone layer and the damage of our global consumerism society were just being discovered and examined. Now in 2014; 25 years after we are faced with nearly devastating climate change which is definitely connected since, like the clock and the basic premise of this lesson is everything is interconnected to one another!  The warnings this and other movies like it since gave us warnings that were ignored.   The torture to our planet stems from; in my opinion; a complete and utter disregard and disrespect toward the planet as a living organism.  We (as humankind) see it as a gift from God that will go on eternally; we put scientific innovation and production in order to create an oil-based economy that is literally destroying the planet!!!!

This view that Women are the root of evil is from the change from pagan polytheist goddess worship to the monotheistic destructiveness of the Male-dominated power elite and the views of Christianity.  Even within that religion it’s ridiculous for us to be destroying our world; wasn’t the world supposedly a Gift from God? Shouldn’t we take care of the ecosystem that has allowed us not just to survive but to thrive as a species? Won’t God be pissed when we approach the pearly gates after completely disregarding His gift for us?  Even if you don’t believe in God; shouldn’t the basic survival idea of "you don’t defecate where you eat!" be respected for the simple reason that in helps preserve the precious life that is you (mankind)?

These are the thoughts that this part of the movie brought to my head; perhaps there’s solutions out there but I do believe we won’t get any better off as a species until we start respecting the planet as we should. You don’t have to deify it as our ancestors did, in order to treat it with respect, but I completely understand why that occurred and I find myself thinking that if that hadn’t changed perhaps we’d be better off as a culture and as a species.

PART 2

41:41 –49:21

After leaving the torture chamber the trio make amends with apologies due to midlife crises. Sonia discusses that she is on a sabbatical from science with a specialty in laser technology. They speak about her life and her desire to see a new way of ecological thinking to help overcome some of these problems discussed so far. 

They then move into ideas of quantum physics and the cell structure (comparison between atoms; nucleus; the island; oranges; and cherries; and why things appear as solid matter when really nothing is solid.)

Sonia: "By reducing all physical phenomena to the motion of material particles; a motion caused by the force of gravity. He (Newton) was able to describe the exact effect of gravity on any object with precise mathematical equations."

Throwing the rock in the river example shows the depth of Newton’s equations and mathematical significant to our culture.  This validated Descartes dream as established fact which empowered people to think in scientific theory and disregard the a view that the world was a living organism which has directly or indirectly laid the ground work for thinking that lead to the worlds abuse and the current state of affairs ecologically.

Jack: "What’s wrong with newton?"

Before Sonia can answer she’s interrupted by her daughter and her daughters’ friend; after introductions to Jack and Thomas; thus a brief discussion of children bleeds into a discussion of Turner and Light.

"49:22-50:58

Sonia: "You know it’s no accident that Turner painted light when he did or that light became the inspiration of the impressionists. The nature of light became an obsession with the physicists, too. See, none of them could visualize how the light of the sun reached the earth. 

Jack: Why? What is the nature of light?

Sonia: To understand the nature of light, you have to know what matter is made of.

Jack: I thought it was made of atoms.

Sonia: What’s an atom? Newton thought it was small, solid particles. But that’s not what scientists saw when they observed atoms for the first time. What they saw was totally unexpected and shocking.

Thomas: You mean when they discovered that atoms were made up of even smaller particles, a nucleus with electrons whirlingaround it?

Sonia: Not only that. They were moving in relatively vast regions of empty space. That’s what shook the scientists up. Atoms consist mainly of empty space.

Jack: what does that mean vast regions of empty space? Atoms are tiny.

Sonia: yes they are, this is what’s so hard to visualize. See the size of atoms is so far removed from our ordinary sense of scale and proportion that it’s extremely hard to get a feeling for the relative sizes and distances of their particles.

Sonia goes on to use an analogy of an orange to demonstrate that size and scale of the basic atom; be it a photon or electron or an atom.

50:59: Sonia: "Ask yourself how many Atoms are there in an orange? Now to answer that, you’ll have to blow up the orange to a size where you can actually see the atoms. You’ll have to blow up the orange until it’s reached the size of Earth. The atoms inside of it will then be the size of cherries. Myriads of cherries tightly packed into an orange the size of the earth. 

Thomas: Wow what an image! I’m serious. I was trying to shrink the earth orange back to a real orange and imagine all those cherries whizzing around, it made me dizzy. . . but Ok you say that the atoms the size of a cherry and in this cherry-atom there’s all this empty space. What about the nucleus? There is a nucleus, right? How big is that? 

Sonia: "Invisible is the answer. If we blow up the atom to the size of a football the nucleus would still be invisible. If we blow up the atom to the size of a sphere that fits in this room here, the nucleus would still be invisible. 

Jack: what if you blew it up to the size of this island, the rock we’re standing on?

Sonia: ok. We would blow the atom –the cherry- up to the size of this island, then the nucleus would be the size of a small pebble, Something like that. And the electrons would be much smaller still. We would have to look for them all the way down there at the edge of the island. And whole space in between would be empty.

Jack: So what you’re saying is that if there were a sphere large enough to contain this whole island, what it would actually consist of is a pebble and a few grains of sand? . . . In other words, nothing? It’s empty? But if this rock is made of spheres like that, then what makes it so solid? Why can’t I pass my hand through it? Why don’t we fall through it?

Thomas: Why don’t we fall through everything? Why doesn’t everything fall through everything?

Sonia: Well you see this is the obvious question the physicists had to ask. Now remember that all the Newtonian concepts were based on things that could actually be seen or at least visualized but what they (scientists) were now finding in this strange and unexpected world were concepts that could no longer be visualized. (53:49)

This imagery for me was mind-blowing; not only is it a beautifully imagined simile but the image itself is so hard to conceptualize into real life for me that it took me a few seconds to absorb it into my psyche. This may need deeper contemplation and meditation but the basic themes of interconnectedness starts at the subatomic level and thus we as beings are completely connected to the air; to the ground; and to each other; and thus have an impact- however minute- on each other.

54:32- 59:50

Sonia: "To understand why matter is so solid they had to question the conventional ideas of the very existence of matter and after many frustrating years they were forced to admit that matter does not exist; which certainty in definite places, but rather shows tendencies to exist."

Thomas: "Tendency? What the hell does that mean?

Sonia: Now let’s say we want to observe an electron out there (points through window) now we cannot say that it is in a definite place, we can rather say that it has a tendency to be outthere in the front rather than in the back, or here to the left rather than over there to the right. In scientific language we actually don’t speak about tendencies, we speak about probabilities."

Jack: I seem to remember a bill in the senate that would give physicists a lot of money for a detector that they said would tell them exactly where an electron is. Were we being jipped?

Sonia: No, the strange thing is when you actually make a measurement of an electron it is in a definite place but between measurements you cannot say that it is in a definite place or that it has traveled a definite path from one place to another.

Thomas: You mean when you want to measure it, it just sort ofshows up?

Sonia: Yeah

Thomas: kind of like out of work actors or presidential candidates’ like Jack Edwards? What do you think? What do you think? 

Jack: okay let me get this straight. You measure it and the electron is there- it shows up- but in between measurements you can’t say for sure it’s in a definite place? Or even that it went on a definite path from one place to another? So how does it go from here to there? It moves doesn’t it? (56:45)

Sonia: No 

Jack: you mean it stays in the same place?

Sonia: No

Jack: well wait a minute. Either the electron moves or it doesn’t move. 

Sonia: Well, you can’t say that. Well now are you getting a feeling for what these physicists felt? You see an electron doesn’t move from place to place and it doesn’t stay in one place either. It manifests itself as probability patterns spread out in space and the shape of these probability patterns changes over time. Something that might seem like movement to human perception. 

Thomas: are you saying that the electron gets (spread) out over a large region and then when you measure it with the measuring gun it collapses into a specific point?

Sonia: You got it.  You see all subatomic particles- electrons, protons, neutrons- manifest this strange existence between potentiality and reality.

Jack: (very frustrated) so at the subatomic level there are no solid objects?

Sonia: No there are not.

Thomas: so if there are no solid objects at the subatomic level, how are there solid objects at any level?

Sonia: well that the amazing thing, this simple question: what makes this rock so solid goes way beyond our power of imagination.  I mean I cannot explain this to you in visual terms; of course I can do it in mathematical equations but there’s no metaphor.

Thomas: how can you live in a world that is un-metaphorical?  I mean you have to perceive reality in some way? I mean, this IS solid? (Knocks on stone pillar) 

Sonia: Okay: let’s take an atom from within this granite. A silicone atom with its 14 electrons. Now the probability pattern of these electrons arranges themselves like shells. Around the nucleus. Each shell contains several electrons. Now within the shells the electrons are everywhere at the same time . . . but the probability patterns that resemble shells are extremely stable and very hard to compress.

Jack: Matter is solid because probability patterns are difficult to compress?

Sonia: That’s as good as it gets. 

. . . 

Thomas: "If the doors of perception were cleansed everything would appear as it is. Infinite"-William Blake 

Like the cherry metaphor; this restatement of the fact that there are no solid objects is an extremely hard concept to comprehend- understand,yes- but to truly comprehend this I had to do some meditations.  Within my meditations I went back to my biology text books and physics lessons online; and the beauty of this emptiness that constructs atoms; which constructs everything.   

A rock is solid because we precieve it as solid in the way it interacts with our bodies at an atomic level; meaning we are always exchanging electrons and atoms with the world around us; and thus we are connected through the air or "empty space" to everything and everyone and are continually exchanging these energies within our ecosystem.

59:50

Okay let me take a second and review. I have reached the halfway point of this movie and this movie is officially hurting my brain! I remember asking similar questions in biology and chemistry classes when making models of atoms and learning about lipids and the basic anatomy of cells; and my teacher told me something along the lines of "it is because it is" and then told me that those were extremely esoteric ideas that; while beneficial to knowledge; wouldn’t be able to be answered in his class.   And now watching this movie and hearing from this physicist character ("Sonia") I see why that would be so hard to explain. My mind is still reeling from the "Orange" analogy but luckily Sonia explains things; with extreme patience; to Jack and Thomas (and myself) in a way that finally clicks with me.

