Skip to content

Tag: participation

Gaining Experience Points

Assuming that simply being alive and making any kind of progress is a never-ending hamster wheel, an ouroboros where the outcome you worked diligently toward is swallowed up in the gaping maw of the next problem, challenge, or opportunity, there’s a certain point in any cycle where it seems unlikely that you’ll make it back around to the starting point. Think of it like that moment when the tilt-a-whirl hits its maximum spin and you hit the metal side of the car with a lurch in your stomach that anticipates but doesn’t quite expect the reverse cycle to kick off.

More often than not, those pause points or moments of relative uncertainty function as epiphany enablers. Like a song in a Broadway musical, they introduce plot devices that take you from one point-of-view (like you’re really mortal enemies) to one diametrically opposed (like now you’re madly in love), without the benefit of developmental dialog and/or theatrical business in between.

Given that, and in the absence of any solid way to measure evolution, how do you actually know you’re making any kind of progress whatsoever? Do the problems get smaller, does your calm take an increasingly larger percentage of your time, are your vital signs like blood pressure, sugar, and activity antibodies more in line with acceptable standards from reputable medical authorities?

A lot of the world’s spiritual traditions suggest that you don’t really know you’re making any headway until you stop thinking about making headway. The best of them even say that making progress is the easiest way to know you’re not making progress. In Soto Zen, for example, the practice is the outcome. You don’t meditate to transform yourself into an enlightened being, a bodhisattva, because you already are one. Just sitting, shikantaza in Japanese, is the enlightenment of just practicing. Shunryu Suzuki said we’re all perfect, we could just use a little improvement. Mac Rebennack might have agreed, saying “You’re on the right trip, but in the wrong car.” In any case, the trick is to arrive without travelling, right?

But what does that really mean? If there’s nowhere to go, and time is mere artificial construct, a house of mirrors reflecting forward and backward in the House of Now, then why are so many of us interested in self-improvement and self-awareness, and so battle-worn resisting self-interest, self-doubt, self-aggrandizement, and self-pity?

Self-help is a mega-million dollar industry built on the history of human fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of death, fear of not being enough, fear of dying without living. As if you had a choice. UG Krishnamurti, the other Krishnamurti, said we are all asking a question we already are able to answer. We just don’t like the answer – and want somebody else to tell us we don’t have to do any work on ourselves by ourselves. Once you stop asking questions, he said, you no longer need any answers. You just live. Until you don’t.

Do we really want to live forever? What for? What do you think you’ll get done in the next two to three hundred years that you haven’t managed to screw up already? We don’t want to learn, to become wise, to reach enlightenment. Because when we do, all the great religious traditions tell us we become one with the divine. That’s what atonement (at-one-ment) really means, after all. You can’t really take the salt back out of salt water once you’ve dissolved it. If you could, what’s the point? Isn’t that like imagining you get more than one once in a lifetime opportunity?

Once you get the chance to level up, some traditions say the best course is to hold off on that advancement until everyone else gets there too. But if you’ve ever played Dungeons & Dragons, you understand that the only way to not keep accumulating experience points is to die. It’s only when you’re dead that the rest of your squad has an opportunity to catch up with you. And some beings take a lot longer than others and gain points in different ways. We don’t all regenerate hit points or magic in the same way, nor do we advance levels at the same rate. In that respect, we’re not all created equal. Each of has our own set of skills, our selected bag of tricks, that give us a myriad of complex, complementary, and often contradictory means to accomplish our objectives. We don’t even necessarily have the same objectives – except of course to remain alive at the end of the quest.

You go with what you know. And you go into what you don’t know. And as is often said, unless you know where you’re going, there’s not much point in choosing who you need along for the journey. In the same way you don’t measure the quality of a goldfish by its ability to climb a tree, you don’t need an elephant to help you on a long sea voyage.

Sometimes, though, it’s the skills you don’t know you need in your party that make all the difference. Once again, Dunning-Kruger plays a part. If you don’t know anything, you don’t even know what you don’t know. So how do you know who should lead you, or when you need to lead, or follow?

You get to roll the dice. Isn’t that enough for now?

08 APR 2025

Leave a Comment

Give and Take

From Swami Satchidananda’s translation and commentary on the Bhagavad Gita:

Cherished by your spirit of sacrifice, the gods give you everything you want. (But remember) whoever receives gifts from the gods without offering anything back is a thief.

To take one hundred percent and give nothing in return is to be a thief.
To take one hundred percent and give only fifty percent is to be a debtor.
To take one hundred percent and give one hundred percent is to be a good business person.
To give one hundred percent and take only fifty percent is to be a righteous person.
To give one hundred percent and take nothing in return is to be a saint or a yogi.

We should always examine our transactions and discover in which category we put ourselves.

— Bhagavad Gita, Chapter Three, Verse Twelve

Leave a Comment

Upon Being Invited to Study the Great Books Online

Thanks for the invitation. I must say, having looked into facilitating my own Great Books curriculum at several times in the past, that the concept is neither unfamiliar to me, nor uninviting. However, my reason for declining at present has little to do with the scope of the program, but more with the medium. I have participated in a number of online study groups, interest groups, etc., over the past ten years, and have found that while they do promote a degree of intellectual stimulation, and do foster a sense of camaraderie among participants, they by their very nature limit the exchange of ideas because they have as their foundation a sense of anonymity. It is very easy to expound one’s ideas, and wax philosophic, in the vacuum of not having to look another person in the eye. It is gratifying, particularly to one’s ego, to have the group linger on a thread of your own creation for endless iterations. However, too often it seems that is where it ends. Having a cluster of pen-pals, so to speak, does not improve my opportunity to have intellectual (or otherwise stimulating) conversations in real life, with people that I encounter in the flesh on a daily basis. Without that level of personal contact, having an exchange of ideas to me is stale and flat.

I don’t say that this particular curriculum or this forum will lead to that end. For me, however, particularly since my own meaning of an educated liberal extends FAR beyond the narrow, and one might even say, self-destructive, confines of Western culture, that at this point in my life, your group is not for me. It smacks too much of knowledge for the sake of knowledge alone, as some kind of barometer by which one can compare one’s education to others and somehow feel more justified in holding opinions, and grasping the illusory reins of control over a life that to be understood must be tasted in the flesh, rather than by sucking the aged marrow from its volumes of bones.

That’s a long way of saying, thanks, but no thanks.

However, I wish you success in this venture, and again, appreciate the invitation.

Leave a Comment

My Generation Waits

They do not call us Boomers,
born too late to wear that name,
and Generation X we’re not
having slipped into life a bit too soon

Each generation bides its time
Seeking its voice and words to say
But in the waiting we seem stuck
Adrift in some self-wrought malaise

The roll of my peers, so much caught up
in decades outside our recall —

the sixties, that we barely saw

the seventies, our childhood strife

the eighties, when we came of age,
barely surviving the complaisance of greed

the nineties, that we’d lief forget

And in the absence of great cause,
we manufacture strife and angst
to disenfranchise our own selves,
disown our own, and silent, sleep

While other generations’ seers
and sages, poets, pens now silent, lost
await rebirth among our ranks

I call them out and wonder why
they do not answer, are not found:

Faulkner, Cummings, Hesse, Frost
Williams, Roethke, Breton, Plath
Lewis, Huxley, Sanburg, Hughes
Cassady, Steinbeck, Fleming, White
Eliot, Cocteau, O’Connor, Maugham

must you all wait, in restless graves,
denied rebirth this time around?

01 MAY 2004

Leave a Comment