The term "reality based community" (RBC) is rather snarky. It seems to be used by those who wish to distinguish themselves from groups that base their opinions on religious doctrine, tradition or on their own self interest. For example, if one believes that interventions to stop global warming could harm ones economic interest one might be resistant to new information supportive of the global warming phenomena.
The RBC claims that their opinions are based on common sense and scientific evidence. It's snarky because it infers that those who are not part of the community, that have divergent beliefs, are irrational or don't have any common sense.
I've always admired science and math, though my abilities to comprehend such matters are minimal. And, I'm embarrassed to say, I have a tendency to enjoy sneering at those with whom I disagree. The RBC denigrates others not because of differences of opinion, esthetics or tradition, but on what they claim are cold facts, logic, reality. I used to be a member of the RBC.
I recently read chapter VI of Man's Supreme Inheritance by FM Alexander. This chapter, in part, is a response to letter written to FM by a Mr. William Archer. It seems to me that Mr. Archer was arguing that there should be limits to ones open-mindedness. For example, he worried that the process of becoming open to the possibility that, say, astrology might be useful would require him to unmoor himself from reality to such an extent that he fears he would lose his mind. The RBC continues such logic to say that the astrologers are crazy.
But FM's response is wonderful. Not in small part because of his refusal to respond as if one's beliefs are independent of the use of one's body. I will not try to summarize FMs response because I'm quite sure I can not do it justice. Suffice it to say that FM would like us all to have an open mind to all information. And if such new information was sufficient to change our opinion on any subject he would hope we could change our opinion without undue hesitation.
After reading this, I started to think about my impressions of the RBC. Honestly, they do seem a bit arrogent. They seem to believe that if they are not like the foolish other believers then they are the holders of the trueth. But if you are not a fool you are not necessarily a genius.
I am amused by those who have not examined the beliefs that govern their activities. And I'm irritated by those who have beliefs that are not aligned with well established scientific thought. But does having reason based beliefs promote ones openness to new information?
It does not seem so.
Remember a couple years ago when the high priests of the RBC decided that Pluto was not a planet anymore? It made front page news and it was in the news for two weeks afterwards. So many people were shocked and upset. Here, a basic scientific fact that all members of the RBC learned in grade school was revised. Endless article were written documenting the terribly hard process the RBC went through giving up this belief.
So how real are the beliefs of the RBC? This RBC includes astrometers who can't find half the matter in the universe. These are the people who say the universe is actually expanding at an accelerating rate. And the astronomers are not the only card carrying members of the RBC. There are the physicists also. What is "real" to physicists Atoms? Do you have any idea of the vast empty space between atoms? Further, atoms are made up of sub atomic particles. And the empty space between these sub atomic particles is also huge. And how real are these "particles"? Even the word "particle" is misleading because it infers something substantial. But these particles flash in and out of existence in a tiny fraction of a second. They are just a momentary manifestation in an endless of web of energetic potentiality. That's it.
So what is real? Nothing. Nothing is real. Sorry but that is the way it actually is.
You don't have to be a scientist to come to this realization. Sit quietly and observe reality without trying to change or hold onto anything. Notice anything that does not change? Anything substantial that you can hold onto? Notice anything at all that is real?
So on what basis does the RBC claim any authority? Well not much. They may have better beliefs but that does not make them right.
I no longer admire the RBC as much. It's easy to parrot the lessons that the RBC dictate, but it is much more challenging to be open to new information, to critically evaluate it, and change quickly without undue hesitation or embarrassing display.
This openness and ability to change our habits is a special and cultivatable skill. To develop it I think we first need to acknowledge that our fixed beliefs are habit of thought and body. They are, actually, the same thing.
To become fixed in a habit of body/mind in a world that is utterly beyond our comprehension is to invite error and disaster. If you know of anything that helps undermine the roots of habit besides the AT and Zen, please let me know. Thank you very much.
Friday, February 15, 2013
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
The Full Lotus
What I want out of the AT is the ability to respond to every stimulus - every situation or event - in a considered way. To respond in a way that reflects my fundamental intention, with conscious consideration. This is as opposed to reacting out of unconscious habit, routine, selfishness or shortsightedness.