What has finally clicked is that everything is about Relationships:

After playing music:

Thomas: So Sonia, life’s a bunch of probability patterns? Patterns of what?

Sonia: of Interconnections

Jack: what?

Sonia; What I’m trying to say that these probabilities aren’t probabilities of things but probabilities of interconnections 

Thomas: See Jack, that’s what she was trying to tell you.

Sonia: see we tend to think of subatomic particles as some type of small billiard balls or small grains of sand but for physicists the particle has no independent existence. The particle is essentially a set of relations that reach outward to connect to other things.

Jack: what are those other things please?

Sonia: they are interconnections of yet other things, which also turn out to be interconnections and so on and so on . . . the essential existence of matter lies not in objects but in interconnections.

The discussion of interconnection finally clicks between Jack and Thomas during this discussion with Sonia through the example of relationships and music.

Relationships make matter: The relationships between electrons and the vast compacted emptiness makes matter appear solid. (which is discussed above)   The analogy using music is a beautiful example to explain the interconnection of everythingas in music where a single note is just a note; but when played with another note can produce a melody; or a chord; string these chords together and you get music.  As demonstrated in the quote below.

Thomas: "Ah! (Plays a chord) Everybody knows the chord, it’s a third, the most basic of harmonies. It carries with it a very distinctive feeling, no? and yet it’s individual notes carry none of that feeling. Therefore the essence of the chord lies in its . . . "

Sonia "Lies in relationships."

Thomas: And the relationship between time and pitch. . . 

Jack: Makes Melody

Thomas: Makes melody. Relationships make music.

Sonia: Relationships make matter. 

Thomas: Music of the spheres.

Sonia: As Kepler said. . . .

Sonia: Today physicists are simply proving that what we call an object. . . is only an approximation, a metaphor. At the subatomic level it dissolves into a series of interconnections. Like music. That’s beautiful.

Jack: Yeah But there are bounderis, aren’t there? I mean between you and me for instance? We are two separate bodies, aren’t we? That’s not an illusion. Is it?

Sonia remains silent

Jack: Are you saying that there is a physical connection between you and me and you and the wall behind you, and the air, and this bench?

Sonia: Yes

THIS is the concept I most closely connect to my reading of the Lynn McTaggart book "The Field"; This idea that on a basic level- a sub atomic level- there is actually nothing disconnecting me from my environment; from the keyboard I type this reflection on; which light connects to my eyes and creates the image on the screen. But even travels further out and mingles (for lack of a better word) with the air in the room; the atoms in my television; the atoms in the paint and wood that builds my house; up through my house (and everyone inside) out into the air and molecules in the world and across the entire world. Exchanging energy sub-atomically; eternally.

 

PART 3:

Light And Systems theory

1:06:00

 

Sonia: "How can they do that here? I mean how can they do that anywhere? "(After seeing people littering)

Thomas: It’s your fault.

Sonia: What?

Thomas: Well, okay, it’s not your fault. It’s physicists fault. They made the bomb. (The A-Bomb)

Sonia: Well, you can’t blame littering on the bomb.

Thomas: Why not? The bomb made the whole planet disposable. Littering is an expression of powerlessness. Like, "Hey, what difference does a little more crap make?"  it’s all going anyway. Kaplooey!!!

Sonia: Maybe you’re right.  (Sigh) You know I visited Hiroshima 10 years ago. I went to the museums. I saw the photographs of devestation. I went to the peace park. Looked at all the monuments- the statue of a mother with a baby- the statue of a goddess enveloped in paper cranes- Big peace bell. And then I saw a mound about six feet high covered with grass. It wasn’t decorated in any way. It wasn’t a symbol of anything, no monument.  It simply contained the ashes of the atomic bomb victims. The actual remains of what was left of tens, maybe hundreds and thousands of men and women and children incinerated because of our knowledge. A flash of light that burned them and obliterated them and totally transformed the world.  . . I felt that I was face to face with the victims of . . . my work as a scientist, as a physicist. I cried.

Thomas: When I was little up on the third floor with my brother, we’d lay in our beds watching the heat lightning flashes and he’d say "what’s that?" and I’d say, "that’s it, that’s the big one, we’re all going to die." 

Jack: You can’t make yourself responsible for Hiroshima, Sonia just because you do physics. You didn’t invent the Bomb. And even if you had, somebody else decided to use it, a politician. Oppenheimer said he felt he had blood on his hands and he did invent it. But President Truman’s answer was "Who the hell does he think he is? I’m the one who ordered them to drop the damn thing." . . . Scientists are suppose to figure things out, itsup to the rest of us to figure out what to do about it. 

. . . . . . 

Sonia: There’s no accountability for scientist as there is for other professions.  Why aren’t we obliged, like medical doctors, to not use our knowledge destructively?  . . . Oppenheimer said he had blood on his hand. He had regrets after the fact.  I have regrets because of my x-ray laser. See, I’m responsible for the consequences of my discovery. . . .we never (at university) discussed ethics.  We were never taught value thinking. No one induced us with the wisdom of the American Indian tribes who made all their decisions with the seventh generation in mind.  . . we were taught in our closed rooms that we were doing pure science in pursuit of pure truth. The noble pursuit of pure truth. 

Jack: That’s what science is. Don’t be so hard on yourself.

Sonia: No, that’s what science was maybe, but pure science hardly exists today. . . sciencceisexpensive. . . 70 % of all science done in the united states today is paid by the military.   It’s become a religion today. It’s not a good religion, but it is a dominating religion. And people who see what science has achieved . . .believe that scientists are so powerful also must be wise, and so they don’t question their work anymoe and they leave their own responsibility in the hands of these people they envision to have this power of knowledge.  . . they just hope that they(the scientists) will be careful. . . . . 

Jack: If you’re worried about the possible dangers of genetic engineering you get advice from a scientist. He’s the only one who understands.  You pretty much have to take his word for it too because often you don’t know even what questions to ask.

 

This discussion from littering to the atomic bomb to the lack of accountability for scientists makes a good point about accountability.   Aren’t we-like this movie suggests- accountable for the state of our planet? Shouldn’t we respect it? But when science can devastate human life for the sake off a war (which devastates human life) does anybody truly "win"? And what about responsibility?

I believe there should be accountability for scientists like those who created the atom bomb but more over its not the knowledge that is bad but the application of that knowledge that makes it immoral and unethical; and sadly politicians make those choices instead of scientists.  The atomic bomb was a devestating loss of life but also as a global community a devastating loss of innocence. 

 

1:19:00- Jacks changing views can these ideas change anything?  How does this translate into politics?

Jack: "The problems (in the senate) are so complex. There’s so many cross overs from one problem to another it’s hard for people to even begin to think about them. But still, I think Thomas Jefferson was every bit as great a mind as Isaac Newton was. I doubt if theres been a better form of government in any form in history ever. And of course getting into politics is nothing to be ashamed of. To me it’s still the biggest challenge there is. Things are changing faster and faster everyday. A few years back the green house effect was just a theory and now . .. we’re just not keeping up but Sonia the question is can your ideas change that? . . . we’re still falling behind so can your ideas make the change go faster? I mean if you’re going to wait for most of the people to be ready to go along with you before move whih is what you have to do.  . . wouldn’t it take some type of totalitarian regime to put ideas as comprehensive as yours into effect? So how does all this translate into politics? Or does it? . . . "

1:21:00  

Sonia: " I do think as long as you keep looking at things through that old patriarchal (view point) you’re gonna miss out on what the world really is. You, me, all of us need a new vision of the world and we need a more comprehensive more inclusive science to support us. There is a new theory emerging now which places all ecological concepts we’ve been talking about into one coherent scientific frame work. We call it systems theory- the theory of living systems .  . .all living organism as well as social systems and ecosystems. See this theory will help us get a much better grasp on the sciences that deal with life.

Jack: Are these all your own ideas or do other people share them? Has this been applied in the sciences anywhere?

Sonia: Am I a crank? This is real science and many scientists including some Nobel laureate have been working on these ideas . . . yes, it is science, but of a new kind. Instead of concentrating on basic building blocks, the systems view concentrates on principles of organization. Instead of cutting things to pieces, it looks at the living system as a whole." 1:23:05

Jack: . . .  How can you talk usefully about a tree without talking about its roots or its leaves or its bark? 

Sonia: Well I could. . . a systems thinker would look at a tree and see the seasonal exchange between tree and earth; earth and sky. But see the annual cycle. The tree is one big breathe the earth takes . . .providing us with oxygen- The breathe of life- linking the earth with the sky, and the rest of the universe. A systems thinker would look at the tree and see the life of the tree only in relation to the life of the whole forest. We’d see the tree as a habitat for birds, but if you lok at a tree and try to understand it simply as a tree you will be bewildered by the billions of fruit it produces in its life time.  . . now if you look at the tree and see it as a member of a larger living system that abundance of fruit would make sense because hundreds upon hundreds of forest animals and birds would survive because of it. Inter dependent. And the tree can not survive on its own either; it needs the fungus that grows from the tip of each root to draw water from the ground, and the fungus needs the root to survive and the root needs the fungus; if one dies, the other dies. And there are millions of relationships like this in our world. Each depending on each other for life.. . The theory of living systems actually provides you with an outline of an answer to that eternal question: What is life? . . . The essence of life is self-organization . . .  it means that a living system is self-maintaining; self-renewing; self-transcending."

 

This idea that life is self-maintaining and self-renewing like the trees that when planted in other areas still go through changes inclement to other weather because it remembers that it had to do that to survive; the self-maintenance  and continual self-renewal of cells or of plant life feeds into the greater organism of the world and survives.  This concept of self renewal I understand as a medical professional and as an organism within this pattern of interconnection between me and the entire world; I love this image of self-renewal and cellular immortality.

___________________________________

"1:32:40- 1:5

Sonia: "We are leaving to our children the most poisonous of waste; plutonium; it’s going to remain poisonous across generations for ½ a million years. We should never have accepted that theory: knowledge is power. We should never have accepted the idea that what’s good for general motors is good for America. We need a sustainable society; one in which our needs are being satisfied without diminishing the possibilities of the next generation. . . I know what worked for me was to come here; be quiet and take one thing at a time; take one thought to its end. And that was my first real step. Telling you, was my second. 

