jump to navigation

Me? Who? – 2 December 25, 2006

Posted by Kedar in Blogroll, buddha\, buddhism, east, eastern, hindu, hinduism, india, mahayana, oriental, philosophy, spiritual, spirituality, zen.
5 comments

Here is what I think about the story in Me? Who? – part 1.

No quest of spirituality is complete without quest in ego. By questioning the validity of this “me”, the teacher sets the person on this path of introspection. One day the person finds that there is no “me”.

In his book “The Way Of Zen”, Alan Watts gives an excellent analogy to explain the relation between me, the ego and the universe. This is what he says (kind of)

“The cells of our body are constantly dying and new cells are being formed. The food that we eat comes from environment and goes back into environment. The thoughts enter our mind and leave our mind. In essence, out identity is not a physical entity. Rather it is just a pattern the way cells organize themselves and thoughts process themselves. This is no different that a whirlpool in water. The water molecules constantly enter the whirlpool and exit it. Whirlpool does not own the water molecules. Rather it is a pattern in which the water molecules arrange themselves for a while. At the end of life of whirlpool, it goes back into the water by all means.”

Like it or not, we are all just whirlpools in this universe. Like it or not, you are just a pattern, just a way body cells and thoughts and beliefs are organized. Once you rotate enough, you will go back in your environment.

You have convinced yourself of a valid entity called ego which keeps everything in check and controls everything. But like it or not. There is nobody inside you. Your core is hollow. There is nobody who is in charge of your personality. You are just an arrangement, where one desire taking over after another, one cell of body taking place of another. “You” are a mere convention, rather than physical entity.

Me? Who? – 1 December 22, 2006

Posted by Kedar in Blogroll, buddha\, buddhism, east, eastern, hindu, hinduism, india, mahayana, oriental, philosophy, spiritual, spirituality, zen.
2 comments

One day a person walked in the room where the Zen teacher was sitting. He walked to the teacher, bowed before him and said “I came from a village nearby. I heard you are very wise. I have lots of troubles. I want peace.”

The teacher looked him straight in eye and asked “Who wants peace?”

A bit confused, the person replied again “I want peace.”

The teacher repeated the question again “Who wants peace?”

After this seemingly absurd dialog, the person walked away disappointed. But he showed up next day again and he popped the same request. “I want peace.”

“Who wants peace?” asked the teacher again.

“I, son of so and so, want peace.” the person replied.

“Who wants peace?” the teacher asked again.

The person turned back and walked away, frustrated that this was not going anywhere.

But he kept showing up day after day, month after month. Every time the dialog would begin with same request, the teacher would ask the same question back. The person would try to come up with different answer to satisfy the teacher.

One day the teacher suddenly stood up and hurled some obscene profanities at him. The person got angry and walked away, but eventually came back anyway. A few days later, the teacher suddenly threw himself at this person’s feet at once. (This is a sign of extreme respect in Eastern cultures.) Totally embarrassed to see the teacher at his feet, the person walked away again.

After several years of this seemingly meaningless discourse, one fine morning the person showed up again. He made the same request saying he wanted peace.

“Who wants the peace?” asked the teacher again.

At this point the person fell silent.

Teacher stood up and threw himself at this person’s feet. The person did not even flinch.

The teacher stood up, smiled at him and said “Now you have your peace. Go back and share it.”

The person, with a content heart, bowed before the teacher, retreated from the teacher’s room and never came back.

Let me know what you thought about it. Leave me a comment. I will post my thoughts on this story soon.

The Duck In The Bottle December 18, 2006

Posted by Kedar in brahma, buddha\, buddhism, east, eastern, hindu, hinduism, india, mahayana, maya, oriental, philosophy, spiritual, spirituality, yang, yin, zen.
6 comments

A group of people went to meet a Zen teacher while he was walking in a park. “We want to know about Zen. Please tells us about it.” The most enthusiastic one asked.

The teacher said, “Let me tell you a story.”