The AT provided two tools to do this. The technical jargon is "inhibition" and "direction". At first I tried to put these tools into effect when the impulse to get out of a chair arises. Now, I'm trying to use them constantly. I am still, ah, somewhat short of this goal, but I'm making the effort.
Alexander seems to me ever practical. He was very concerned with how people used themselves. I'm no scholar of his writing, but I do not believe he ever suggested people simply practice just "inhibition" and "direction". These tools seem to be always presented as precursor to an action of the body/mind. What possible benefit might they have if practiced alone? Another way of saying this: Is it possible to "inhibit" and "direct" and have all other desires and impulses regarded as "end-gaining"?
What a weird thing to suggest. Why on earth would anyone want to spend time to do this? I have no idea. Is it really possible? I'm not sure. But how about if we set out to do something really simple, like say sitting. We can call this type of sitting the "inhibition of end-gaining where anything other than sitting is end-gaining" and "directing". Maybe calling this "just sitting" would be more convenient.
My question is: Is there any arrangement of the body that would be more supportive of "just sitting"? How would you sit if you wanted to "just sit" well? We will need to put aside the questions of what it means to "sit well". We'll also need to set aside the question of why you would care if you sat "well" or not "well".
I have found that I have more trouble continually "just sitting" while slumped on a couch with a gin and tonic, than when I am in my AT training program sitting in a chair. Clearly, how one arranges one's body has an impact on ones ability to "just sit".
For brief periods, I'm not sure it matters how one arranges ones body to "just sit". But longer periods of time erodes our ability to use our self well.
Although the concept of AT "direction" is unknown to Zen students, they otherwise are very concerned with "just sitting". Many Zen students are critically concerned with their ability to "just sit" well in for long continuous periods in an environment that discourages gross physical movements. For over 2000 years Zen teachers have claimed that the full lotus is the ne plus ultra of sitting postures.
US Zen teachers continue to recommend the full lotus. And this comes from a society that easily discards traditions that don't work here. We have dispensed with the sexism of traditional Eastern Zen and the rigorous physical style. We have obscured the boundaries of lay and ordained, monastic and community. We have changed quite a bit with traditional Zen, but all Zen teachers and senior students that I have ever seen sit in full lotus unless they have compelling physical reasons that make it impossible.
Despite such strong recommendation, it seems that there is not a whole lot written about why the full lotus is recommended. In part, this is because there is no coherent physical teaching of Zen. (This blog is about trying to provide some framework of a physical teaching of Zen. ).
Here are some thoughts on why the full lotus is recommended and practiced:
1. The AT student can see the benefits at a glance. This spine is long, and the torso is wide. The upper arms are gently externally rotated and there is maximal distance between the elbow and the thumb and forefinger. The knees go dramatically out and away. With this expansive form, we can easily notice the pulling down, shortening and narrowing that is the distraction from the simple activity of "just sitting".
2. It is possible to appreciate the antagonistic forces between the "down" at the sit bones and the "up" at the head/neck.
3. The full lotus is easy on the circulation. When sitting or kneeling for long periods the blood pools and the lower legs and feet. In the full lotus it easily re-enters the circulation.
4. Ones bottom and knees for a tripod. This is a very stable configuration. It is very helpful should the winds of desires and aversions kick up.
5. This may seem like a stretch, but the full lotus seems to recycle the energy that enters the legs. To me there seems a vital energy that flows into the legs and leaks out and away when on a kneeling bench or sitting in a chair. The full lotus recycles this energy nicely. Your experience may vary.
6. There is a sensation of tautness in the legs. Not tight, but definitely not loose. And this is reflected in the quality of the mind.
7. The full lotus helps one to stay warm. When wrapped in long robes it's easy to keep the lower legs and feet warm.
8. It's a dignified way to sit among the "alternative" crowd. Among the more traditional crowd it's an entertaining party trick.
For all the benefits it's a pity that the full lotus is not easy for us in the west. It's the external rotation of the hips that is the problem. The rest of the posture is very neutral and requires no flexibility or strength. When I first started sitting I sat on a high cushion and two smaller ones under my knees. Every few months I would arrange my cushions to effectively bring my feet a bit higher. It did take me a few years before I could sit in the full lotus with little distraction. Of course, there are a few yogic exercises that can accelerate the process.
I mention all this to recommend the full lotus to those who study the AT. It is a very useful posture for the AT crowd should they become interested in honing their skills of "inhibition" and "direction" with minimal distracting activity.