Jack: you can’t pass the buck that easily. How about doing something direct about this? How about helping me? How about joining my staff? . . . Finding a way to get these ideas of yours into the main stream. You say it’s urgent. You say the ideas are practical- I’ll give you a chance to prove it. . . .You’ll have to learn how to compromise. You’ll have to get your hands dirty.

Sonia: well I get them dirty the way I want. Here. In my ivory tower where I can sit and think"

Jack: if you’re gonna say no, don’t say anything. Just think it over. 1:35:40

______________________________________

As the friends continue down the beach they discuss their new friendships and as they depart Sonia is left contemplating Thomas’s words as he quotes the poem: "Los Enigmas" By Pablo Neruda.

Not sure about the poetry; as it’s never been my forte.  Here’s a link to the poem:

Poemhunter.com/poem/enigmas/

 

 

 

Exercise 4: Lesson 3: “Alan Watts Teaches Meditation”
(12/20/13; 12/31/13; 5/28/14; 6/02/14)

I’ve had such an intense love/hate relationship for this material while trying to write this essay. I know that I’m simply responsible for showing I understand the material presented and to write a reflection about my feelings and experiences with the material presented.

Due to my ADHD and- some would say- obsessive attention to detail, I outlined an essay that ended up being far to daunting and over analytical of every aspect in the recording. I fell into an old model of needing to analyze every word presented; much like when I was working on the “Power of Myth” and Alan Watts “Taboo” reflections.
So I’ve adjusted this reflection into 7 paragraphs/Sections covering reflections upon the material discussed in the order of the You tube Audio book “Alan Watts Teaches Meditation.” The 7 sections are as follows:
Section 1:The Main Goal of Meditation
Section 2:Meditation is Enjoyable
Section 3: Props
Section 4:Chanting/Breathing and the Meditative state;
Section 5:The Spiritual Aspects of Meditation;
Section 6:Reflection upon the meditation presented in audio; and Lastly;
Section 7: There is no purpose for meditation. (3 step forward meditation)

Section 1: The Main Goal of Meditation

The first section talks about how we confuse symbols with our true reality and how we can come to terms with our universe is through meditation. This confusion is easily overcome by relaxing but then we have another problem- one I’ve personally experienced- and that is the trap of the constant chatting with in our own heads.

The first reason for mediation is to put an end to the constant internal chatter and to get in touch with “our basic inseparability with the universe.”

Similar to what wrote in “The Book”; it’s the idea that we are all interconnected and interdependent and that through the act of meditation we can see and feel this interconnectedness between the universe and ourselves.

Section 2: Meditation is Enjoyable

The second reason one might meditate, according to Watts, is for the enjoyment of the act. Now I personally always pictured meditation as an arbitrary necessity for religious experience – as Alan Watts calls a “Grim Duty”- and the idea that it can actually be enjoyable is very strange.

One of the things we discover through meditation is that there isn’t anything but NOW . . . with no past, any future, Just NOW. Bringing us into a place where we can understand that the point of life is simply to be in the here and now.

Section 3: Props

The next section discusses the various props used in meditation. Watts speaks about how to sit, the use of sound to still the mind (through the use of a gong or chanting); the use of incense, which touches the sense of smell and links the subconscious with the conscious mind. And the use of a string of beads or some other way to keep time without counting and thus distracting oneself from meditation.

There are a few ways to sit; either cross legged, or in a chair but it doesn’t actually matter which one you choose as long as you are aware and centered by keeping your back erect; and thus diminishing distraction and helping to feel a general sense of comfort or a “settled” feeling.

I personally have had a very difficult time finding a comfortable way of sitting in order to do meditations, which is one of the major hindrances I’ve had to success in meditation. To get around this I’ve been experimenting with Tai Chi and slow martial art movements to combat fatigue and distraction while also calming my mind of racing thoughts.

The use of sound is very important in meditation because using sound allows us to connect the subconscious with the conscious and can be used to focus and quiet the mind. One of the stereotypical meditative sounds we have is that of the gong, which has been used in temples for meditations for thousands of years.

When a gong is struck the noise resonates out in a wave that the human voice can mimic; which leads us into the next tool we have which is our voice and the use of Chanting. The noise to chant to emulate the gong is that of “Aum.” (More about that in section 4)

Another prop that is used is Incense because we as humans associate certain smells with certain states of mind and the smell of incense is most often tied to the use of meditation.

Another tool in meditation is the use of a string of beads as an unconscious way of timing oneself. Where as a watch can be a visual and auditory distraction with its endless tick-tick-ticking, having a string of beads can be advantageous to help keep a sense of time without distraction. Using Watts’ example of a rosary, and advancing one bead with every inhalation/exhalation, Watts recommends going half way around the rosary, which should last roughly for about 40 minutes. Watts advises against going longer as the body will become restless and concentration will be exponentially harder to control and thus be self defeating the goal of meditation.

Since our brains are wired for routine the use of a personal incense or meditation at the same time of day every day will, over time, help reaching the meditative state occur quicker and last longer.

Section 4: Chanting/Breathing (Meditative State)

“The easiest way to get into the meditative state is to begin by listening and allow yourself to hear all the sounds around you. Just listen to the general hum of the world as if you were listening to music. Don’t try to identify the sounds you’re hearing. Don’t put names on them. Simply allow them to play with your ear drums and let them go . . . don’t judge the sounds . . . it’s all just sound . . . “-Alan Watts

This seems deceptively simple; Watts simply asks that you listen to what is going on around you and become aware of it all, but I (and many others) have had quite a bit of difficult getting to the point where all the noises are just noises. My brain still has a problem with naming everything.

“You will find that you can’ t help naming sounds . . . but it’s important to not repress (your) thoughts by forcing them out of your mind . . . what you do is this: As you hear . . .thoughts you simply listen to them AS PART OF the general sounds that are going on. You should look at your own thoughts as just noises and soon you will find that the . . outside world and the inside world come together. They are a “happening”. . .everything is simply a ‘happening’ and all you’re doing is simply watching it.”-Watts

Basically Watts is saying that once we get over the distractions of naming sounds and become grounded in the present we will be calm and able to see the world as it truly is.

The use of breathing is an interesting thing in regards to meditation because as you may (or may not) know breathing is something that is at times both involuntary and voluntary. Meaning we can consciously change how we breathe and can even hold our breath but that even when we aren’t thinking about our breathing we still continue to breathe.

Becoming aware of your breathing allows you to calm yourself which will allow you to get in touch with your feelings and place your mind into the meditative state. Through the use of breathing exercises like the ones described by Watts as well as chanting sere the same purpose of calming and connecting to a deeper self; an “inner self” where ones true feelings lay.

Section 5: The Spiritual Aspect of Meditation

The next section begins with the quick stories of yoga teachers and a Buddhist quote demonstrating that the practitioner (you and I) cannot force our mind into submission through sheer will. Feeling and thinking that we can actually creates a false sense of success when we inevitably slow down our thoughts.

“And so you get concentrating. And you can get . . . Success through a process called self hypnosis . . .and a good teacher will let you go along like that until he really throws you with one. “Why are you concentrating?” (29:09)

This actually took me a second to understand. I always thought meditation was something one did; which is true in some regard; but meditation is also – like the breathing section- something that can just happen if given the right mind state. By actively concentrating on your breathing or your chanting or your heartbeat, you are unable to focus on anything else and thus are not meditating. Not to say you can’t have some great benefits by concentrated focus (*an example from my life would be a breathing exercise I do when my pulse is too high or my blood pressure is in a hypertensive state. But then I’m actively calming my body for a desired result; which is not meditating.)

Watts expands upon this idea with an example from Buddhism: (29:12-29:43)

“ Buddha said: If you suffer, you suffer because you desire and your desires are either unobtainable or always being disappointed or something. So cut out desire. So those disciples went away and they stamped on desire, jumped on desire, cut the throat of desire and through out desire but then they came back and Buddha said “But you are still desiring not to desire.”
29:43-30:46

“But you see it works like this; all spiritual discipline works this way. I’ll show you. Some in the form of a Childs game. . . There’s the church and there’s the steple;open the door and there are the people and here’s the person going upstairs, and there he is saying his prayers. Catch him. Catch him. Catch him. You never can because the would-be catchy is the catcher. So then that’s like desiring not to desire, or uh, loving out of a sense of duty. Trying to be spontaneous because you ought to be. . all that is nonsense.” (30:46)

Hopefully the quote is enough to help you visualize the  steeple game described; but –and I had a very hard time expressing this- what Watts is saying with this example is that you cannot cut out the idea to desire. Even desiring not to desire IS a desire; and so to try to forceful in your meditation is self-defeating.

30:47: “So when you see that that’s nonsense there naturally comes over you a quietness. And seeing that you cannot control your mind you realize there is no controller. What you took to be the thinker of thoughts is just one of the thoughts. . . .What you took to be the experiencer of the experience is just one of the experiences. So there isn’t any thinker of thoughts, feeler of feelings. We get into that bind because we have a grammatical rule that verbs have to have subjects, and the funny thing about that is that verbs are processes and subjects are nouns which are suppose to be things. How does a noun start a verb? How does a thing put a process into action? Obviously it can’t. But we always insist that there is this subject called “Knowa” and without a “knowa” there can’t be knowing. Well that’s just a grammatical rule; it isn’t a rule of nature. In nature there’s just knowing, like you’re feeling it. . . When I am saying ‘I am feeling” I’m saying there is feeling here. When I say ‘You are feeling’ I’m saying there is feeling there. . . .(32:15)”

These examples are to clarify what meditation is and what it isn’t. The inference here is that –to use an earlier example- Watts is saying that meditation should be like making music or laughter. It is an expression of your self and can be a method used to allow you to get in touch with that inner self or consciousness.

