Thoughts on Walt Whitman's "Envy"

WHEN I peruse the conquered fame of heroes, and the
    victories of mighty generals, I do not envy the
    generals,
Nor the President in his Presidency, nor the rich in
    his great house;
But when I read of the brotherhood of lovers, how it 
    was with them,
How through life, through dangers, odium, un-
    changing, long and long,
Through youth, and through middle and old age, how 
    unfaltering, how affectionate and faithful they 
    were,
Then I am pensive—I hastily put down the book,
    and walk away, filled with the bitterest envy.



While reading this last night, I was struck by a few thoughts I've tried to organize.

First, the Buddhist reaction in me contemplated the ending -- being so struck with envy. Reading can elicit many responses, of course, and well written works can certainly inspire empathy with the characters. In fact, that may be the point... to let you experience some aspect of life through other eyes. Envy of course is a very negative emotion -- and here clearly affects Whitman in such a strong way he puts down the book. The optimal reaction is not jealousy, but rather, with empathy. To feel in yourself the pleasure the characters are feeling leads to happiness, while being envious of their positions leads to unhappiness -- as Whitman clearly captures here.

Then, however, my thoughts turned to the first piece of the poem. While reading about happy lovers, Whitman encounters envy, but not when reading of generals or Presidents, nor the rich. It made me think... do people read stories of great leaders and feel envious of their actions? I cannot recall a single thing I've read of any historical person where I felt envy. When I think of generals leading troops into war, envy is far from my mind. When I think of US Presidents leading the populace, envy again does not register. And most of the wealthy people I have ever met do not seem very happy to me.

I read something recently about why people like playing the hero in video games, linked to how people want to play the roll of the liberator, the super man, who can save the day by themselves. (Well, sometimes with a sidekick.) Maybe many people want to be hero. Do they read such works with envy? And then, when they read about happy lovers, does that envy carry over?

While a sensitive caring person such as Whitman would dismiss the initial, but envy the lovers, my hypothesis is that one who envies the general dismisses the lovers. Right or wrong, thank you Walt Whitman for making me think.

Everyday Mindfulness

Just now I had finished showering and found myself at the sink going through the motions of shaving my head. As I thought about various topics mindlessly, I recalled an earlier discussion on Facebook about the Buddhist view on anger. From this thought I hit a tangent and contemplated how best to communicate via FB comments the importance of mindfulness. Then I harked back to some practices, to words from Eckhart Tolle, Buddhists teachings over the last year... I wasn't being mindful. The feeling was immense as my Watcher kicked in. I quickly assessed my state of mind.

I had been thinking about a party later tonight, looking forward to a good time (desirous attachment). I had been thinking about an early Facebook post, proud of my wording of a complex thought (Ego). I had been thinking about my impending move and all the tasks associated with that (attachment leading to worry). None of these things were happening currently. Either past or future. Not present. Right then, I was shaving my head. And that's all I did. I felt the razor bouncing across the stubble as I hadn't felt in a long time. I noticed the gloopiness of the conditioner I use as shaving cream now. I watched the water and whiskers splash around the drain. I was present. Here and now.

The party will happen later. We'll get there, we'll have fun as we always do. It shall be as it shall be. My posts and comments are out there for all to read. If I wasn't sincere and with intention to spread knowledge and help others, I wouldn't have written whatever I have written. If people comment, or disagree, or agree, or whatever, that'll be a task to address later. Right now, it's there and it's fine. The move too will all come together in good time. We took a couple steps today, a few more later, but there's absolutely nothing in my power while standing at the sink to shave that I can do to change any aspect of moving. I was shaving, there in the present moment. Right now, I'm scanning my memories while I sit and type at the computer. Things will happen later, things have happened in the past, but the most important things are happening right now. So wrapping up here to do the next tasks of the day, hopefully with some mindfulness. Peace and Love to you all.

Terrorists are Human Beings

Yes, you read the title correctly. It is important not to demonize other human beings. The threshold used to split the population into "demons" and "decent humans" is arbitrary and all in your mind.

