Apology

The last time I was in India, my dearly beloved son Eyal asked me for - believe it or not - MORE PHILOSOPHY. Normally, I would do whatever is in my power to spare other humans from the weird workings of my own mind, but the young man actually asked for it. And then I thought that maybe one or two other people might be interested. (In other words, I figured - why make only one suffer, when I can do more?) So here are some thoughts that I have been writing for the past couple of weeks. Just in case you're interested.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

So I've been thinking. On the one hand, I keep talking about exploring into this philosophy - and on the other - Sivananda doesn't really go beyond the basics.

The thing is: somehow this "simple life" agrees with me in ways I don't begin to understand. I suspect there is a nomadic part of me that is happiest when I am unattached and moving; and I know that I will always wonder if that part is genetic or acquired (as if that mattered). There is something un-nerving in feeling a surge of joy and realizing that it is just for going away from HERE, wherever HERE may be. This is especially disturbing when you have children, who would appreciate it if you would stay put for a little while longer. John Steinbeck wrote: "once a bum, always a bum" - and my own personal experience would prove him right. So this would be by way of apology.

The point of just living like this, even without actively studying anything, is that you learn more about what is really important (at least on a subjective level) - just for the sheer experience of settling down to a life with few possessions (no more than you can carry), in a land where poverty is the norm. You get a chance to look reality in the eye.

Funny thing, reality. I know that the common reaction to what I am doing is: "she's running away from reality".

Define reality, please.

The people who live in the near-by mud-brick houses with palm-leaf roofs would just love to "get back" to what we commonly call reality. They have no idea that they are living an illusion in an un-real world.

Personally, I think it's a real hoot for a guy who's sitting in a concrete & metal building on a plastic chair in polyester clothes to be talking to me about reality. Especially if he's dealing in virtual option fortunes or making movies.

But my point is not that "what I am living is reality and you are not". My point is that none of it is real. It's all Illusions, just like Richard Bach said. He actually has a bit there where he compares life to a movie, and you just choose whichever feature you prefer. I choose this one.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

First point:

Nothing is real.

Buddhism and Hinduism flat-out say so, and so does the Course in Miracles. You can more or less find the same implied in other philosophies, I think.

The idea is that everything - all you can possibly conceive of - is a fabrication of your own mind. You do not even know what or who you really are, because you are so bogged down in your illusions and fantasies and fairy tales that you have been told since you were born.

The first immediate conclusion to this is: everything, with no exception whatsoever - EVERYTHING is open to question. Absolutely NOTHING is sacred. This is the basis.

It's really scary having nothing at all to believe. Imagine jumping from a plane with no parachute, and then seeing that there is no ground to fall on. Should you be scared that there is nothing to break your fall, or relieved that there is nothing to crash on?

Second point:

Well, where does the first point leave us? The Hindus (and the Course In Miracles) say that the only reality is God, or Brahman, or Love - call it what you will.

Now, God is a very tricky subject, because every religion has at least one (except Buddhism, which we will look at in just a minute). But the God of the Old Testament is a jealous one that threatens to destroy anyone who insults him, and the God of various Christian faiths will send you to hell in a New-York minute if you don't follow his rules.

These Gods have wants (they want people to do things). They are supposed to be able to work miracles, but at the same time are unable to control their followers (or else why is hell necessary at all?) Something doesn't make sense here.

The concept that I am following says that ITT just IS. ITT has no wants, no needs, no likes or dislikes. ITT is the only reality there is, and we are part of ITT, whether we realize this or not, just like waves in the ocean, if each one believes that it is a separate entity.

Now, if this ITT is so over-all real, then nothing is impossible to ITT. By the simple act of thinking about something - you make it possible.

So if it is that simple, then why is it so complicated? Before you can answer that question, you have to look at a few more basics. Such as - if ITT is all that is real, then what am I, and what are you?

Look at the wave again. Is the wave part of the ocean, or the ocean part of the wave? Which is more real - the water or the wave? (Not my original statement, I know.) And is the wave really an individual entity, separate from the other waves, and from the ocean?

This is not to say that I know the answer, but an exploration.

Point number 3:

The Course In Miracles says that the One And Only ITT (or Godd) is actually nothing but Love. The Hindus call it Existence-Knowledge-Bliss, and when you get into it, you find that they are talking about the same thing, with different names. This is where you can get really suspicious of all religions everywhere, because – lo and behold, no matter what religion you get into - the deeper you go into the definition of God, the closer you get to the exact same definition. Even the Buddhists, who declare that there is no God, speak of attaining a state in which you know everything, see everything, and are in a perpetual state of joy, love and well-being. The Hindus consider this state to be one with God - isn't that a coincidence?

 
So, we have 3 basic pointers to a reality which we will call God (because everybody else does) or ITT (because I like that). But we will not attach any attributes or characteristics to this Godd without examining them first to see if they make sense to us (so you can forget about keeping Kosher or genuflecting). Now, Hinduism and the Course In Miracles have as their stated goal to unite with this God and become one with ITT, as they say. The Buddhists actually have the same goal, with a different name. They talk about reaching a state of divine bliss, and who is to say that Godd is an entity and not a state of being? If Godd is so all-encompassing then ITT is neither, because no definition can set the boundaries of what ITT is. ITT is – by definition - indefinable.

And everybody wants to get there. This, by the way, is actually the first reason that I prefer Eastern religion to Western. Judaism and Christianity see God as a separate entity, and declare their goal to serve Him (and why not Her, I'd like to know?). Hinduism not only declares it's goal as BEING God, it also declares that each and every one of us already IS. I know that if you dig deep enough you will probably find the same idea in Western religion, but I'm lazy by nature. And I like the idea of a mentality that sets it's goal as being happy rather than one that sets it's goal as service (although they come out the same in the end, as we will see). At least you don't have to explain why being happy is a good idea. I like happy.

The rest of religion, any religion - just deals with ways and means of achieving the goal. And again, the Eastern philosophies seem to have more straight-forward methods than the West. But they all, without exception, agree that getting there involves considering your fellow-man as dearly as you consider yourself, if not more so.

But doing that does not mean disregarding yourself or belittling yourself or making yourself suffer. The idea is that you are Godd, but then, so is everybody else. The perception they are going for is one of seeing yourself as part of everything and everyone else you see, and seeing perfection in it all. When you've managed to do that, you've got it made.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

So, what I've written here is a sort of an exploration, a thinking-out-loud, of the philosophy that I'm trying to work with. It is there in the back of my head most of the time, accompanying just about everything that I am doing. So I thought I would let you know about it, and see if you have any comments.