32:49 “When you come to see that . . .the play of thought etcetera is just happening, then you are in a state which we will call meditation. And Slowly without being pushed your thoughts will come to silence. That is to say all verbal symbolic chatter going on in the skull- don’t try to get rid of it because that will again produce the illusion that there is a controller. Just . . . it goes on and finally it gets tired of itself and gets bored and stops. SO then there’s a silence and this is a deeper level of meditation. And in that silence you suddenly begin to see the world as it is, and you don’t see any past and you don’t see any future. You don’t see any difference between yourself and the rest of it. That’s just an idea . You can’t put your hand on the difference between myself and you. . . . you can’t bounce it, you can’t pull it. It’s just an idea. . . . . So we find that we live in an eternal NOW. . . you have all the time in the world because you have all the time that is which is Now. And you are this universe and. . When ideas don’t define the differences you find that other people’s doings are your doings and that makes it very difficult to blame other people. . . ” (35:05)

Okay this sort of blew my mind away a bit. So much of the Alan Watts material occasionally does make my head hurt because he’ll go on structured tangents and use philosophical language or imagery that is very hard for me personally to comprehend.

The main message I took away from the above example is that Watts is describing that interconnectness that he discussed in “The Book” and that through the act of meditation you can find that the present moment is the only one that truly matters and that you are connected to everyone at all times on a basic human level.

“If you’re not sophisticated theologically you might of course start running in the streets saying “you’re God”. In a way that’s what happened to Jesus because he wasn’t sophisticated theologically. He only had the Old Testament biblically theology behind him. If he had Hindu theology he would have put it more subtly . . . (the) theology of the Old Testament, and that was a conception of God as a monoicle boss. . And you can’t go around saying “I’m the Bosses Son” . . . You must allow it for everyone else too. But this was a heretical idea . . .so what they did with Jesus was they pedistle iized him . . . and that stopped the gospel cold, right at the beginning. (36:27)

36:28- 39:00

“This is to say that the transformation of human consciousness through meditation is frustrated. So long as we think of it in terms as something that I myself can bring about by some . . . sort of gimmick because that leads to endless games of spiritual one-upmanship . . . (but once that falls away) we get this strange feeling . . .that we are no longer this poor little stranger and afraid in a world it never made but that you are this universe and you are creating it because it starts now . . . there was no past . . . .If the universe began in the past when that happened it was “now”, well it’s still now, and the universe is still beginning now and it’s trailing off like the wake of a ship from now and the wake of the ship fades out, so does the past. . It happens now, which is the birth of responsibility, because otherwise you could always look over your shoulder as say “well I’m the way I am because my mother dropped me, and she’s the way she was because . . . her mother dropped her . . . ”(and so on and so on)

Lets take this quote in two parts: The first discusses the frustration that disappears when we allow meditation to work. When we take a breath and allow ourselves to truly see that we are connected to the universe. The second part describes how that could change the view on time.

I’ve personally really enjoyed the concept of “there is no past” which is described here cause it makes people accountable for themselves immediately and for their own wellbeing without being able to blame anyone else. Meditation as a tool to see this difference in view of oneself can also allow one to take stock of the feelings ad circumstances that had lead to that point (what ever it is) in their life; as well as acknowledging the God Part of them (which Watts discusses in “The Book” and in this audio)

“If you know that I, in the sense of the Ego, really doesn’t exist then it won’t go to your head to badly if you wake up and discover that you are God.” (40:23)

Section 6: Reflection upon meditation presented

Watts begins the meditation ritual with the playing of music and through out the meditation he reiterates the different themes he’s already discussed. Through the reading of the poem and the playing off the table harp he allows the listener to obtain a meditative state. He goes through breathing exercises and Chanting; as well as reminding us to remain mindful to the changes in our perspective and meditative state.

I went through the audio of this section while sitting comfortably in low light (as many books including this one recommend) and was able to achieve an inner calm but not a deep spiritual connection; but as I’ve only just restarted my meditation practice with the aid of this audio I will try to keep my journal updated with any failures or success’s in this regard.

During the breathing exercises when chanting “Ah” I experienced a bit of attention deficit due to my environment but was able to focus most of my attention on the here and now. At the end of the meditation read through I felt “heavy” but centered and calmer then before; thus I feel I had some basic success in my goal of using meditation to calm myself and get an accurate picture of what was going on inside my head.

I had some fears as in years past, when I’d look inside myself I’d only see the Trauma of my Assault or the anger, or the shame and, while those are still things I am dealing with, I have had a brief moment (or moments) of calm which to someone with PTSD is boarder line blissful; A feeling of Going out of my mind in order to stay sane.

Section 7: There is no “Purpose” for Meditation (3 step forward meditation)

Watts’ last section discusses a meditation example to show that there is no “NOW” by having us relax once again into the meditative state and go a bit deeper into ourselves and then trying this meditation by taking 3 steps forward we see that the movement we took is an example of a past “Now” and the next step we are going to take is a future “Now”; and the only “Now” that matters in the Present moment.

I had quite an issue hearing the “chatter” of the world as anything but a distraction but I feel that with practice and many more listening I will be able to calm that inner turmoil and feel and hear my inner self (or “The Force”; or “God” or our conscience, or what ever you want to call that inner voice in your head that helps guide you)

Through recalling the first step in the “past” and looking into ourselves but focusing on how we FEEL without thinking allows our bodies to truly have the “Aha” moment in what meditation is; at least it did for me.

I really enjoyed meditating and looking into my self, even if I don’t go to the happiest of places currently, and I feel I will have much more success through practice and remembering to take time out of my day to laugh. I loved how the audio ends with Watts just laughing his head off; connected to the universe and the “Now” and at the time I was doing the meditation – even with my distractions- I feel deeply connected and grounded, and couldn’t help but join him in his some might say “mad-man” laughter.

I look forward to meditation and the next time I listen to this audio so I can begin to heal myself and connect more with the world around me.

Exercise 4: Lesson 2: Section 6: IT (11/06/13; 11/17/13; 11/30/13;12/04/13;12/10/13)
(*time stamps are from YouTube Video in case I want to review them later)

0:00-0:50

The beginning of this final chapter speaks of “correlative vision”: This is basically an understanding of what Watts calls “The Game of Black and White”; where everything is “. . . co-relative in the sense that they go with each other and can not exist apart. “

To have a good sense of “correlative vision” allows one to knowingly play the game of black-and-white; because once you understand that everything is connected and defined by it’s opposite and thus Not Truly defined; you see that they Need their opposite in order to exist. This splitting of our selves into two sides in order to place them against each other is a part of all cultures with the focus of religion/spirituality being the search for a delicate balance of these opposing forces. This delicate balancing act is defined by the Upanishads as “The path of the razors edge”.

0:50-1:45

“. . . To ordinary vision there is nothing visible ‘between’ classes and opposites. Life is a series of urgent choices demanding firm commitment to this or to that. . . .Is it conceivable then that I am basically an external existence momentarily and perhaps needlessly terrified by one half of itself because it has identified all of itself with the other half? If the choices must be either white or black must I so commit myself to the white side that I can not . . . play the game of black and white with the implicit knowledge that neither can win? Or is all this so much banding with the formal relations between words and terms without any relation to my physical situation? To answer the last question affirmatively I should have to believe that the logic of thought is arbitrary. That it is a purely and strictly human invention without any basis in the physical universe. . . “

To see the world as a series of loosely connected events that change based on choices means that you’re completely tied to the world of objects with external things proving that you exist. Watts asks in this section whether or not simply knowing about the game of opposites or as he calls it “the game of black and white” means that one can not participate even though by understanding this concept you know you can’t “win”. But by simply participating one enlightens them. To be a part of this you have to believe that our thoughts about ourselves are all situational or arbitrary.

I would like to explain this in a different way in an image I’ve used to express morality and its importance to others of different religions, or creeds. The main one I use this for are the “Jesus” Faiths; When they argue that only through Jesus can someone be saved; an all actions in this life either send us to heaven or hell and we MUST do good SO THAT WE GET INTO HEAVEN.

That’s an amazing accomplishment to them (although if you know the doctrine simply living a just life will allow you into heaven) and a lot of the people I’ve had this discussion with are very adamant and strong in this- do-good-things-for-the-goal-of-heaven-thing; where I personally find that a bit selfish.

I think people should take the goal of heaven out of the equation; and when I ask them to humor me for a moment most get very offended but the few that walk down that path a bit with me usually end up agreeing with my point; My point being that if you remove heaven and hell; as well as reincarnation from the equation; so now our actions hold no extra special spiritual significance; then our actions are what matter. (“if nothing we do matters (i.e. gets us into heaven) then the only thing that matters is what we do.”)
__________
1:46-2:46
“To sever the connections between human logic and the physical universe, I would have to revert to the myth of the ego as an isolated, independent observer for whom the rest of the world is absolutely external and ‘other.’. . . If, on the other hand, self and other, subject and object, organism and environment are the poles of a single process THAT is my true existence . . . As the Upanishads say, “That is the Self. That is the real. That art thou!” But I cannot say anything about THAT, or, as I shall now call it, IT, unless I resort to the convention of using dualistic language as the lines of perception are used to show depth on a flat surface. What lies beyond opposites must be discussed, I terms of opposites and this means using the language of analogy, metaphor, and myth.”

So far we’ve discussed that Watts sees the ego as a vehicle towards isolating ourselves and “pretending” we aren’t all actually connected. Going one step forward simply by seeing this we can see that all organisms are evoked by their environment and all environments are dependent on the organisms within them. Accepting this view we can see that we are all influenced by everything and THAT is what makes us, US. But we as humans NEED our analogies, our metaphor, and are myths in order to find our “place” in society, our environment, and our selves. What ever “IT” is, is what we are, with these analogies and metaphors, our environment and our society; all shaping us until we become a reflection of “IT”.
_____
2:47- 3:26
The next part talks about how very difficult it is to truly define “IT”. While reading this chapter and listening to the audio I find myself getting caught up in terminology and a bit confused at times; as I have had occur in previous chapters. I hope that the rest of this reflection will be understandable.