This topic arises as we joined together last night for my Buddhist meditation class and one member asked our teacher something along the lines of "how do you treat all humans with compassion in light of the recent terror events" (in the past couple weeks we've seen shootings in Paris and Beirut, at a Planned Parenthood in CO, and in San Bernardino).

This is an important question.

I had already thought about this some previously. I found a way to humanize people who perform such violent acts by contemplating their life as a human. I realize they were not born terrorists. No one is. Everyone you read about spraying bullets in a crowd was once a child. Picturing them as an eight year old running around a soccer field helps me to see them as fellow souls who have lost their way. The turn of events in their lives to lead to such radical behavior is difficult for many of us to comprehend, especially for those of us who live in suburbia America. But we haven't had generations of wars destroying the world around us, uncles being murdered because you family's religious practices are a minority sect in that part of the world. So that's one way I've thought about this - all terrorists were born as innocent human babies.

Our teacher shared a couple other possible ways to look at this.

These radicalized men and women are just seeking happiness like the rest of us. Now, from our perspective, we know you can never find lasting peace through violence. Yet Most violence in the world is motivated by personal morality.  So yes, their world view has become so skewed that their justification of their actions exists on a plane of morality that we find difficult to comprehend. By using compassion and empathy, it is possible to see yourself drawn into a society with different teachings where the ends justify the means. And the ends one seeks is to find eternal happiness. So indeed, terrorists are human too.

Next if one has faith in Karma (and by that I mean the Buddhist view of karma, not the belligerent Facebook posts about someone stealing your parking space at the mall), you can use this understanding to help empathize as well. By committing these acts of terrorism, the perpetrators are heaping loads of negative karma upon themselves, and will be suffering in future lives in ways well beyond all the combined suffering they have caused here on Earth through their actions. In feeling compassion for all living beings, I wish no others to experience such horrendous suffering and wish that they had never taken on those actions. I wish all living beings to be forever free from all suffering, including terrorists.

There is another way as well I thought about later. Buddha teaches that all human beings have a seed within them to achieve enlightenment in this very lifetime. We all have that potential, and thus we should see that potential in all other living beings. This is challenging. It would seem that you need to be a Buddha, or at least a Bodhisattva, in order to see this special gift in those who perform unspeakably violent acts. But that seed is there because terrorists are human too.

To wrap up and bring back the opening statement, I in no way condone the violent actions of other human beings. However, if we demonize them, either as individuals or as a group, we are doing a disservice to all living beings. Only by treating all living beings with loving kindness can we individually travel the path of enlightenment. There are no exceptions. Even humans who have sadly not been touched by Dharma in this lifetime and have succumbed to the delusions offered by other delusional humans deserve our compassion.

 A man who conquers himself is greater than one who conquers a thousand men in battle.
-- Buddha

Love or Fear

The Premise: Some small portion of the population has strongly violent tendencies.

Option A: treat these individuals with love and compassion. Do research to understand their core problems, offer services to help them find alternative behaviors, show them empathy, patience and a willingness to help them.

Option B: treat these individuals with fear, and arm yourself to prevent them from harming you.

Results of Option A: this violent subset of the population is treated with respect and dignity. Many of them will find the help they need before they become a drain on society. The occasional outburst of violence may obviously still occur, but will likely be limited in scope and effect. The next generation learns compassion and patience.

Results of Option B: in order to arm anyone and everyone afraid of these people, you by definition provide access to weapons for them as well, creating an escalating arms race. As fear leads to anger, which leads to hate, which leads to violence, you are also enabling people who may not be fundamentally violent a means for violence, increasing the number of individuals you need to fear. By escalating the arms race, when a violent outburst occurs, it will not be limited in scope. Violence towards the public at large creates more fear, thus creating a negative feedback loop and even further escalating the arms race. The next generation learns fear and watches people trying to solve their problems with violence.

Option A has no downside and provides for a safer world for your children. Option B leads to America in 2015.

Can we change this? YES! But it comes down to YOU. How do YOU react to potentially violent people in your life? Do you treat them with empathy and compassion and try to get them help? Or do you ignore them, or worse, foster fear in your heart until it's so overwhelming you are willing to put your family in danger by owning a deadly weapon?

