Don't forget to say hello to the cloud...

...yea that's right. The cloud. The cloud is in that bottle of water you drank today, it is also in the icecream that I ate yesterday.. the cloud is even in that glass of tea you had a few days ago.


"One cause can never be enough in order to bring about an effect"
The reason why I had icecream yesterday wasn't just because I wanted to have it. The reasons behind why I actually got it are infinite. For example, first my parents had to create me; I needed to develop a liking of icecream; I needed a car to drive to get the icecream; a store needed to exist in order for me to get the icecream; a cow needed to be involved for me to get the icecream. I can go on and on...


To reach Nirvana we need to understand and realize that what we are looking for has been within us this whole time.
When I read this part of the chapter I immediately thought of the Wizard of Oz. When the whole gang is standing there waiting to ask the wizard to grant them their wishes, the little green man behind the curtain is revealed. They then realize that there is no wizard that can help them. What they needed had been inside of them all along.
Once we recognize this, we will be free.


As the reading states, "We are Nirvana".

Are we here or not? Both yes and no.

I got several ideas out of this reading.

The omnipresent idea of non being and being were mentioned, as well as the important point about taking a class on Buddhism on page 21. It states that "To speak about or distribute ideas is not the study or practice of Buddhism." It's similar to the Tao Te Ching saying that "The more we know, the less we understand."

It is only through experience and understanding of those experiences, one make a marked understand of not only their lives, but also within a certain extent, the universe as well.

Also, it mentioned that without certain actions, aspects of our existence/non-existence would fail to manifest.

What I got out of it: There is a constant and steady flow and the world is made up of actions, reasons, and varied consciousnesses within that flow. Once we realize this, all will fall into place.

Dogs & Reincarnation, Mongolian Style

I was doing some research on my Mongol philosophy presentation, and I ran into this bit about dogs. Since we mentioned dogs and reincarnation briefly a couple classes ago, I thought this might be of interest for general background info on culture and tradition.

"Dogs are mentioned very often in famous historical documents and literary epics as "Dogs are the most loyal friends. They will never change poor master for a rich herder, grown by poor nomad it will never follow even a khaan." There was even a poem composed by Sandag, a famous poet of 19th century "Praise to Dog"

Ch. Jugder, well known expert on Medieval Mongolian philosophy, notes that "Mongols deeply respected and revered their dogs and the dogs never betrayed their masters."

Such respect for dogs even found reflection in the legislation. The Codes of Law from 1640 and 1709 (enforced and observed until 1921) both contain provisions prohibiting to kill or beat dogs.

Dogs, similar to horses, were buried on the hills so that people do not walk on their remains. Dog's tail was cut off and placed under the head. A piece of fat was put into their mouth and words of wishes to be born as a human being in the next life were said before burial."

'Mongolian Dog' (breed not 'registered') & child

(from Mongolia Today http://www.mongoliatoday.com/issue/8/dog_intro.html )

Words, windchimes, outer space

Despite the grounding of self-awareness, the people that spin past your periphery will inform how you interpret so much of your experience in the human context. We are an intuitive species, like every other, but that is easy to forget as we move through the evolution of communication. Words have more power than is generally acknowledged these days. How they are used can warp or elevate a message, and how we experience those words can be the foundation of expectation, as well. The word "spirituality" is a prime example. I do not like to inhabit many of the biases that surround words, but even I am subject to a knee-jerk reaction to that one. Spirituality for me triggers connotations of cultural blurring with a presumptive slant. Dreamcatchers and mantras and totems via New Age gift shops steeped in incense. Ethereal music (plucked sitars, echoing flutes, the occasional punctuation of a shimmery windchime). Crowds of retirees in loose Eastern garb doing Tai chi on the well-groomed lawn of some public park.