“. . . the fact that IT eludes every description must not, as happens so often, be mistaken for the description of IT as the airiest of abstractions, as a literal transparent continuum or undifferentiated cosmic Jell-O. The most concrete image of God the Father, with his white beard and golden robe, is better than that. Yet Western students of eastern philosophies and religions persistently accuse Hindus and Buddhists of believing in a featureless and gelatinous God, just because the later insists that every conception or objective image of IT is void. But the term “void” applies to all such conceptions, not to IT. . . . “(3:26)

“But in speaking and thinking of IT, there is no alternative to the use of conceptions and images, and no harm in it so long as we realize what we are doing. Idolatry is not the use of images, but confusing them with what they represent, and in this respect mental images and lofty abstractions can be more insidious then bronze idols.

“You were probably brought up in a culture where the presiding image of IT has for centuries been God the Father, whose pronoun is He, because IT seems too impersonal and She would, of course, be inferior. Is this image still workable, as a functional myth to provide some consensus about life and its meaning for all the diverse peoples and cultures of this planet?”

“Frankly, the image of God the Father has become ridiculous-that is, unless you read Saint Thomas Aquinas or Martin Buber or Paul Tillich, and realize that you can be a devout Jew or Christian without having to believe, literally, in the Cosmic male Parent. Even then, it is difficult not to feel the force of the image, because images sway our emotions more deeply than conceptions. . . Furthermore, the younger members of our society have for some time been in growing rebellion against paternal authority and the paternal state.” (4:41)
___
This speaks of the misunderstandings of what “IT” is. In American society most people don’t truly understand many other faiths other then the Juedo-Christian faiths of Israel. Using the “Holy” bible with its image of a paternal white haired man in the clouds as God (*This image is most likely a conglomerate of the old Norse Imagery of the God Odin, and the spiritual imagery side of the old God known as “The Green Man”) The problem with this image is that it limits humans imagination of the divine. Trapping everything in a single spiritual male parent diminishes the strength of the divine.

On the other hand, using the moniker of “IT” instead of “HE” or “SHE”, creates an impersonal connection to God; but in my opinion might have so isolated us with “belonging” that some groups of “Christian” faiths (or any other monotheistic faiths) have no real connection to God. In an earlier section Watts speaks of locking up the Bible for a few generations so that it might be “rediscovered” (hopefully in its entirety instead of what we currently have) and thus seen with fresh eyes and might actually have a chance to help people instead of empowering charlatans and proselytizing for the sake of money, power, or notoriety instead of the simple goodness of positive activities such as volunteer work, or helping others for the simple joy of helping someone with no “this-is-how-I-get-into-heaven” false humility.
____
(4:41-5:33)

‘Along with the devaluation of the father, we are becoming accustomed to a conception of the universe so mysterious and so impressive that even the best father image will no longer do for an explanation of what makes it run. But the problem then is that it is impossible for us to conceive an image higher then the human image. In other words, we accepted a definition of ourselves which confined the self to the source and to the limitations of conscious attention, This definition is miserably insufficient, for in fact we know how to grow brains and eyes, ears and fingers, hearts and bones, in just the same way that we know how to walk and breathe, talk and think- only we can’t put it into words. Words are too slow and too clumsy for describing such things, and conscious attention is too narrow for keeping track of all their detail.”

Now we reach a limit in our psychology. Humanity having seen itself no longer as a part of the animal kingdom but as something above it, thus needs a God image that can hold them in check as a way or reason for all the Unknown holes in human understanding. Our God is in the image of a human being because it’s how we relate to the “unknowable” and that’s been the same (along with images of animals as gods/goddess) in many societies thousands of years before the creation of the Christian religion. We trap ourselves within these limitations; and although we now have the thought provoking works known as “science” we know how our bodies work, how light interacts with our eyes to produce color, how our brains can conceptualize space and time and allow our limbs to move in a rhythm known as “walking”. It’s all done without conscious thought; and just “IS”. I feel that’s why the practice of meditation hasn’t disappeared in our cultures because through meditation one can tap into this spiritual understanding of “self” connecting the conscious with the subconscious and empowering themselves. (*I will speak more about all this in my reflection on “Meditation” by Alan Watts)

(5:34-6:35)
“Yet we can still awaken the sense that all this, too, is the self-a self, however, which is far beyond the image of the ego, or of the human body as limited by the skin. We then behold the Self wherever we look, and its image is the universe in its light and in its darkness, in its body’s and in its spaces. This is the new image of man, but it is still an image; for there remains-to use dualistic words- “behind” “under,” “encompassing,” and “central” to it all the unthinkable IT, polarizing itself in the visible contrasts of waves and troughs, solids and spaces. But the odd thing is that this IT, however inconceivable, is no vapid abstraction: it is very simply and truly yourself.

In the words of a Chinese Zen master, “Nothing is left to you at this moment but to have a good laugh!”

This reminds me of the following quote: “When you realize how perfect everything is you will tilt your head back and laugh at the sky”-Buddha

Once we realize that we aren’t limited by our simple definitions of the self as our bodies, or our skin, or as our thoughts, or as our environment and how it shapes us. And that we are in fact shaped by ALL these things where we are not separate from one another because at our core we are the same. We all have fears and concerns, we all have hopes and dreams, we all seek socialization with likeminded individuals in order to feel like we “belong” (another positive benefit of religions organizations is that it allows socialization, If only religion wasn’t such a limiter on human imagination, then it’d be a perfect place for growth instead of something that seems to sometimes actually promote ignorance.) The search for greater understanding is a basic Human quest. We are all trapped by our preconceptions of IT or “The Self”, but, like the game of black-and-white, we can knowingly play the game and thus have greater chance of deeper understanding.

6:36-7:01 (8:41)

“True humor is, indeed, laughter at one’s Self- at the Divine Comedy, the fabulous deception, whereby one comes to imagine that a creature in existence is not also of existence, that what man is not also what everything is. All the time we “know it in our bones” but conscious attention, distracted by details and differences, cannot see the whole for the parts.”
Being able to laugh at ones self is a lesson of many –if not all- faiths. Having a good sense of the humor in the world is paramount to a strong spiritual core. Similar to the quote “Don’t take life too seriously; you will never get out of it alive.”-(Elbert Hubbard) Allows us to take a moment and have a release from the day-to-day “stuff” that may bog us down or diminish us or distract us from our spiritual selves and our spiritual journeys. When that happens some can become embittered, or angry at others who they see as “More spiritual” or “more peaceful”, and at times like that it’s very important we have this system of checks and balances- this ability to laugh at the absurdity of life- because without it we couldn’t ever have any true perspective or understanding.

8:42-9:38
“Now you know-even if it takes you some time to do double-talk and get the full impact. It may not be easy to recover from the many generations through which the fathers have knocked down the children, like dominoes, saying, and “Don’t you dare think that thought! You’re just a little upstart, just a creature, and you had better learn your place.” On the contrary, you’re IT. But perhaps the fathers were unwittingly trying to tell the children that IT plays IT cool. You don’t come on (this is, on stage) like IT because you really are IT, and the point of the stage is to show on, not to show off. To come on like IT-to play at being God- is to play the Self as a role, which is just what it isn’t. When IT plays, it plays at being everything else.”

As I reach the end of this lesson and the end of “The Book” I find myself reflecting on the major themes. We ARE “It”, and by being “It”-by acknowledging that “God” part of ourselves- that spiritual side that yearns for deeper understanding- we can play the game of Black-and-White, we can analyze our feelings and our thoughts, but we must remember to take time to breathe. We don’t have to allow what others (society) say we “should be”. I spoke a bit about the conflicting images in Christians I have interacted with where they “Show off” their humility or “Godliness” as a way to get praise. But they are not understanding that they are “IT”, They don’t need outward praise to be good; and no amount of good deeds with buy their way into heaven; they –like us- simply need to live a good life and acknowledge the “IT”- The God part- of themselves; that part of themselves that connects them to their environment; that houses the Self and the Ego and the Superego.

I’m really happy with what I’ve learned from reading “The Book”. It has allowed me the opportunity of seeing the world differently, even if I didn’t agree with everything Watts says, allowing myself to think about the lessons- allowing myself to try to See the world as an interconnected web of “stuff” where everyone impacts everyone else; but that we pretend to be isolated; seems to really explain the “fear” I see in humanities search for God; we seem to all be grasping at something “Out There” when really we should be looking within ourselves and our own minds and thoughts to grasp for deeper understanding of the world.

I look forward to reading more by Watts as well as other philosophers of the modern era and the past, as I walk my own path towards self knowledge. I am very pleased I found these studies and have taken the time to reflect on everything instead of rushing through them.

Exercise 4: Lesson 2: Section 5: So What? (4-27-13/6-4-13/6-5-13/6-25-13/9-12-13/10-11-13/10-29-13) (*time stamps are from the YouTube video. Please ignore time stamps; only included in case I want to revisit this post in the future as a bookmark of sorts)

Part 1: (0:00-8:13)

This next section of “The Book” begins by asking: What is the importance of having a new vision on life? And a vision of the separate man- This makes groups such as the Protestants nervous because the separate person is without content; living on hope, looking forward to tomorrow. That most people understand that contemplation is good for its own right, thus living on hope without a plan is seen as a dangerous thing.

The first main section Watts discusses centers around The Rites of Santa Claus as an example of folk religion in our modern society. This is important because the rites of Christmas connect us to ancient folklore and a time in our lives of infinite wonder, and in doing so “traps” childhood for a little longer.

In America the “Christmas” holiday starts the day after Halloween (sometimes sooner); two months before the actual holiday; so that by the actual day of Christmas; children are beside themselves with excitement; but just as soon as it starts it’s finished. The build up is important because it ideally promotes the togetherness that was the original meaning of Christmas (“Yule”) but in our modern disposable society; Christmas is more about objects and less about togetherness. The Expectation is important because it keeps us motivated. But just as soon as December 26th comes around, most people return to their lives, with only more “stuff” to fill their environments; and the “Christmas Spirit” fading fast; replaced by chores, jobs, children, and the ebb and flow of day to day life. No longer connected to the joy they had so recently been filled with; no longer connected to Paradise because the build up couldn’t sustain the actual event and thus ‘fizzled” out.