The AT provided two tools to do this. The technical jargon is "inhibition" and "direction". At first I tried to put these tools into effect when the impulse to get out of a chair arises. Now, I'm trying to use them constantly. I am still, ah, somewhat short of this goal, but I'm making the effort.
Alexander seems to me ever practical. He was very concerned with how people used themselves. I'm no scholar of his writing, but I do not believe he ever suggested people simply practice just "inhibition" and "direction". These tools seem to be always presented as precursor to an action of the body/mind. What possible benefit might they have if practiced alone? Another way of saying this: Is it possible to "inhibit" and "direct" and have all other desires and impulses regarded as "end-gaining"?
What a weird thing to suggest. Why on earth would anyone want to spend time to do this? I have no idea. Is it really possible? I'm not sure. But how about if we set out to do something really simple, like say sitting. We can call this type of sitting the "inhibition of end-gaining where anything other than sitting is end-gaining" and "directing". Maybe calling this "just sitting" would be more convenient.
My question is: Is there any arrangement of the body that would be more supportive of "just sitting"? How would you sit if you wanted to "just sit" well? We will need to put aside the questions of what it means to "sit well". We'll also need to set aside the question of why you would care if you sat "well" or not "well".
I have found that I have more trouble continually "just sitting" while slumped on a couch with a gin and tonic, than when I am in my AT training program sitting in a chair. Clearly, how one arranges one's body has an impact on ones ability to "just sit".
For brief periods, I'm not sure it matters how one arranges ones body to "just sit". But longer periods of time erodes our ability to use our self well.
Although the concept of AT "direction" is unknown to Zen students, they otherwise are very concerned with "just sitting". Many Zen students are critically concerned with their ability to "just sit" well in for long continuous periods in an environment that discourages gross physical movements. For over 2000 years Zen teachers have claimed that the full lotus is the ne plus ultra of sitting postures.
US Zen teachers continue to recommend the full lotus. And this comes from a society that easily discards traditions that don't work here. We have dispensed with the sexism of traditional Eastern Zen and the rigorous physical style. We have obscured the boundaries of lay and ordained, monastic and community. We have changed quite a bit with traditional Zen, but all Zen teachers and senior students that I have ever seen sit in full lotus unless they have compelling physical reasons that make it impossible.
Despite such strong recommendation, it seems that there is not a whole lot written about why the full lotus is recommended. In part, this is because there is no coherent physical teaching of Zen. (This blog is about trying to provide some framework of a physical teaching of Zen. ).
Here are some thoughts on why the full lotus is recommended and practiced:
1. The AT student can see the benefits at a glance. This spine is long, and the torso is wide. The upper arms are gently externally rotated and there is maximal distance between the elbow and the thumb and forefinger. The knees go dramatically out and away. With this expansive form, we can easily notice the pulling down, shortening and narrowing that is the distraction from the simple activity of "just sitting".
2. It is possible to appreciate the antagonistic forces between the "down" at the sit bones and the "up" at the head/neck.
3. The full lotus is easy on the circulation. When sitting or kneeling for long periods the blood pools and the lower legs and feet. In the full lotus it easily re-enters the circulation.
4. Ones bottom and knees for a tripod. This is a very stable configuration. It is very helpful should the winds of desires and aversions kick up.
5. This may seem like a stretch, but the full lotus seems to recycle the energy that enters the legs. To me there seems a vital energy that flows into the legs and leaks out and away when on a kneeling bench or sitting in a chair. The full lotus recycles this energy nicely. Your experience may vary.
6. There is a sensation of tautness in the legs. Not tight, but definitely not loose. And this is reflected in the quality of the mind.
7. The full lotus helps one to stay warm. When wrapped in long robes it's easy to keep the lower legs and feet warm.
8. It's a dignified way to sit among the "alternative" crowd. Among the more traditional crowd it's an entertaining party trick.
For all the benefits it's a pity that the full lotus is not easy for us in the west. It's the external rotation of the hips that is the problem. The rest of the posture is very neutral and requires no flexibility or strength. When I first started sitting I sat on a high cushion and two smaller ones under my knees. Every few months I would arrange my cushions to effectively bring my feet a bit higher. It did take me a few years before I could sit in the full lotus with little distraction. Of course, there are a few yogic exercises that can accelerate the process.