Darkness' only enemy is light. You have the option every moment of every day to be that light or to propagate the darkness. With either option, you lead by example, influencing others, especially the next generation. Do you want your children growing up barricaded in their house, gun in hand, fearing the world? Or do you want your children growing up seeing the love in the world?


"Do not make friends with an elephant keeper, unless you have space to entertain an elephant." -- Ram Dass

Buddhism + Yoga?

I am looking for some input on this. My primary Buddhist teacher is a wonderful speaker and shows great compassion, but he does not practice Hatha Yoga. My primary Yoga teacher is another wonderful soul and exudes the Eight Limbs in a humbling yet noble way, but he is not well versed in Buddhist practices. 

Om Ah Hum

This is a breathing meditation found in many Buddhist circles. My experience with it is within the New Kadampa Tradition via the teachings of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. There are numerous articles and books on the topic with great depth, so I will keep this explanation intentionally short to focus on my question at hand. 

The general concept is that you think "OM" when you breath in, "AH" between the inhale and exhale, and "HUM" upon the exhale. This breathing meditation is useful for calming the mind, although does not replace in any way the contemplative meditations one undertakes when practicing Buddhism. The "thoughts" of those sounds is a summary, but what you should actually be concentrating on is not so much the sound, but the meaning. These are each linked to three things: OM links to Buddha's Body; AH to Buddha's Speech; HUM to Buddha's Mind. One could argue (I think with some success) that replacing the old Tibetan sounds with English words Body Speech Mind would be just as effective if the intent is the same.  With the links to the enlightened body, speech and mind in these sounds, we should be contemplating the meanings in some detail for the full effect, but it is beyond my expertise to provide a teaching on this subject in this space at this time. If you are unfamiliar but interested, a simple internet search with reveal numerous learning paths.    

Hatha Yoga

The practice of Hatha Yoga focuses on the poses and positions used to strengthen, heal, and re-center the body. Breathing is obviously an important component of such practice, and teachers will often instruct students on this. Maybe it's a simple reminder to breath during long poses, as one's tendency may be to hold the breath in during exertion. Across various poses, different breathing methods are more or less appropriate. Sometimes deep belly breathing, filling the lower lungs first by pushing down the diaphragm, then filling the upper lungs last, is correct. At other times, expansion of the upper chest is applicable. 

Quandary

Where my question arises is the point in poses when one breathes deeply, holds for a moment, then exhales. At this point, my mind wants to link this action with the breathing meditation. Often I will think OM AH HUM during this set of poses. I do not know if this is correct. To my mind, the benefit is calming the mind while strengthening the body. However, it may also be a cause of distraction. If I am focused on the teachings of Buddha during a yoga session, I am not focused on my teacher's words nor my body's responses to the poses. If I lose concentration during yoga, I will not receive the maximum benefits of the practice. 

Open Question: is it good practice to combine a breathing meditation with yoga poses?

One can have no smaller or greater mastery than mastery of oneself. -- Leonardo da Vinci

John Boehner

The other day, after meeting Pope Francis, John Boehner announced he's stepping down as Speaker of the House and even resigning his seat.

My gut reaction to this news was confusion. I felt like that I "should" be happy to see him go. He stands across the political aisle from my views, and I guess that means he's an "enemy." However, I also know that he has been a moderate voice on the Republican side who's been faced with an uprising from the Tea Party group. The Tea Party view points are even further away from mine, so maybe it comes down to "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." I contemplated what this may mean for the future for a bit, and conclude that I am personally fearful that a hard-line Tea Party representative will replace him. Thus while I disagree with him on many points, the evil you know is better than the evil you do not know. Further, I could observe a seed of compassion in Boehner that I do not see in many other Republicans in this Congress. In conclusion, I am sad to see him go (even if I should be happy given our political differences).