Expectation is important because it helps motivate us upward and onward towards our goals. A personal example of this from my life was the last few classes building up to my brown belt test (on May 31st 2013) The classes ticked away and with each one I got a bit more excited and a bit more nervous, until finally the night of the test arrived. I got there and practiced a few times, helped my parents find seats, and stood in line until I was called. I did the verbal examination part of the test and then moved on to the sparring objectives; Pushing myself harder and harder, trying to remember everything I needed to show my sensei and at the end of the test (broken rib aside) I was so exhausted I could barely remember the events of the test the next day. The expectation was replaced by satisfaction having passed the test, but now that I’m a brown belt the expectation for the next rank has already started to build up inside as I work towards my brown stripe test and finally my Black Belt. (*update: Achieved Brown stripe on August 30th; And Achieved 1st Degree Black Belt on September 27th: literally couldn’t get up the next day out of bed after Black Belt)

Alan Watts goes on to state that “Children are in touch with paradise to the extent they haven’t learned the ego trick.” Children are “innocent” in that they have to learn to hate, too discriminate. They have to be indoctrinated into the game of black versus white, and the “us versus them” mentality that is sadly so prevalently unconsciously taught in our society right along side messages such as: “Buy product X and be happy for eternity.” Or “Get Product Y before your neighbors do or you’re on the Outside, less important to your peers because you don’t have the newest or shiniest toys, etc.”

Mr. Watts goes on to ask what if, once you understand that the ego is a hoax, you ask yourself “so what?’ What’s the next step?

The next step is to consolidate understand; try to learn to live in the moment; the ego trick must be overcome by intense self consciousness.

The ego trick reaffirms itself in moralistic teachings; and we start to play the game of “I’m more humble then you.” Or “I’m closer to God then you.” And in playing this game of one-up-men ship; we destroy the humility of the words we are saying and are thus self defeated with our hypocrisy. I agree with Mr. Watts on this point, and this is the exact reason I dislike proselytizing; and televangelists. I find the “holy” men who scream loud and proud on television upsetting for the simple fact that sooner or later some version of “For the cost of your donation you too can be SAVED”, or some version of this message. A person can’t buy their way into heaven; money doesn’t make a person more “holy” or closer to God. The game of “I’m-closer-to-God-then-you-are” is a total lie.

“All saints need sinners, all winners need losers, and all sages need fools; as long as the goal of life is to “amount” to something. But how do we take away the desire to “be something?”

As we become more aware of the game of black and white we see that we depend on an external opposing entity to compare ourselves to; but don’t truly need this to be aware or whole. By trying to eliminate the socially externally imposed desire to “Be Something” we can see that we can be happy with who we actually are and not what someone (Society) else says we “Should” be.

(6:50- 8:03)

“The more you strive for some type of mastery the more you see you are playing the ego game; that you’re only defined by the opposite external objects. If you decide to be a great man you will soon find an evil force challenging you; all things need to be balanced.”

Taking away the desire to “be something” would be a way to step away from this identity crisis. One has many meditation options or spiritual practices available; but any true attainment of “height” or success is still only defined by others lower level of attainment/ or complete lack of success.

_Part 1 ends with Watts saying there is a different way to look at this; as a way to over come it; which is where part 2 begins. (8:03)
_______________________________________________________________________-

Part 2 (0:00- 10:08)

Part 2 talks about once you understand that the idea of yourself is an illusion and that there isn’t anyway to be different you must observe what is going on. You can’t ignore life; you must watch it and you can’t change viewing it as something happening to you into something without something separate to govern it.

Experience and “experiencer” becomes one experiencing. This can’t happen by will but simple “is” happening, and by trying to get rid of the ego you simply reinforce the feeling of ego. That’s an interesting thing really. Simply understanding that there is ego won’t destroy ego, and any active effort towards removing the “ego” – like some mental “surgical” procedure- is instantly redundant because the act of removing the ego IS an act OF the ego.

(3:00- 4:30)
This act of destroying the ego is compared to that of unraveling an onion, layer upon layer until you reach the center, only to find nothing there. Watts explains this as a byproduct of child hood. Watts defines the “Ego” as an “automatic mechanism implanted since childhood by social authority with a touch of heredity thrown in,” which simple means that once all the layers are striped off we will find a pre-programmed mind set; and once we shake that off- which religions like Buddhism, Shinto-ism, and even esoteric Christian groups focus on- we find the “pure” self, the self we were before society started shaping us; so similar to childhood or a re-linking to childhood mindsets and ideals.

Now as we go deeper into our understanding of this we see that a line can be drawn separating everything we thought we were from everything we now know we are. But even this is an imaginary line, similar to the game of black and white; playing things against each other as a way to define them by their opposites and thus deny actually defining them.

(4:35- 6:48)
Now I find myself not in a world but as a world; where things simply happen; and all happenings are interdependent of all other things that happen. (Similar to ‘cause and effect’) And when this finally happens it’s like moments when thing “click” like learning to swim; and you feel as though you aren’t doing these things but that these things are doing themselves through you of their own freewill. Then you wonder if you might lose this until you realize that the world outside your skin is just as much YOU as the world inside.

“For a while you feel out of control because the world outside is so much vaster then the world inside yet, you soon discover you are able to work and make decisions as before. But somehow this is no longer an effort; air breathes itself in and out of your lungs. And instead of looking and listening, light and sound comes to you on there own.”

This interconnectedness; or this blurring of lines that aren’t truly there is I think a core of not just this chapter but the entirety of “The Book.” Mankind has always yearned to be part of something ‘bigger”- that’s one of the core benefits of religion; and realizing that we are all already interconnected can hopefully alleviate sorrow and helplessness.
______________________________________________________________________

“ Now that you’ve seen this you can see the universe at it’s root as a “fabulous game” and there is no separate “you” to get something out of it as if life were a bank to be robbed” the “real” you is actual the same as every other conscious being.

Watts talks about “live must be lived in the spirit of play whether then work” This simple change in perspective can be the difference between “surviving” life and “Living” life. I know many people that just go through their routine and- my self included- will find themselves years’ later not really remembering “recent” life events. My example is that I really don’t remember my early 20s (I’m currently 27; I remember my Teens but they were very tragic) During my early 20s I was working a dead end job and just wasting away at school not really challenging myself; just living day to day with no real goal to strive for; until about 24 when I did my C.N.A training and then when I was 25 I started karate.

This section concludes with the idea that conflict must be carried on with the understanding that without the natural antagonist it can’t continue. You must accept the roles of people in your life; friends and enemies alike. By loving your enemy AS an enemy harkens back to that game of us versus them; or “game of black-and-white”; one’s actions or even personal definitions are defined by the oppositions. Again; white is only white when placed against black.
______________________________________________________________________________________

9:02-10:08
Nothing seems more boring then simply “being” . . . . If I ask what you did yesterday; (most couldn’t answer) is it surprising that existing this way seems so empty and bear that its hunger for an infinite future is insatiable. But suppose you could answerer “it’d take me forever to answer and I’m far to interested in what’s happening now.”

I love this subtle but impacting change in perspective. Focusing on the positive, living in the moment, remembering each day and (*my own implications added here) living everyday to the fullest instead of just “Existing” is just an amazing lesson. The last part about being far to focused on the present is something everyone should strive for (myself included).

“. . . How is it possible that a being with such sensitive jewels as the eyes, such enchanted musical instruments as the ears, and such a fabulous arabesque of nerves as the brain can experience itself as anything less then god? And, when you consider that this incalculably subtle organism is inseparable from the still more marvelous patterns of its environment-from the minutest electrical designs to the whole company of the galaxies- how is it conceivable that this incarnation of all eternity can be bored with being?”

Life is Amazing! That feels like such an overstated thing these days-where words over used lose their meaning- but honestly! Life is Amazing!! “The Book” teaches that everyone is connected, and everything has meaning. With all of us interconnected but still quite individual and unique really is so amazing. And honestly once we realize this how can we continue to be bored with “being” or existing? I think if these lessons are taken to heart- they will change me for the better and I won’t be “just existing”, but instead I will be “awake”, I will be connected. For all the hardship I’m having with some of these concepts and these initiate assignments I’m learning so much! I really can’t wait to see what the final chapter brings out of my mind, or challenges my view of the world.

Exercise 4; Lesson 2: Taboo; Section 4: The World Is Your Body (3/28/13-4/08/13)

We define our world by how it interacts on our bodies; heat isn’t heat until it touches our skin, Light isn’t light until it touches our eyes, it takes both heat and light to perceive: “sunshine”

Another interesting example of this is when Watts speaks about the creation of a rainbow. Many things are necessary for a rainbow to not just be present but to be perceived. There needs to be the right amount of moisture in the air, the proper position of the individual on the planet and sunlight. Without any one of these the image “rainbow” will not exist.

This idea of perception of the world as self knowledge seems so very simple and yet, a bit difficult to comprehend or to put into words. You need both heat and the ability to feel heat to understand heat. In this regards the environment evokes the organism and the organism evokes the environment. Their definitions are symbiotic.

Watts speaks about the total environment evoking the individual by asking simple questions like; how would vibrations in the air be noise if we didn’t have ears? How would rocks be had if we didn’t have soft skin? How would rocks be heavy if we didn’t have muscles?

These are all examples of relationships between the physical body and how we label/understand our environment. Watts’ idea about the relationship being mutual; leads him to ask if, before the first “thinking” creature existed there was no universe? That they in fact came into existence at the same time? Is all the study of ecological/geological events just the study of what “could” have happened?

Watts' idea that the relationship is mutual leads him to ask if before the first “thinking” creature existed there was no universe? That they came into existence at the same time? Is the study of all ecological and geological events just what “could have” happened?

If every organism evokes its environment then the total environment both spatial and temporal must evoke the organism. The organism evokes knowledge of a past before it began and of a future beyond its death.

The other pole says that the universe wouldn’t have created itself unless it decided to, at some point, to include organisms that would interact with the environment. This “intelligent design” theory isn’t necessarily true. Since all of our knowledge is in relation to ourselves and our surroundings play a role on our very existence, would we not-like Campbell implies- create a God to answer the questions mankind couldn’t answer like “where did we come from?” and “Why are we here?”

Watts discusses our “false humility” in the next section. On one hand we have been conditioned to think of ourselves as mere creatures put in the world by the will of God or as separate fighting egos trying to control the physical world.