I mention all this to recommend the full lotus to those who study the AT. It is a very useful posture for the AT crowd should they become interested in honing their skills of "inhibition" and "direction" with minimal distracting activity.
Sunday, February 3, 2013
Ode to the Lie Down
The lie down is a homework instruction given to students in the AT. It's a truly wonderful thing and I think Zen students should consider doing them also.
I'm not sure if there is a point at which the lie down is not still recommended. But I can say that my AT teacher, with many years experience running a teacher training program, still does it regularly.
Physically, it is pretty straight forward. Lie on your back with a paperback book under your head. A firm surface is best, padded enough not to be uncomfortable but firm enough to provide clear feedback. I use a yoga mat or a carpeted floor. Knees bent, feet flat on the floor. Eyes open so that I can see some of my body.
From there, I can have read a variety of instructions. Robert Richover has an interview podcast with a teacher who gives what sounds like a guided meditation.
It has also been recommended to me that I run through the basic directions: "Let the neck be free to let the head go forward and up, let the torso lengthen and widen, let the knees go forward and away, release the ankles to let the heals drop."
I've also heard a recommendation to release any tension or holding that might be found. I've tried that but I always get confused and tired after a while. I end up asking questions such as "Is this really tension?" "How do I get rid of it?" "What is so bad about tension anyway?" "Can I really trust what my opinions are of what I'm feeling?" But my real problem with trying to relax some part of me is that another tension inevitably pops up. Smack down one and another pops up somewhere else. But truly, I have very little insight. Perhaps I'm too lazy to try to relax. Maybe I'm just too old to bother, and I don't even have enough self respect to care. Oh well...
Here is what I do. I start with inhibiting of any end-gaining. And then I recite the directions as above. But then I focus on trying not to do anything. And if I think I've managed to do that then I try not to do that either. But to say I don't do anything is not quite accurate. I'm not doing much, and it may be easy for you, but it seems a bit tricky to me.
I'm not sure how often to do the lie downs, I do this once or twice a day. I've heard that it is important that it be done twice a day. But if you don't have time to do it two times a day, if you are simply too busy, then you must do it three times a day. It seems to work best if I do it before I do something, because if I try to do a lie down after I do something else I end up not doing the lie down at all.
I love the lie down. The more I do it the more I like it. You would think that since I'm lying flat on the floor, totally supported, that there would be no muscle tension at all. Just some effort, now and then, to breath. But there are all kinds of odd things going on. I don't really trust my ideas about what those sensations mean, but it feels like muscles tightening and relaxing. Mostly in my shoulders and back and neck. A lot of the sensations produce a stimulus to do something, in particular to relax. So it's really fun to try just to watch the sensations and to watch the impulse to do something. They come and go and never seem to last very long. After a while there is the sensation of "ownership" or "investment" in my body as a whole. A few times it has felt as if my body was flattening out over the whole floor. In any event, I think the whole lie down thing is fun.
At first, there is often a recurrent thought that "Is it time to get up yet? Isn't that enough?" Sometimes I just get up spontaneously. Mostly, I try to not get up until I don't care any more. Soon after the idea that I could lie here forever pops into my mind, I get the idea that this would be a nice time to take a nap. And this just isn't a nice place to nap - I've tried - so I get up. So usually I'm up after five to 15 minutes.
Standing after a lie down is a delicious experience. I feel so tall, and it's always very obvious that the lie down is a great thing to have done.
That's my experience. Maybe I'm an odd duck as some have suggested. I've recommended the lie down to my brother, who has recurrent low back pain. Most people consider him well adjusted. He says he tried it briefly, but he says it's too boring. That is shocking for me to hear. I don't think it's boring at all! All these thoughts! Emotions! and a symphony of bodily sensations that is ever changing! And it takes a lot of work to resist the impulse to do something. I get the impulses to concentrate my mind, impulses to try to relax some sensation I think is undesirable, impulses to get up and get back to work, impulses to try to straighten something that feel crooked. There is lots going on! I've never felt bored.
