Skip to content

Tag: Ramakrishna

The Plan It Planet

What does it mean to have a plan? I used to date someone who had scheduled the vacations they wanted and were going to take up to five years in advance. As if in the course of living life, day to day, in the period between then and now, the world and their attitude toward it, their wants and desires, their situation in any way, would not have changed. Like parents who buy a Subaru because they believe it will be the perfect car to pass off to their children when they are of driving age. Never mind that hopefully in the 15 years you own that car that automotive technology will not advance to such a point that your current vehicle will be hopelessly outdated and definitely out of style.

Sure, it makes sense to store your nuts for the winter, so that when that time of your discontent (or retirement or inability to continue working frenetically) inevitably comes that you and yours will have at least a store of protein to consume. But even though we watch our grandparents and parents make that slow decline into autumn, it’s difficult to imagine the scope and breadth of shit you’re going to have to adjust for as you get older. For one thing, despite what you do to delay it, old age, infirmity, and decrepitude are coming. For you, just like everyone else. Regardless of how gentle or fiercely you go into that good night, the darkness is going to get you. It’s just a question of time. And time, of course, is relative. Eihei Dogen, the Japanese Zen master, predated the theories of quantum physics by about 600 years when he suggested that the “passage” of time is imaginary. There is only the current moment, in which (and only in which) all the future and past exist. Time travel is impossible, if only because when you choose a past or future to revisit, whose time is it? You are not the same person you were five minutes ago, let alone when you attended elementary school or who you will be when you grow up and out of it. To suggest otherwise, to imagine yourself the same at 20 as at 50, is to, as Muhammad Ali quipped, “waste 30 years of your life.” Your purpose is to grow, to change. To grow old. To live and die. To borrow a finite amount of energy for a finite time, and then give it back.

You want to make the gods laugh, they say, make a plan. But “they” also say you should live as if you’re going to die tomorrow, but save as if you’re going to live forever. Forever, of course, being an impossible condition outside the controlling principles of cause and effect. In other words, not reality. We struggle to make a meaningful contribution to the world in less than 100 years. How much more difficult, depressing, soul-crushing, and ultimately useless is an infinite lifetime’s worth of failure?

But everybody’s supposed to have a plan, right? Especially, when they look to be doing something we disagree with, they’re supposed to have a Plan B. A backup, a strategy. But if you think about it, there has not been a single, 24-hour period of time for any being that ever existed or will exist where everything has gone the way they wanted or expected it.

So is the answer to let go of expectations? Forget the results and lose yourself in the doing? Maybe. Maybe not. Just like a car will only go so far on a half tank of gas, the human body and mind can only function for a limited number of miles without refueling or checking the engine lights. And preventative maintenance IS a plan, isn’t it? You gotta eat.

Maybe it’s more like a religion – in that EVERY religion, regardless of its number of adherents or how ironclad its promises or doctrine, is always just a single generation from extinction. We are all in that sense merely living from paycheck to paycheck. Even the most tight-fisted billionaire can lose it all in a few minutes on the stock market. It’s unpredictability that puts the living into a life. Otherwise, you might as well be an automaton serving a will greater than yourself with no time off for good behavior.

Honestly, what’s the difference anyway? If there IS a greater or higher purpose or being or driving energy or calling or destination, greater than you, right here and now, how would you recognize it when you saw it? Could you in fact even see it? How can you really come to grips with something truly extrasensory, extraordinary, superhuman?

Would you be able to determine whether that super-something was encouraging you, creating constant roadblocks, or simply laughing its divine ass off?

If you could interpret the language of the gods, could you then easily slip back into the linga franca of humanity, of mere mortal communication? Or would you be, like someone who is able to distinguish the fabric and meter of the universe while high on LSD, unable to translate your all-absorbing experience in the land and speech of the trip into your common, ordinary, mundane and altogether boring mother tongue?

Ultimately, does it really matter whether you have a solid plan? If you’re going to be alive, truly and absolutely alive in this moment, what difference does it matter what has happened, what you imagined you wanted to happen, what might happen, and what is possible? It’s not really like Sherlock Holmes quipped, that once you’ve eliminated the impossible, some part of the possible, no matter how impractical, must be the truth. The Truth, with a capital T, is that anything that can happen does happen. In fact, it’s already happening. Or you wouldn’t be able to think of it, or plan for it, or NOT plan for it.

They teach you in project management that planning is just a spoke in an ever-turning wheel that spins from through initiation through planning to execution, monitoring and closing. Not in big grandiose cycles, but in tiny, easily measurable segments. But keeping up with that rhythm isn’t as easy as it sounds. Far from it. The trick, if there is a trick at all – because a “trick” requires you to be a separate observer who thinks if they watch closely enough they can see the “secret” mechanics for how the master magician achieves their sleight of hand. Learning the trick means a denial of all magic altogether – including that magic that right now is considered science and therefore physiologically, psychologically, and metaphysically not only possible, but predictable. No the secret to the project cycle is that everything is infinitely small. So infinite, in fact, that it is finite. But measuring, as Sri Ramakrishna pointed out, is itself a tricky business. We are all just dolls made out of salt, who think by wandering out into the ocean we can accurately measure its salinity.