I've always felt a vague uneasiness toward those implications, and have kept my distance from discussion of "spirituality" because of that discomfort. It is a shame to me that I am subject to that interpretation of a perfectly functional word. "Spirituality" did nothing to deserve my wariness. I'm really not sure why I have a problem with people seeking some measure of peace through practices that have endured through the centuries. Well, I suppose I have some idea- the modern portrayal of these old ways smacks of commercialization, and the only way I keep the dignity of those practices in mind is to engage in them very quietly. Still, I need to make my peace with the people who dive into these ways with exuberance. That sort of energy is nigh impossible to sustain, and I'd like to be glad for them while they inhabit it. I need to remember the quiet that I prefer to dwell in, and let those people wheel above me on their dizzy spirals. I want to be treading the same middle ground when they plunge back down to earth and reassess.

So. The reading. (Bet you thought I'd forgotten. Well, yes, I did). This reading appealed to me in a very settled sense. The material was far-reaching and provocative, but the author's voice struck a very friendly chord in me. His simultaneous respect and skepticism for Huston Smith was a welcome balance, and I appreciated the deliberate honesty with which he approached the material at hand. I was also very drawn to Smith's celebratory stance on religion. I do not subscribe to a particular faith, as I've said here before, but I very much enjoyed the warmth of Smith's embracing perspective. He did not isolate or alienate, though religion has been a consistent excuse to do just that throughout history. I also appreciated his emotional response to science, and complete willingness to examine that emotion. It is very easy to hang onto your reactions and never look at them from another facet of perspective. Lately I've been thinking about the concept of wisdom and its presence in all stages of life (far beyond the wise old elder caricature). Smith's wisdom is a very comfortable sort, for me. Lofty wisdom is another thing I associate with commercialized spirituality (guided retreats to Eastern temples, etc) but I don't think it will ever have the resonance of a bright and humble awareness.

I don't know if I've said this before, but a friend used to send my philosophical ramblings, and eventually I told him that to think about how we are living is intoxicating and can lift us to trembling transcendence...but if you go out on a night when there are few clouds and look up, the stars will shake you down to stillness in their indifferent endurance. When you are dizzy with the cognitive high of pure thought, go out and look up. That is all I feel I need right now. Beyond the boundaries of words and what we do with them, we are still existing. Look at that. Just look at it. Eventually you will go back inside and slip back into a more nearsighted and comfortable state of being, and that is good, too.

Ones Journey & Self Worth

I thought this read was enticing and I think that part of what the writing is meant to do. Hogan's writing was to explain an experience of a path one took to gain enlightenment. The section of this chapter where he explains Smith's experiences and means he took to gain enlightenment.
Smith had experienced what he calls his most important mystical experiences. I agree with him that entheogens do not produce a spiritual path, but they can give one a glimpse and the feel of spirituality for a short-term period.
"spirituality should be the transformations of one's whole life."
I believe that when one takes on the belief that entheogens can create a realm that one can live and produce a spiritual life as a whole is false. this is where people fall into the trap at times when they begin to believe that the state of mind one reaches when on a etheogen could be permanent. It could be a spiritual awaking but fallowing the path of trying to stay in a permanent state from the entheogen is dangerous to the mind body and soul. Smiths says that he found his experience and that he needs not enter that realm again. His answers were answered on a different level and recognized that he need not abuse the drug but be content with what he gained from the experiences.
I like how he sees enlightenment as an "ideal" or "a quality of life". It may just be true that true enlightenment is a realization of becoming one with who, what you are, one with the environment and everything around you. To carry ones self in a holistic manner free from the strains and boundaries of our mind and physical matters.

I also wanted to touch on what he wrote about science. As a child smith truly loved science, it gave people a longer life and discovered things most would not imagine. Its truly a great gift what our minds offer to us. Though i believe that science has taken us to a dark room, a slow destruction. science as he puts it is "an object" it has manifested into a way to deny what is natural to us and has created a mind set of competition, money, power, poverty, and erases the natural connection and flow that we as humans that are part of the earth are responsible for. We live higher that any other beings, we take for granted the earth, we forget that we live on a planet that is unstable. We live without consequence's because we believe that whatever problem arises science can fix it and we will be able to live on as a forever surviving race. We cannot let science answer all of our questions we must take it upon ones self to answer the questions within ourselves. Without this the journey is already made and in a sense ended for them, before that began. Science is out of balance, it has created a failing earth, and self destruction of our environment and ourselves. I don't want to be misconstrued science is a great benefit I think it just needs find its balance.
I guess this was a bit of an unorganized rant.....