Doing the lie down between long sittings is wonderful. If I put my body on a cushion for a long time, exposed to constant gravity, any shortening or narrowing seems to become "locked in". As this becomes chronic I'm not always aware of it. I do get pain, usually, at some point, but it is not always clear to me where the shortening/narrowing is exactly. The lie downs are so nice because the spine is in the same, "upright" position, but there is no gravity. Without the stimulus of gravity I respond and use my self differently. I can look at my use with fresh eyes and give up unnecessary effort. In effect I reset myself. It's really wonderful. I suppose one could do zazen while lying down in between sittings, but hey, this is break time right? Take a breather, yo.
The most interesting part of the lie down, for me, is observing the unity of mind and body. I first noticed this durring a lie down that I was doing in between sitting during a seven day Zen retreat a few years ago. I was lying down and I started thinking about something, probably chocolate cookies. Suddenly I would realize I was swept away with my thinking. At the point that I realized I was thinking - at the point I "woke up" - I obtained a retrograde memory of my shoulder becoming tighter and tighter as I was thinking about cookies. In fact, partly it was the sensation of my shoulder getting tighter that awakened me out of my cookie preoccupation. And as the thinking residue from the cookies evaporated out of my brain, the sensation of tension resolved in my shoulder.
Since then, I have repeatedly noticed the co-arising of a thought, an emotion, and the sensation of muscular tension. In fact, I have never noted any significant mental or emotional activity that is not accompanied by the sensation of shortening and narrowing. And this goes for not only the lie down but also while doing zazen (zazen for me is the same as a lie down except that I'm in full lotus and somehow more formal). I have concluded that shortening and narrowing, thinking, and emotions involvement are all part of the same process. This is just so amazing to me. I guess it reflects the deep seated assumptions I have about the duality of mind/body.
I should also mention I love the lie down because I stand a lot at work (I have a stand-up desk, see previous essays on the dangers of sitting). After a few hours it's just nice to lie down for a few minutes. It's rejuvenating Yes, my co-workers do roll their eyes and shake their heads when they see me lying on the floor in the office. Ok, the truth is I feel a bit self-conscious. It's not the lying down that is a bit embarrassing, it's that I'm doing nothing.
So I love the lie down because:
-it has taught me about the lack of utility in seeing the mind as different from the body.
-it's rejuvenating.
-it's fascinating and very entertaining
-it has helped me give up some of my shortening and narrowing.
-it is completely safe and easy.
-I'm complying with my AT teachers recommendations.
-along with a walk, it is the most wholesome way to spend a break during days of long zen sittings.
I'm not sure if there is a point at which the lie down is not still recommended. But I can say that my AT teacher, with many years experience running a teacher training program, still does it regularly.
Physically, it is pretty straight forward. Lie on your back with a paperback book under your head. A firm surface is best, padded enough not to be uncomfortable but firm enough to provide clear feedback. I use a yoga mat or a carpeted floor. Knees bent, feet flat on the floor. Eyes open so that I can see some of my body.
From there, I can have read a variety of instructions. Robert Richover has an interview podcast with a teacher who gives what sounds like a guided meditation.
It has also been recommended to me that I run through the basic directions: "Let the neck be free to let the head go forward and up, let the torso lengthen and widen, let the knees go forward and away, release the ankles to let the heals drop."
I've also heard a recommendation to release any tension or holding that might be found. I've tried that but I always get confused and tired after a while. I end up asking questions such as "Is this really tension?" "How do I get rid of it?" "What is so bad about tension anyway?" "Can I really trust what my opinions are of what I'm feeling?" But my real problem with trying to relax some part of me is that another tension inevitably pops up. Smack down one and another pops up somewhere else. But truly, I have very little insight. Perhaps I'm too lazy to try to relax. Maybe I'm just too old to bother, and I don't even have enough self respect to care. Oh well...
Here is what I do. I start with inhibiting of any end-gaining. And then I recite the directions as above. But then I focus on trying not to do anything. And if I think I've managed to do that then I try not to do that either. But to say I don't do anything is not quite accurate. I'm not doing much, and it may be easy for you, but it seems a bit tricky to me.
I'm not sure how often to do the lie downs, I do this once or twice a day. I've heard that it is important that it be done twice a day. But if you don't have time to do it two times a day, if you are simply too busy, then you must do it three times a day. It seems to work best if I do it before I do something, because if I try to do a lie down after I do something else I end up not doing the lie down at all.