“I had a small duckling. I kept it in a bottle. I fed it and kept the bottle clean and took good care of it. The duck grew and grew. One day I realized that the duck has grown too big and I cannot get it out unless I hurt it seriously or break the bottle. So now what should I do if I want to get the duck out, but I still want the bottle intact?”

People started scratching their heads and talking to each other. Time went by. Once in a while somebody would come up with a solution. Teacher would smile and show his disagreement.

After a while teacher called a small girl playing nearby and asked her the same question. “Just break the bottle.” The girl replied without hesitation.

The teacher nodded in agreement and patted her on back. He smiled at the bunch of perplexed faces in front of him and walked away.

I know what you are all thinking. You are wondering if I am suggesting the girl’s answer is the correct one. If I am, then you are ready to pound on me saying “But the teacher clearly said he does not want to break the bottle.”

The girl’s answer is perhaps not correct by definition. Yet she sees something the group of grown-ups fails to see. She sees that it is impossible.

It is impossible to save the duck and save the bottle as well. Yes, people can come up with solutions. Perhaps a machines can be invented to expand the bottle and get the duck safely out, or to tele-transport the duck the way they show in Star trek, or perhaps surgical procedures can be performed that would cut the duck to pieces inside the bottle and join all the limbs again when out.

Yet, we would do a lot of damage by the time we achieve that. To invent such a machine and test it, money worth a lot of bottles would be spent. To come up with perfect surgical procedures, a lot of ducks will have to die in experiments. Usually that’s how we tend to solve problems in our daily life. We isolate the problem from rest of the universe and solve the problem, making a lot of assumptions about the rest of the world.

Can you save both the duck and the bottle by going to extreme means? Yes. Are you really living in better universe after that feat of achievement? Most likely not.

The little girl, who was not yet conditioned by civilization, immediately saw futility of this conquest. She did not convert it in an intellectual challenge. She felt compassion even for the fictional duck. She did not mind ignoring the instructions and risking to look foolish. Her problem is very clear and solution very simple. If the duck is stuck, break the bottle and get it out.

The truth here is that conflict is inherent to life.

We go on telling ourselves that if there is a conflict, then there is something wrong, something needs to be improved, optimized, changed. For example, healthy food usually does not taste good. Tasty food is mostly bad for health. So there is a conflict. Food that is healthy as well as tasty will cost you a lot more, thus conflicting somewhere else. Chase one conflict out, and the other one sneaks in.

We treat these conflicts as aberrations or mistakes. We believe in existence of a physical and mental state eternally free of all conflicts and we continuously strive for such a state.

The truth is, it is impossible to achieve such a state of mind and body by pursuit of material goals.

This is the lesson 101 of Zen Buddhism and overall oriental philosophy. Disillusion of material goals. Rather than shunning these conflicts and trying to impose order on life, ancient Eastern philosophers tend to honor them by calling it the game of Bramha and Maya, or the dance of Yin and Yang. They tend to view the world as the continuous and endless play between two forces, eternally at conflict with each other. Sometimes the duck wins, sometimes the bottle. Sometimes it’s Bramha, sometimes Maya. There is no purpose, there is no end.

This Yin vs. Yang struggle is present in our life as short term goals vs. long term goals, emotions vs. logic, ideology vs. practicality, aggression vs. defense, hate vs. love. Sometimes we swing this way, sometimes that way. That swinging is us, not the swing. The motion is us, not the pendulum.

Initially it might sound depressing. What’s the point in such a broken life if we cannot fix it?

But once we let it sink in, we find a huge sense of liberation. Suddenly it is not necessary to fix things before you enjoy them. Fix it if you like fixing. Enjoy it if you like enjoying.

Once we get it, we stop subordinating this present moment for that fictitious moment of fulfillment in future. We begin honoring the present for what it is. We stop life as an exercise in managing consequences and we start life as spontaneous expression. We stop seeing ourselves as a player. Instead we see ourselves as the game, the motion itself. We stop living in fiction, we start living in reality.

Because Destination is a fiction, only journey is a reality.