03 MAR 2025

Leave a Comment

Salt Dolls and Other Temporal Measures

In a dharma talk given July 15th for the New York Zen Center for Contemplative Care (as part of their Summer 2024 Commit to Sit program), Zen teacher Norman Fischer said something quite interesting and profound. He was discussing the viewpoint and attitude toward life of Zen master Tongen Harada Roshi, who although Japanese was of the same generation as Norman’s father (and my father, as well) born in the late 1920s. He observed that each generation, each culture, each country, has their own unique way of defining and understanding what it means to be human – and that once everyone from that generation is dead, there is no one who really understands that point of view and how it affected and influenced the lives those people led, the choices they made, or the way they looked at relationships, religion, spirituality, friendship, love, conflict, or any other profound lens for the human experience. Norman, now in his late 70s, also noted that his own generation, those who grew up in the 1960s and experienced that whole counter-culture, e.g., hippies, free love, exposure to Eastern religions, the anti-war movement, the Kennedy assassination, the “birth” of television, etc., would soon suffer the same fate. Likewise, each of us living now – my own Generation X, across continents, countries, and cultures, for example. It made me think that ultimately, that inability to really understand another generation’s “definition of human” was the real failing of the “hard” sciences of anthropology, archaeology, and history. After all, the truth of my humanity is not defined in what I write down, or the long-lasting artifacts I create. It’s something much more ephemeral: a feeling, a notion, a sense of ennui, angst, fear or hope that pervades how I think, who I think I am, what I think is important, and who I include or exclude. To think that we understand the “mind” of Julius Caesar by reading his battle journals, or Sigmund Freud by his technical interpretation of dreams, is an illusion. Perhaps a useful illusion, but given that it’s filtered through our own judgment and definition of humanity, hardly a “true” and “accurate” grokking of reality. Makes you wonder. We THINK we know so much. We BELIEVE the world is the way we think it is. We have no idea, really. And the more fractured we become in our own time and place, the more that bucket of water you draw from the ocean that you believe to be the wholeness of everything and true representation of the sea, seems so small, separate, distinct, and alien to the bucket of water I draw from the shore just a few miles further down the coast. Neither is the whole ocean.

18 JUL 2024

Leave a Comment

2. Pay attention

One book of Jiddu Krishnamurti’s lectures refers to the Flame of Attention, pointing out that the meaning of the word “attention” is a reminder of the perils of constant watchfulness – you must be “at-tension”, so at any moment you can react in a myriad of ways to any number of encroaching or interrupting signals. This peripatetic vigil, if not conducted carefully, can result in a huge, and probably considering the likelihood of perilous events pretty low, mostly hyper-prioritized and undue stress on the attendee. There is always the danger of micro-managing, even oneself. The trick, I think – and probably both Montaigne and Krishnamurti would agree – is to be aware, rather than attentive. To be conscious, if not fully cognizant. The Buddha and so many other spiritual guides suggest the same: to be in the world, but not of it, you must be fully open to the information constantly being presented, but you must learn to observe it and let it go. The instant I discovered this in Montaigne, the word mindfulness immediately came to mind. There is however so much psychobabble currently about mindfulness (in theory and practice) that it is in danger of becoming a parody of itself.

Pay attention, but don’t get lost in the details. That’s a hard thing for an ADHD hunter-gatherer to accomplish, particularly in our “busyness is holiness” and “look busy, the boss might be watching” Protestant-driven culture of work for work’s sake. We spend a lot of time talking but very little effort thinking about just breathing. Just this morning, I said to myself, until you change the way you hear, you can’t change the way you listen. Until you change the way you listen, you can’t change the way you see. Until you change the way you see, you can’t change the way you think. And until you change the way you think, you can’t change the world.

One of the duties of a Bard, as traditional defined in Celtic culture, is serving as the historian, the memory, of your own culture. This includes not only where it is today, but where it started, how it traveled the path from there to here, and what indicators point to where it might be in the future. A lot of emphasis is placed on remembering things: verse forms, definitions, cultural events – the usual hows, whys and wherefores. As someone trained in that tradition (I first became associated with official Bardic business as a member of both the Order of Bards, Ovates and Druids (OBOD) and Ár nDraíocht Féin (ADF) pagan (more accurately, neo-pagan) traditions. The ADF was not for me, but I did manage to digest and complete the OBOD’s Bardic grade lessons and complete the required initiation. Among a lot of pretty useless information (if only because it involved attempting to reconstruct a system based on a fantastic, romantic interpretation of a long-past reality, from a language and culture with which I had insufficient familiarity), there is at least the idea that someone is responsible for keeping an eye on everything that’s going on. This appeals to my distrust of cultural specialists; that the history of one thing should be detailed and kept “sacred” completely separately, and in isolation from, each other thing’s history – that there should ultimately be at the top a mere conglomeration, but no real sense of synthesis or, to borrow Buckminster Fuller’s term, synergy, has always seemed to fall flat.