I love the lie down. The more I do it the more I like it. You would think that since I'm lying flat on the floor, totally supported, that there would be no muscle tension at all. Just some effort, now and then, to breath. But there are all kinds of odd things going on. I don't really trust my ideas about what those sensations mean, but it feels like muscles tightening and relaxing. Mostly in my shoulders and back and neck. A lot of the sensations produce a stimulus to do something, in particular to relax. So it's really fun to try just to watch the sensations and to watch the impulse to do something. They come and go and never seem to last very long. After a while there is the sensation of "ownership" or "investment" in my body as a whole. A few times it has felt as if my body was flattening out over the whole floor. In any event, I think the whole lie down thing is fun.
At first, there is often a recurrent thought that "Is it time to get up yet? Isn't that enough?" Sometimes I just get up spontaneously. Mostly, I try to not get up until I don't care any more. Soon after the idea that I could lie here forever pops into my mind, I get the idea that this would be a nice time to take a nap. And this just isn't a nice place to nap - I've tried - so I get up. So usually I'm up after five to 15 minutes.
Standing after a lie down is a delicious experience. I feel so tall, and it's always very obvious that the lie down is a great thing to have done.
That's my experience. Maybe I'm an odd duck as some have suggested. I've recommended the lie down to my brother, who has recurrent low back pain. Most people consider him well adjusted. He says he tried it briefly, but he says it's too boring. That is shocking for me to hear. I don't think it's boring at all! All these thoughts! Emotions! and a symphony of bodily sensations that is ever changing! And it takes a lot of work to resist the impulse to do something. I get the impulses to concentrate my mind, impulses to try to relax some sensation I think is undesirable, impulses to get up and get back to work, impulses to try to straighten something that feel crooked. There is lots going on! I've never felt bored.
Doing the lie down between long sittings is wonderful. If I put my body on a cushion for a long time, exposed to constant gravity, any shortening or narrowing seems to become "locked in". As this becomes chronic I'm not always aware of it. I do get pain, usually, at some point, but it is not always clear to me where the shortening/narrowing is exactly. The lie downs are so nice because the spine is in the same, "upright" position, but there is no gravity. Without the stimulus of gravity I respond and use my self differently. I can look at my use with fresh eyes and give up unnecessary effort. In effect I reset myself. It's really wonderful. I suppose one could do zazen while lying down in between sittings, but hey, this is break time right? Take a breather, yo.
The most interesting part of the lie down, for me, is observing the unity of mind and body. I first noticed this durring a lie down that I was doing in between sitting during a seven day Zen retreat a few years ago. I was lying down and I started thinking about something, probably chocolate cookies. Suddenly I would realize I was swept away with my thinking. At the point that I realized I was thinking - at the point I "woke up" - I obtained a retrograde memory of my shoulder becoming tighter and tighter as I was thinking about cookies. In fact, partly it was the sensation of my shoulder getting tighter that awakened me out of my cookie preoccupation. And as the thinking residue from the cookies evaporated out of my brain, the sensation of tension resolved in my shoulder.
Since then, I have repeatedly noticed the co-arising of a thought, an emotion, and the sensation of muscular tension. In fact, I have never noted any significant mental or emotional activity that is not accompanied by the sensation of shortening and narrowing. And this goes for not only the lie down but also while doing zazen (zazen for me is the same as a lie down except that I'm in full lotus and somehow more formal). I have concluded that shortening and narrowing, thinking, and emotions involvement are all part of the same process. This is just so amazing to me. I guess it reflects the deep seated assumptions I have about the duality of mind/body.
I should also mention I love the lie down because I stand a lot at work (I have a stand-up desk, see previous essays on the dangers of sitting). After a few hours it's just nice to lie down for a few minutes. It's rejuvenating Yes, my co-workers do roll their eyes and shake their heads when they see me lying on the floor in the office. Ok, the truth is I feel a bit self-conscious. It's not the lying down that is a bit embarrassing, it's that I'm doing nothing.
So I love the lie down because:
-it has taught me about the lack of utility in seeing the mind as different from the body.
-it's rejuvenating.
-it's fascinating and very entertaining
-it has helped me give up some of my shortening and narrowing.
-it is completely safe and easy.
-I'm complying with my AT teachers recommendations.
-along with a walk, it is the most wholesome way to spend a break during days of long zen sittings.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)