After diving into work for a bit, I pulled up a few news pages. As expected all the headlines revolved around Boehner's announcement. They provided some additional information I didn't know - especially that he had had a private meeting with Pope Francis outside of his addressing Congress. I also learned this day fulfilled a long-time dream of his. They also gave examples and context on just how hard he had to fight within factions of the GOP, and I realized how frustrating that would be for him on a personal level. My conclusion that I'm sad to see him give up and quit became more firm.

By that evening, the headlines expanded to include the reactions of other political headliners. In short, Ted Cruz was out dancing in the street, celebrating this decision. That his resignation makes Cruz happy made it all the more obvious that I should not be happy with this decision to give up his elected position. In this case, the enemy of my enemy is indeed my friend.

To John Boehner: I am sorry to see you give up on this fight. But I understand that being Speaker in the current climate is an untenable and unwinnable situation. I truly hope your audience with the Pontiff has opened your heart and eyes to the possibilities of where treating everyone with compassion can lead us. I wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors and implore you to keep your humility. If your next professional step requires compromise with opposing viewpoints, may the world see you're doing the best with what you've been given.


Because a thing is national of the past, it need not follow that it must be national of the future. -- Sri Aurobindo

One Thing At A Time

Somewhere along the line I read or heard mention of the practice to focus solely on a single task at a time. This was quite a while ago on my journey, so I cannot picture the original source that opened this concept to me. However, it aligns well with the mantra recitation I've written about before  - where when I'm doing something mundane like washing the dishes, I will often repeat "Om Namah Shivaya" to help focus my mind and stop the Ego monologue.

In recent times, this mantra practice has stopped in many home-based tasks because I nearly always have Pandora playing one of three stations (if you're curious, they're Krishna Das Radio, Bhagavan Das Radio, and MC Yogi Radio). The results are similar, however, as I focus on the music and chants and contemplate their meaning rather than doing it on my on in silence.

Back to the point, doing one task at a time, being un-attached to the results of that action, has been a beneficial practice for me. I lost track of the times I've run up the stairs of my townhouse, spilling tea or coffee on the carpeted steps. What used to happen is that I'd wander downstairs for a refill, then jog back upstairs to get back to work. My task was "getting back to work" which doesn't quite fit. The result was that I'd jog up the steps, the liquid would slosh a bit, and sometimes splatter onto the carpet. Then I'd have to delay "getting back to work" to address the "clean up this mess" task before it could stain the carpet. Spilling carelessly is just one side event, but others might include toe-stubbing or forgetting what I actually went downstairs to do in the first place. I'm sure we've all been there!

Nowadays, as my coffee cup empties, I move downstairs with the single task "refill coffee." That may change into "rinse out coffee maker" and other little things in between. Then when I'm going back upstairs, my task is "carry coffee to office." With my focus on that task, there hasn't been a single spill or toe-stub since. It seems to work.

Recently I read 101 Zen Stories (a fun short read) and came across this gem (reproduced without permission; 101 Zen Stories attributes this to Essential Zen. May the original authors be pleased with my use of their story):

Seung Sahn would say, "When you eat, just eat. When you read the newspaper, just read the newspaper. Don't do anything other than what you are doing."

One day a student saw him reading the newspaper while he was eating. The student asked if this did not contradict his teachings.  

Seung Sahn said, "When you eat and read the newspaper, just eat and read the newspaper."

One can of course chalk this little story up to "do as I say, not as I do" but that would discount the wisdom in focusing one's mind on a single task. Rather it speaks to the speed of our modern society. As eating takes some focus, it also takes some time. Reading takes more focus and also takes time. In the interest of time, I believe there's leeway in this teaching to combine certain activities without missing the point. There's no need to try to create a list of activities that are OK to combine, but maybe to point out a key activity that you cannot combine:  Listening. You cannot listen well when you are also reading, when you are waiting to speak next, when you are watching TV, or many other activities. Not listening fully is disrespectful. After all, you expect to be heard when you're speaking, right? So put down your phone, put down the book, face your friend, and listen with respect.

Performing your task with singular focus yet being un-attached to the results is a concept I would like to visit in a future post.


Opinions are not knowledge, they are only sidelights on knowledge. Most often they are illegitimate extensions of an imperfect knowledge. -- Sri Aurobindo