Falling flat – now there’s an interesting concept. I immediately think of Hamlet’s mournful, “oh, how flat and unprofitable are the things of this world” and I want to say, “well, things are flat because you lack perspective.” Perspective, however, is not just the ability to see things from varying points of view. It is the desire to do so – and the belief that just as Ramakrishna put it, A lake has several ghâts. At one the Hindus take water in pitchers and call it ‘jal’; at another the Mussalmâns take water in leather bags and call it ‘pâni’. At a third the Christians call it ‘water’. Can we imagine that it is not ‘jal’, but only ‘pâni’ or ‘water’? How ridiculous! The substance is One under different names, and everyone is seeking the same substance; only climate, temperament, and name create differences.

 

Leave a Comment

Water seeks its own level

Water seeks its own level,
on a quest to find the sea;
The answers we seek taste of metal,
our understanding like liquid drawn from a well
that finds the hard edges
of knowing, the galvanized pail
holding the essence of our being
in one place, in this world.

What is outside this frame of steel,
this skeleton that time binds to this space?
To where are we going?
From where did we come?

What can we know of answers,
we who will be one day poured from this bucket
into the ocean?

What need is there of questions then,
when we are part of the wave?

And to those who are still on the shore, separate,
how shall we describe
what is gained, what is lost?

“Wherever I look, I see men quarrelling in the name of religion —
Hindus, Mohammedans, Brâhmos, Vaishnavas, and the rest. But they
never reflect that He who is called Krishna is also called Úiva, and
bears the name of the Primal Energy, Jesus, and Âllâh as well — the
same Râma with a thousand names. A lake has several ghâts. At one
the Hindus take water in pitchers and call it ‘jal’; at another the
Mussalmâns take water in leather bags and call it ‘pâni’. At a third
the Christians call it ‘water’. Can we imagine that it is not ‘jal’,
but only ‘pâni’ or ‘water’? How ridiculous! The substance is One
under different names, and everyone is seeking the same substance;
only climate, temperament, and name create differences. Let each man
follow his own path. If he sincerely and ardently wishes to know God,
peace be unto him! He will surely realize Him.” — Sri Ramakrishna
(1836-1886)

21 DEC 2004

Leave a Comment

Salt of the Earth

Imagine a person made completely out of salt.

If that person chooses to be immersed in the ocean, their very being is absorbed by the sea. Once their head is beneath the waves, no distinction can be made between their now dissolved form and the depths into which they have sojourned. Not even the ocean can separate itself again, saying “this minute portion of me is of that small salt doll, and the remainder is not”.

Such is the case, too, when a person approaches and begins to comprehend the infinite energy of the universe. Once an individual recognizes the eternal within themselves, the external sack of temporal cloth in which that eternal has been stored melts away, and only the infinite remains.

In either case, who is left to report, to return some answer to the question they originally set out seeking? And in what language could that answer be expressed, that those on the shore, whose toes scarcely dare to dip into the surf’s foam, would be able to understand?

Even the cleverest of parables fails. And to speak with the voice of the ocean itself is to be misunderstood as a overwhelming roar.

Leave a Comment

Who cries for the gods?

Who cries for the gods, who watch
as their intelligent design
is torn and sundered into pieces,
reviled and maligned?

Who cries for the gods, who listen
to the clamour of our voices,
each using free will as excuse
for all our selfish choices?

Who cries for the gods, who linger
in our churches, isolated
from the whole of our daily lives,
their message denigrated?

Who cries for the gods, forgotten
in our rush for selfish glory,
reduced to simple figureheads
and stuff of childrens’ stories?

Who cries for the gods, who hears
the sob of divine separation:
creatrix from created split
for profit and sensation?

Who cries for the gods, who wait
for us to listen once again,
and have all of eternity
to miss what might have been?

for Ramakrishna

21 JUL 2006

Leave a Comment

Roadside Attractions

If you see the Buddha by the roadside,
stop, and ask him how his day is going,
inquire if perhaps he might need a ride …
if you do not, there’s no way of knowing.

Give him a break, for a minute – don’t just
ask for yet another explanation,
without even smiling – you know, that must
make his a depressing situation.

After all, he’s here ’til we are all free –
judging by the state of things, a long time;
at night in his motel watching TV
does he shake his gold head and wonder why?

Of course, being beyond all the drama
helps; at least he’s not still just a lama…

(’cause nobody thinks they need hugs, either)

17 JUL 2003

But who cries for God? — Ramakrishna

Leave a Comment