Philosophy - A Perennial View ?

I felt that the most interesting portion of this reading was the fact that this term "perennial Philosophy" kept coming up. Perennial can mean lasting a lifetime, or having an extended life, it is amusing to me that the writer would describe a "perennial" Philosophy, which would mean that in his view there is a philosophy that has been lasting throughout a lifetime or several lifetimes. I would have to agree with the "idea" of a generic umbrella like philosophy that has been passed down from generation to generation, a "perennial" philosophy of course I feel could change and alter in its intricacies but maintain its general "focus". I wonder if our Philosophic pursuits are as flawed as the reading points out science can be by taking the analysis of things to the point where they just become objects....like our pursuit of something more is so broken down to its very bare bones essence that it is laid out like an object or goal. Do we ponder and wonder to know or is it to break things down to the point where they cease to be whole and instead become pieces shattered on the solidity of our philosophical pursuits? I don't know.

Therefore I ask not to dissemble the whole, but to make it clear, in making it clear, however am I breaking it down? The Perennial Philosophy of life. "Why am I here?, What Is My Purpose?, Is there a Point? and if so WHY?" The very beginning of the most basic philosophy is questioning everything, like a toddler who has just learned to ask why and persists with it until the parent finally says irritably or resignedly "I dont know" or "It Just Is" . I felt that the reading was correct in pointing out that Science is and isn't the perfect model for truth .

- http://www.curiokitty.com/images/mine/Good_evil_after.jpg

Another point that stuck with me was the acceptance of "evil" or Natural Evil, Basic Evil, Primitive Evil, Evil in essence or however you want to break it down. I have to agree with the idea and points made about evil , however , I feel that it is an inaccurate boxed view of evil. Conceptually, we as humans decide typically that evil is anything that is different from the accepted view of the majority. Evil could be a person who writes with their left hand, Evil could be someone of a different religion or race, Evil could be an animal that we do not understand or looks foreign and alien to us. Evil is a coping device for the "wrongs" in the world. Events occur and the results of said events are not by their very cause evil, it is a concept we put to it. I feel like we diverged from the original idea of complementary elements in the world, male and female for example, instead we very aggressively force separation and conflict between things and say they are opposites, or at war, such as good and evil, such as water and fire. The article points out that evil is quite possibly a part of good. Like shadows are a part of light, and potentially vice versa. I am currently writing a story called "What the Other Sees " and it is in essence my attempt to understand the precepts of good and evil as opposing forces of the same thing. The Main character is portrayed as being "good" however, he has the "curse" of having an alternate personality that is portrayed as Evil. In this storyline I try to assess the perceptual concept that evil is perceived and purely the way we think about it as matter of perception.

I think that there is no good and no evil, in terms of the way things are in the world , I feel like they are just different parts of a singular force, life perhaps? I don't know, but in the event of my own perception of good and evil I can not deny the fact that even with this idea I still hold reservations about things, and my own ideas of things that are good and things that are bad, but I try to understand them from the view point that the events or things that are different are not in and of themselves evil or bad, I, and or Society just don't like them. And to this I can only shrug my shoulders, and continue to move and think, Or can I? Who knows !?

-for fun!

A Trippy Good Time or Spiritual Enlightenment

This was a very interesting read, but I don't know why we are reading this in class. Did we read this in hopes that some of us would feel comfortable sharing our experiences from previous trips or is it in order to put the idea of tripping into our heads? Will reading this article make someone think twice about not doing these entheogenics? Next time one of the students of this class is out at a party and someone is offering shrums, will they be more likely to want to experiences situations like the ones in this read? I think they might be! According to this read the benefits of a trip could last months. Why would they not want to be enlightened or at least a better chance of becoming enlightened.