Our real humility would be in understanding that we are not separate from nature, and we are “members of the biosphere” where, without living in harmony will all creatures of this planet, we can not thrive. Also we lack the self awareness to see ourselves as a conglomerate of our world through our physical body and in how we treat our environment shows how we treat ourselves. In our attempt to understand, label and place everything “in its place”, we’ve distanced ourselves from the surrounding world and our own understanding of our bodies; this distance creates disillusionment and disconnection. We must strive to look past the individual and world towards a more world-friendly outlook; in other words:

THE WORLD IS YOUR BODY; RESPECT IT AS SUCH.

Exercise 4:Lesson 2: “The Book” Section 3: How To Be A Genuine Fake (3/08/13-3/09/13)

This hoax of us being separate from one another seems to be the theme of this section, with the thesis being that we are not actually separate from the universe and that believing that we are is a great “lie” or hoax we play on ourselves.

When reading this I found the specificity of the use of “I” being felt, as a part of the body is interesting. The opinion on where the ego exists is different from culture to culture; some cultures view the ego as residing in the heart, or the brain, or as an extension of the “soul” but regardless of the difference in location, all cultures have the opinion that their identity doesn’t extended past their bodies or is viewed as “trapped” by the skin.

The next part talks about the image of a “net” or graph being placed on a wiggly line (*representing chaos) trapping the world. This allows us to be able to define the image by its length and width with the imposed graph, and while that allows us to label the wiggle and let’s us come to some “peace”, applying the graph doesn’t truly tell us what the wiggle actually is.

This image of a net can be seen in many things in the world; from graph paper, filing holes, constellations in the stars, or as ground plans for city blocks, thus this image has become one of the “presiding images of human thought” but it’s only an image and no matter how much we divide or categorize the world, it’s only a way of thinking about the world and is NOT the world itself. The actual world is not truly divided.

Watts goes on to discuss the ceramic model of the universe, which is a theory that states that the world is made up of “stuff” or “clay.” This idea leads to two myths about the world that form the illusion of separation. These are: 1.The ceramic model, and 2.the fully automatic model of the universe.

In the ceramic model, the world is viewed as an artifact “someone” must have made out of some sort of original “stuff”- being the forming matter that must have been created by a “god.”

Using the image of God from the Juedo-Christian theology, we see God as an omnipresent being, which allows everyone a feeling that life is based on intelligence and an individual feeling of importance and meaning.

This God watches over EVERY deed you do every day while allowing for bliss and love for those who believe, but also has strings attached, for the opposite is true for those who choose not to believe, and upon physical bodily death they must face agonizing pain and separation from the divine for all eternity.

I personally always had trouble believing in this God of Christianity, even as a child when I believed in the resurrection and divinity of Christ, I still had trouble understanding the fundamental oxymoronic duality of a God who offers eternal bliss and heavenly rewards while also demanding respect through punishment and fear. Over time I’ve come to learn this was more out of the days of the pagan reform when the Church controlled more of how people thought and what people did, and while it is still a main doctrine of Christianity, I have matured enough to sort of “read between the lines” and find my own spiritual path.

Watts goes on to say that he feels the problem here is that it’s (Gods promises of paradise) too much of a good thing, while at the same time Gods promises of love, mixed with retribution can –like it did with me- cause fear or a sense of paranoia in children.

“Children working at their desks in school are almost always put off when even a kindly and respected teacher watches over their shoulder. How much more disconcerting to realize each single deed, thought, and feeling is “watched” by the teacher of teachers, that no where on earth or heaven is there any hiding place from the eye which sees all and judges all…”-Alan Watts

The philosophers questioned the “crack-pot” myth and removed God from the equation due to problems from a logical standpoint believing everything was the creation of God, as if God made the universe and then left it to its own devices.

The other model of the Universe is the Fully Automatic Theory, which is the idea that God had no part in the creation but instead it was mainly chance that-like monkeys with typewriters writing Shakespeare- created “somethingness” from nothingness.

The problem with the monkey and the typewriters image that Watts proposes is that once the monkeys have finally written Shakespeare, there is nothing keeping them from devolving back into gibberish, so like the monkeys, Man must keep working o overcome the “random processes of nature.”

Destroying God this way creates isolation within humanity, reinforcing the myth of separation of the ego which can only lead to the destruction of ones psyche over time.
_______
The next part talks about the eastern philosophy that the whole world is one entity with everything having some form of intelligence.

Watts speaks about the idea of the ego being a trap in that the way we identify ourselves is with how others perceive us is false. We aren’t what our society says we are although wee do learn our behaviors from our environment and our social interactions with “society” thus we perpetuate our own disillusionment, Trapping ourselves in our ego or our inaccurate perceptions of what we are, and what we should be.

According to Watts, we are actually “what is going on,” meaning we are just us, there is no real ulterior identifier, and we are all connected, that there is no “I” in the entire universe.

Society plays this game of separation on everyone including itself, propagating the conviction that our bodies our separate from the world around us. We are taught that we are independent from one another during childhood; we are then told to do things that are “right” as long as they are done by our own moral choices to do them. We do this because these thoughts were imposed on us and so we are conditioned to “force” things to happen which are only acceptable when done without being forced. We are also conditioned to spread this myth to our children and then to their children, and so on, and so on.

We do this because we view mankind as “on the world” but not “of the world.” Watts says we need to get rid of this viewpoint and see ourselves as we truly are, as a part of the balance of nature, or else we risk destroying our environment as well as ourselves.

Watts uses the imagery of a tree with every branch being an individual but also has a connection with the tree thus differentiation is not separation, meaning that just because you are different, it doesn’t mean you are separate from the world.

Perpetrating the idea of this separation cause people to not be able to focus on the present, and without a good grasp of the present one can’t grasp at the future.

Recognizing this impermanence can lead to withdrawal from the world such as Monks and Aesthetics do; trying to lose their desire so that they can passively watch the world, thus being in the world but not “of” the world and instead focus on trying to become one with the “pure” self in a state of serenity.

On the other extreme we have a vision f the world as being a “gift” from the divine; where the main focus of life is selfless love, devotion to God and devotion to Man.

The truth is that because this is a hoax; neither path truly works as a complete system of connectiveness, but Watts goes on to talk about a third option: The idea of the world being a balanced, harmonized system of contained conflicts based on the realization that the only real “I” is the whole process. We know this is true but we have propagated the hoax to such a degree that we ignore it.

I believe this and I can see the merit in what Watts calls “The Hoax”, but I can see this idea of a world being seen as these isolated conflicts in balance with one another, so in a way we are just playing a part in some great play, tricking ourselves that we are separate being and not truly connected.

I found this section of “The Book” a bit harder to grasp then the previous sections but I find the idea of interconnectedness as well as the hoax that we are separate beings very interesting, and I wonder now that we Know we aren’t truly separate from the Earth or Separate from each other, where exactly Mr. Watts will take us next.

Exercise 4: Lesson 2:”The Book” section 2: The Game of Black-and-White (02/04/13-02/05/13)

This section is all about perception: this game of black-and-white. We can’t have black without white, and we can’t have white without black, and in fact can’t define or comprehend “Black” without being able to compare it to its “opposition” in “white.”

This causes us to put these ideas in opposition to one another when truly they can’t exist without one another, and so we play the game of “Black versus White.” Alan Watts talks about our perceptions with the example of if you see a white background with a black dot (or a black background with a white dot) your brain automatically is conditioned to read that AS the dot being the “Thing” on the painting. This leads to a creation/perception as “nothing as something” being that of the opposition of “something”.

The fundamental idea of nothingness as 'something-ness' is very interesting to me and I’ve thought similarly about the world within my own meditations when I first start out on my spiritual journey or my search for a personally defined spirituality. I was quite quickly forced to come to terms or at least acknowledge the nothingness of reality as a “thing” and would often discuss the naming of objects with friends. (I.e.: why do we call a tree a tree? Or why is “green” green? And I came to the conclusion that it’s in how we able things we demystify them and then they leave the world of the supernatural and enter the world of the natural. And we have peace in the “known” entity, instead of fear of the “unknown” entity.)

I searched for peace within my society and within my small chunk of the earth as well as within myself; I too saw black as “negative” and as an opponent- A ‘Darkness’ to overcome in order to be “whole.” But I found the same paradox that Mr. Watts talks about when he says that White must win is an impossibility because without black for us to set against white in our minds, we can’t define white.

This definition of things by there opposites is a fundamental human philosophy that can touch every idea such as: How do we know what up is without down? Or tell time by defining “day” without a “Night”, or even as simple as what is “in” without an “out” to define it?

Another great image of this balance between opposites is the Chinese symbol of the Ying-Yang.
In Chinese philosophy “Ying and Yang” are the two great oppositions on which everything in the universe depends. While ‘ying’ represents the feminine attributes and is seen as the “dark” or negativity, “Yang” represents the masculine and positive attributes or “light.”

The opposite dark dot within the white section as well as the white dot within the black section represents the idea that each encompasses the other’s attributes and is defined by the other. Again this idea of definition by opposition is represented.

The yin-yang symbolizes the great altercation or struggle within each of us reaching its “end”, and as the ying-yang symbol continues to turn-going on and on- so do our defining struggles that we are forced to come to terms within our own duality of self.

The morals or rules for this game of black-and-white or “black versus white”, or “order versus chance” to continue we must not allow ourselves to understand that without black there can be no white, and with out white there can be no black, and if we tried to change this fundamental idea, the way we perceive our entire world on a fundamental level would shift and allow for chaos.

Exercise 4 Lesson 2: The Book Section: 1: Inside Information (02/02/13-02/03/13)

This beginning section I feel seems to set up the book by asking the question, “What is the new taboo for our generation?”

Some would say Sex was quite recently a taboo but now, I agree with Watts, feeling that the prevalence of sex and sexual imagery in today’s society has made the laymen or “Average Joe” know too much about intimate information when compared to the previous baby-boomer generation.

The ancient and cultural myths tell us about ourselves in now just the moral musing of the myth but also in our thinking or meditations on our opinions of the myths message and, in doing so, we better define or create our own self’s.

