While looking into the story of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan situation, I noticed an interesting piece on Salon.com by Christopher Hitchens linked to from the Wikipedia entry.

This piece is quite critical of the Dalai Lama, having read it and few other pieces by Christopher I’m becoming convinced that he’s performing us all a great service. I find that he is critical of media and public figures, I think that given the way we tend to build up and idolise public figures we need someone playing Devils Advocate to drag them back down off the pedestal.

The problem with building up a person (public figure or not) to huge adoration is that when the things about them that we didn’t previously know become known the adoration swings the other way and people start to feel just as strongly, but negatively.

It’s as if we forget that they are simply human beings with the same imperfections and flaws and foibles as us. I know there’s a sentiment that seems to think that because they’re in the public eye they should somehow be perfect; well sorry, get real, these people are humans too. Why are we so surprised when we find that out?

The problem I have with the adulation these people receive, is that people would be much better off focussing on their own problems and spiritual practices; mainly because, while the opinions of spiritual leaders and many celebrities and politicians are useful and helpful, ultimately we have to settle on our own answers.  If you’re slavishly following the opinions of another person over your own, who controls your development and ultimately your destiny? Not you, that’s for sure.

Or as the Buddha put it before his death:

“Be a light unto yourself; betake yourselves to no external refuge. Hold fast to the Truth. Look not for refuge to anyone besides yourselves.”

I’ve talked about my views on the finger pointing at the moon before, but this was a nice surprise.  I’ve been reading “The Religion of The Samurai”, a treatise on Zen written in 1913 by by Kaiten Nukariya.
There is a section on why scripture is no more than waste paper, which echoes my sentiments, though I personally feel that this sentiment extends far beyond the Buddhist scriptures to all religious scriptures regardless of creed or canon:  They’re a nice place to start, but you wouldn’t want to live there.

This quote is from the beginning of Chapter 3:

“Zen is based on the highest spiritual plane attained by Shakya Muni himself. It can only be realized by one who has attained the same plane. To describe it in full by means of words is beyond the power even of Gotama himself. It is for this reason that the author of Lankavatara-sutra insists that Shakya Muni spoke no word through his long career of forty-nine years as a religious teacher, and that of Mahaprajñaparamita-sutra also express the same opinion. The Scripture is no more nor less than the finger pointing to the moon of Buddhahood. When we recognize the moon and enjoy its benign beauty, the finger is of no use. As the finger has no brightness whatever, so the Scripture has no holiness whatever. The Scripture is religious currency representing spiritual wealth. It does not matter whether money be gold, or sea-shells, or cows. It is a mere substitute. What it stands for is of paramount importance. Away with your stone-knife! Do not watch the stake against which a running hare once struck its head and died. Do not wait for another hare. Another may not come for ever. Do not cut the side of the boat out of which you dropped your sword to mark where it sunk. The boat is ever moving on. The Canon is the window through which we observe the grand scenery of spiritual nature. To hold communion directly with it we must get out of the window. It is a mere stray fly that is always buzzing within it, struggling to get out. Those who spend most of their lives in the study of the Scriptures, arguing and explaining with hair-splitting reasonings, and attain no higher plane in spirituality, are religious flies good for nothing but their buzzing about the nonsensical technicalities. It is on this account that Rin-zai declared:  ‘The twelve divisions of the Buddhist Canon are nothing better than waste paper.’”

This sentiment is why I have little time for religious debates or the technicalities of scripture, stop arguing over trifles in books of dubious authorship, we know we need to progress spiritually … so get on with it!

The Religion of The Samurai is available for download here.

I noticed today that the subject of religion in UK schools has hit the news again, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) as suggested that religious figures could visit schools and that schools could have prayer rooms.

From the Times:

“Imams, rabbis, priests and preachers from other faiths could be invited into state schools to provide religious instruction to pupils who want it, under controversial reforms to faith education.

The National Union of Teachers (NUT) is also recommending that schools provide “private prayer space” for pupils of all faiths, recognise the holy days of world religions, allow school uniforms and food to reflect “religious requirements” and turn the daily act of a worship in schools into “inclusive school assemblies”.”

I have to say I don’t agree, my own view is that the trappings of religion have no place whatsoever in state schools.  The education and environment in state schools should be entirely secular and practical in nature, in addition I feel that if children are to be taught about their religion then it should be put in context with other faiths and religious themes should be taught from a wholly neutral standpoint.

Or maybe the real reason that UK religious leaders have been pushing this line with the NUT is that when you do teach religions side by side, objectively, the result might be secularism or a person finding (as I have) that an individual, personalised, approach is more satisfying that precooked dogma.

For me, questioning is a large part of spirituality, I feel that an unexamined belief is not worth holding.  That’s a large part of what I like about Buddhism, that spirit of enquiry and examination, in fact I was pleasantly surprised to find a virtual Sangha in Second Life which feels exactly the same way.

The Skeptical Buddhists Sangha is a place for Buddhists (and anyone else who wants to drop in and talk on the subject) to meet in Second Life.   I have to say it’s very useful to have them there, I’m finding that Second Life is a very useful tool for allowing communities to form and interact in a new way that I’ve not quite seen anywhere else.  I’ve been involved in some truly stimulating discussion meetings in the Sangha and have to say it’s certainly helped me along the path.