Watts talks about us being “God-unknown” and playing the game of hide-and-seek with ourselves as we search for “God”, we are truly looking for the “God” part within ourselves.
This analogy of “Hide-and-seek” with God as the central figure resonates similarly to what I feel Campbell spoke of with the central deity changing from Nature to Animal; then from Animal to Spiritual, as cultures evolved. We, simply as humans, create myth to come to terms with our surroundings and teach morality lessons to the next generation.

The main question of “Inside Information” is what are the taboos we as people in today’s oversexed culture need to know to be on the “inside” or “In the know” as it were.
I deeply enjoyed this introductory chapter and look forward to greater understandings or knowledge about what Watts feels is necessary information or questions to ask to be “in the know” in today’s culture.

Exercise 4; lesson1:”The Power of Myth”; Section 6: “Love and the Goddess” (02/06/13-02/07/13)

LOVE

Campbell begins this section with the story of the Troubadours of the 12th century. This representation of a pivotal time of change in how mankind viewed love, going from “Eros” or physical longing for one another and the concept of brotherhood and non-sexual affection changing focus onto a type of person-to-person affection.

This change was at the time a deeply dangerous social opinion because the 12th century was a time of the ‘Great and Powerful Roman Catholic Church” as my friend put it, where marriages were arranged between families for status, and power instead of love. So this idea of a person freely choosing his or her own partnership based on affection was dangerous because it upset the status quo. Professing the virtues of “libido versus Credo” the desires of ones person or “the impulse to love” overcomes the rules of the time or declarations (“Credo”) of the Catholic Church.

This change in thinking provides person justifications and validity of speaking out as an empowered individual, and provides the individual identity over and against the socially imposed opinion of the individual.

Campbell next talks about the myth of Satan as it pertained to the Persian societies. In this version, Satan is described as “Gods greatest lover” and was condemned to Hell because Satan would not bow to man. Instead of this being out of hubris or Ego on Satan’s part as I was taught from childhood bible school, Instead the Persians believed Satan’s love for God was so grand that he would only bow to God, and wouldn’t bow to Man, thus Satan was cast out of paradise. This contrast to my early childhood teachings about Pride adds a bit more of a tragic figure to the Satan figure of the old testament which I find to be a beautiful alternative to the darker biblical stories. This grand idea that Satan loved God so much that he maintains the realm of Hell by the memory of Gods voice saying “Go to Hell.”

I feel this shows great affection and love of God which ties in greatly with the biblical imagery of Lucifer (Satan) being Gods most loved Angel, and the idea that Hell is not defined as a place of physical torture with fire and brimstone but is simply a void that is separate from God and it is this eternal separation from the divine that is the instrument of endless torture of your soul.

LOVING YOUR ENEMY

The greatest teaching in Christian doctrine according to Campbell is the teaching of “agape” or loving ones enemy.

“Do not pluck the moat from your enemy’s eye, but pluck the beam from your own.”-Joseph Campbell

I believe this to mean you should not have to go out of your way for the benefit of ones enemies but should instead focus on changing your perceptions to see all sides of an confrontation to un-blind yourself or enlighten yourself to what is truly going on before acting.

This teaching of Agape or Loving ones enemies can be utilized in today’s cynical world buy that that you should not let those who oppose you- those who would bully you or wish you harm- the succeed in causing said harm but one should counter that deception not with vengeance because by doing so you become lessened or lowered to the level of the bully. I feel this is also reflected in that well-known quote of Mahatma Gandhi, when he said: “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

This idea of love can also be scene in the mythos of the crucifixion of Christ as the ultimate act of atonement with mankind. This idea of sacrifice was part of the pervious myth sections, but this example speaks of the crucifixion being a symbolic meeting between God and mankind through compassion where the sacrifice is seen as an act of unconditional love for man and for their salvation.

MOTHER EARTH

The second half of the interview deals with the Goddess image throughout cultures, generations, and religions, as well as, the origin of the Virgin Birth mythos.

Most ancient cultures predating the rise of monotheistic teachings such as Judaism and Christianity, had at least two primary (and sometimes dozens) Gods and Goddesses, which represented the male and female- the ying-yang- the primal and eternal forces needed to keep the world in balance.

This section speaks of the resurrection of the Goddess Gaia, as a way to hearken back to see the world as a sacred place that needs protection and care for the natural resources.

In our current consumer driven economy and culture we build bigger and bigger buildings, taking away from one thing that is not in endless supply, that being Earth. I feel mankind sees themselves as not just the top of the food chain but also “The great conqueror of the Earth.”

We no longer take care of our world the way the ancients did and I feel and in my opinion if the imagery of the Goddess with the God – this perfect duality and balance- we’d have more respect for others of our species thus less war, and we’d have greater respect (if any respect) for our planet and thus put a true effort to less or no pollution in our environment.

VIRGIN BIRTH MYTHOS

Joseph Campbell next speaks about the “Sacred Virgin” emerging in the 12-13th century as the same Goddess image of pre-Christianity having simply, like most sacred images in the Christian church, been taken over when monotheism conquered polytheistic religions during the first millennium A.D.

The virgin birth is symbolic of a spiritual awakening and is so universal that many ancient cultures had “virgin birth” imagery (non-physical birth) within their mythology and religions.

The Buddha was born out of the side of his mother able to walk. Many Egyptian stories of Gods being born were conceived through non-physical ways so those offspring were born of virgins. This virgin birth is symbolic of a spiritual transformation and spiritual empowerment.

I connected more deeply to this part of “The Power of Myth” series because I feel this lesson resonates with me. Growing up I always felt a spiritual connection and appreciation to the earth, and when I discovered paganism in high school I was able to externalize that appreciation and find greater self-identity with the spiritual practices that are in tune with nature instead of the more possessive or combative principles of the Roman Catholic Church which I was raised with.

Even with my years of study of paganism and personal experiences as a Goddess worshipper I still learned so much from this interview and was left with a strange happiness after watching it. I felt like a student at the lecture of a beloved passionate professor, on the edge of my seat just fixated on the lesson and I can’t wait to see what Campbell speaks of next.

Exercise 4, lesson 1: section 5: The Heroes Adventure (12/09/12)

This section spoke of the hero adventure archetype, which is seen in all cultures and all mythologies, and is sometimes referred to as “The monomyth.” Joseph Campbell refers to this as “The hero with a thousand faces.”

This hero adventure is a cornerstone of mythology and pertains to every aspect of spiritual practice and society though out time; from the “enlightenment of the Buddha”, “The temptation of Christ”, and even up into today’s culture with the stories of Star Wars, as well as into the everyday in aspects of motherhood.

The hero myth deals with transformation of consciousness by trials and illuminations, either through conscious thought such as hero figures like Jesus, or Buddha, or Mohamed, going out and facing trials and tribulations, and by passing these trials these heroes lose their selfishness, and move into a realm of seeing the world with new understanding, maturity, or enlightenment.

The heroes adventure myth evolved with the cultures in which it exists. Primitive man had the idea of a person who goes out and slaughters “monster,” that imagery translated in ancient cultures with many myths of heroes going out into their world and through trials and tribulations are transformed; seeing the world differently.

Campbell discusses the hero myth being so prevalent in ancient and modern society that even the stages of the hero’s journey are similar, being organized as: 1.Ordinary world, 2.Call to adventure, 3. Refusal of adventure, 4.Acceptance of adventure, 5.Entering the unknown: in this step the hero obtains supernatural aid, talismans, and allies/helpers, 6. Tests and supreme ordeal, 7. Reward/journey home, and finally 8.Master of two worlds/Change/restoring the world.

Even in pop culture this mythological quest imagery exists; Campbell speaks of the character of Han Solo going through this hero journey, however reluctant.

Solo begins as a hired mercenary and through circumstances is given the opportunity to rise to the occasion; helping save the princess, and inevitably battling and helping destroy the Empire.

The other main hero journey of star wars is that of Luke Skywalker. Following the outline above.

(1.) Skywalker starts out a simple farmer living an ordinary life; when (2) through fate or circumstances he experiences a call to adventure; to help save the Princess. (3) Refusal of the quest occurs instantly. “I cant go to Alderan, I have chores and a life here on Tattooine,. . Etc”, (4) Again circumstances transpire and with the deaths of his Aunt and Uncle, that old life dies and Luke decides to go with Obi-Wan to help and begin his training. (5) Entering the unknown: The Cantena scene where Luke is faced with creatures unknown to him and finds allies (Solo/Chewbacca), the adventure begins and he is given his fathers lightsaber (“supernatural aid”) and begins his training. (6) Then through the movie he faces trials while trying to save the princess which lead to more “enlightenment” or “self-knowledge” slowly building up until Luke faces the ultimate test of going against the “Death Star.”(7) Through success he’s able to return home; transformed by restoring peace to the galaxy (8) (8until episode 5 and 6; which follow the same basic outline; leading to the ultimate climactic fight against Vader and the Emperor, where Vader-redeemed by Luke- kills The Emperor, thus completing the “Hero’s Journey.”)

This hero’s journey can be seen in “The Matrix”, “The Lion King”, “Star Wars”, Religious texts such as “The Bible”, and in the enlightenment of the Buddha, and is the cornerstone for Greek and other ancient culture mythologies.

Another example: Mother as hero.

1.An ordinary woman leading her ordinary life, 2. Becomes pregnant, 3 can deny the pregnancy, but if 4. Accepted the women’s body goes through changes (5); finds a doctor (supernatural aide), perhaps buys baby clothes (talisman) and hopefully has an ally (boyfriend/husband or family member). (6)The test or supreme ordeal is the painful act of childbirth, (&) leading to a the reward of a child and (8) a new life role as “Mother.”

This journey speaks to us on a basic human level and is so prevalent because we all go through these stages in life: We all go through life once way until circumstances beyond our control change and our lives change (for better or worst) because of it. We are called to ‘enter the unknown’ and through the help of friends and family we face down our “dragons” and emerge changed.

If we simply as human beings can understand that this journey is a fundamental aspect of our lives, we will be better equipped to walk along our paths and lead the lives we want.