As an aside, I’m finding Second Life to be more useful when viewed as an enhancement to my Real Life and given a balance with that as appropriate.  I try not to spend more time there than I feel appropriate and always try to bear in mind my reasons for being there.

I was doing push hands in my Tai Chi class tonight, I’m starting to understand what they mean when they say you can get in your own way. Slavish adherence to the form and the idea of a set of rules tends to get you pushed over.

It reminds me of a couple of quotes, first it Bruce Lee “The man who is really serious, with the urge to find out what truth is, has no style at all. He lives only in what is.”, the other is an old Zen quote “If you meet the Buddha on the path, kill him”. It’s gotten me thinking, can slavish adherence to the Buddhist scriptures in fact get in the way or progress?

We all know the old line about the flexible reed bending in the wind but the tree breaking, I think this is something we need to be reminded of from time to time in our practice. We need to move beyond orthodoxy in order to really fulfill ourselves as spiritual seekers, I know there are many paths that claim to have all the answers, I don’t think that that claim can be made and the claimant expect to keep any real credibility.

I personally think that the best attitude is the one my Tai Chi teacher takes, that he too, for all his very considerable prowess, is still a student.

I was thinking about writing a little about Christmas and Buddhism, but found that others have already done the job and done it better than I could have. In true geek tradition, I won’t waste time reinventing the wheel, but I’ll simply link to them.

First up is the Precious Metal blog, I enjoyed this post and like the way he points out the common ground between our two paths.

Secondly I’d like to share this article from the About Ulverston website. I especially liked the use of a parallel with Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, very nicely done.

Finally, I’d just like to take this chance to wish everyone everywhere a happy Christmas and a great New Year.

I was once advised to consider spiritual writings as a raft or coracle. Let’s imagine the challenges faced by someone starting out on a contemplative path as a wide river, in order to cross it the learner uses their chosen spiritual system to build a coracle; once across the river, they can start exploring. But, the important part is not to drag the coracle around with you, it’ll only slow you down.

It’s a good point, the teachings of a spiritual system are useful as a starting place for our own meditations and thoughts, but they are not the be all and end all. I personally feel that our daily experiences provide many valuable lessons, but the mindset the you approach it in is more important than the dogma you approach it from.

One of the things about Zazen meditation, is you’re not really supposed to do it for a reason, you do it for it’s own sake. When you actually stop and think about it, that’s a far more balanced approach. Imagine doing the taji from with the intent solely of completing the form, that’s to miss the point, the magic of the form is in doing it! Even with gym work, the treasures are found along the way, in each rep, not at the end of it.

I find it increasingly strange the way we do this, focus on the future and the destination, ignoring the moment, then we wonder where all the time has gone. As if we’re travelling our lives, but not living them. Does anyone else feel like this?

I was having a nose round looking at Contemplative Spirituality the other day, this sounds pretty general, but is more used in Christian terms and was once known as “Christian Mysticism”.  To my eyes, it seems that it’s more about getting a direct experience with the eternal, or the divine if you’d prefer.  Meditation is a major tool, but the scriptures and the  general apparatus of the  mainstream church seem to have a less exalted place there,  the emphasis is on direct experience.

This sounds quite a lot like Zen and Taoism, which I find welcome, I’ve always considered it necessary to decide for yourself what you believe, scripture has it’s place, but your spiritual practice in the moment should have the emphasis and you should always examine everything you’re told critically.

I see that Contemplative Spirituality has been condemned by some as dangerous, as it takes the focus away from scripture and more to your own experience, well I suppose if you’ve got a lot invested in the idea of a spiritual middle man or you are the middle man then contemplative traditions of all kinds are a definite threat.

It seems to me that a lot of religion can be focussed to much on the ends, not the journey.  I think we lose a lot that way, the journey is enormously rewarding, and when you do spiritual practice with an aim in mind you lose something from it.

I’m going to revisit the topic of a previous post, I intend to make a habit of this when I think I have a bit more to say on the matter.

Many systems, be they religious, secular or whatever have people who will hold that only a system must be “authentic”, for example, I was taught Cheng Man-Ch’ing style Tai Chi. This is quite a controversial style, as it was derived from the Yang family style without their authorisation. So it can be argued to be not “authentic”. Yet the man who taught me is undeniably effective in applying it, it is most certainly effective, I know he’s sparred and competed with it.

So why push this concept of authentic? I feel it can be a combination of ego on the part of the student, not just of martial arts, but also of religion, and clever salesmanship of their ‘brand’ on the part of the school/church. But also of the attractive desire, to pass the responsibility of deciding what we believe or know to be effective to someone else, and to have the reassurance of a collective.

Let’s think about that a minute. If you do the freethought thing, criticising and deciding for yourself, you always have to face the distinct possibility of being out in the cold, out on a limb, or under fire for heresy. Cheng Man-Ch’ing did his own thing, and the results are still controversial today, never mind the flak Darwin drew for thinking outside the box.

Maybe it is easier to keep your head down, but without people who are prepared to wander off into places marked “Here Be Dragons” and make their own way, we’d probably still be sitting in caves.