My currently active blog is on boylerworks.com
Richard Boyle
Sunday, August 30, 2020
Monday, December 12, 2016
Post-election efforts have become more political. For an abstract of my ongoing paper "Cracking the Buddhist Code," go the the second selection below. The one immediately next was written 12/10/16 as on op ed piece.
.................................................................................................................................................................
.................................................................................................................................................................
Illegitimate Donald?
Richard
P. Boyle, December 10, 2016
It is in the spirit of our nation
to keep an eye on the legitimacy of our government, because while legality is
determined by the law, legitimacy is granted by the people. In that spirit we
could state today: We hold this truth to be self-evident, that the people of
the United States did not elect Donald Trump. To appreciate how true this is we
need to look closely at the systematic distortions the Electoral College system
now imposes on the popular vote.
As everyone knows, Clinton led the popular vote by 2.0
percent or 2.7 million votes but lost in the Electoral College 305 to 233. This
raises red flags, of course, but what is really important is to understand the
forces that produced the distortion. Begin by to dividing each candidate’s
popular vote by the number of electors they won. This tells us that 281,266 popular votes for Clinton translated into one electoral vote, compared with 206,093 popular
votes per electoral vote for Trump. The ratio is 4 to 3 - it took four popular
votes for Clinton to produce the same Electoral College result as three votes
for Trump. Or, one vote for Clinton was worth only .73 of a vote for Trump.
The inequality occurred, of course, because
Clinton won her states by wider margins than Trump did, but “wasted” votes in
the process. In California she received twice as many votes as Trump, leaving
her with a blow-out victory but more than four million popular votes that were
redundant in California and worthless anywhere else. So the question becomes,
what produced the clumping together of Clinton votes into a smaller number of
states? It was not a random event but, like global
warming, was the end result of a chain of natural causes.
First, for most of our history people have been
moving from rural areas into cities, so that today just over half of us live in
the fifty-four metropolitan areas with populations of more than 1,000,000.
Second, these areas are concentrated in the states Clinton won. Third, large
cities are the vital engines of economic growth in this country, and they
attract people with higher levels of education to work in and propel that
progress. Fourth, people with more education increasingly vote for Democratic
candidates. Putting these together, people with more education tend to live in large
metropolitan areas, vote Democratic, and be discriminated against in presidential
elections.
So, how would this look to
the founders of our nation? We have always based the legitimacy of the
Electoral College on the spirit and word of the constitution. It is
clear that the Constitutional Convention intended the presidency to represent
all “people” (free male property owners) equally, balanced by a senate
representing each state equally. Whether “the people” should be represented
directly or indirectly, however, was a contentious problem requiring
considerable negotiation and compromise. Most of the founders preferred
indirect representation, whereby people in local areas elected representatives
they knew and trusted, who then met to decide who would be president. This arrangement
appealed to the South because the population on which the number of electors
was based could then include 3/5 of the slave population without allowing
slaves to actually vote. The next question is, how have these two bases for
legitimacy worked out in practice?
First, the founding fathers who thought the Electoral College system would result
in wiser and more informed decision-makers would be appalled to learn, 226
years later, that it now serves to give better educated voters considerably less
influence than those with lower levels of education. Second, as an expedient
compromise the Electoral College system worked – by giving the South more
electoral votes than the number of people eligible to vote justified, it
brought together in one union states that allowed slavery and states that
opposed it. The fight against slavery eventually succeeded and today all Americans
can vote, but the structural distortion currently built into the Electoral
College system continues to give the southern states and their bloc more voting
power – one-third more – than the rest of the country. In both cases, far from
deriving legitimacy from the constitution, the Electoral College today actually
contradicts and works in opposition
to what the founding fathers had in mind.
As a result, we now have a
president whose legitimate right to rule is questionable. There are, of course,
sources of legitimacy that do not depend on historical origins. In Max Weber’s
classic analysis, legitimacy can be earned
by action that furthers the interests and will of the people. According to a
recent Quinnipiac Poll, more than two-thirds of voters:
Agree
with the Roe v. Wade decision establishing a woman's right to abortion.
Express significant concern about global warming.
Oppose
lowering taxes on the wealthy.
There are many, many more
polls indicating where the will of the people lies, and where they would like a
legitimate president to lead them. Few of us may expect this to happen, but the
path is open. Obviously the best way to return legitimacy to the presidency
would be to eliminate the Electoral College entirely and let the people vote
directly (and in fact a majority of the public supports doing just this).
Meanwhile, I think we should
use the question of legitimacy as a form of protest. Picture bumper
stickers everywhere saying “Illegitimate Donald?” They could come with
instructions: “Put a line through the question mark when you have made up your
mind – only you can grant legitimacy.” And in general, we should continuously
remind everyone that the legitimacy of the Trump presidency will have to be
earned, whatever role the Russians played in it.
........................................................................................................................................................................
Cracking the
Buddhist Code:
A Contemporary
Theory of Awakening
(Slightly
revised version of a paper submitted
to the Journal of Consciousness Studies)
Abstract
The
theory proposes that what Buddhists and others have called awakening is the
same thing as “pure perceptual experience,” defined as the awareness our
perceptual systems would present to us if they acted on their own, with no
interference from conceptual systems. Two forms of interference are
particularly apt to interfere with pure perceptual experience: uncontrolled
inner speech (wandering thoughts, monkey mind) and distortion of perception to
fit reified conceptual structures. Monkey mind has been shown to be caused by
hyper-activity in the Default Mode Network (DMN) of the brain, which happens
whenever nothing else demands our attention. Reification occurs, especially, in
three kinds of symbolic structures, all of which we acquire as part of the
culture we are born into:
1.
Scripts, which describe situations and events
and prescribe appropriate behavior.
2.
Conceptual systems – theories, belief systems,
social reality, world views, theologies and ideologies, etc.
3.
The underlying construct of four dimensional spacetime,
in which we think we live.
The
fact that predispositions toward uncontrolled DMN activity and reification of
conceptual structures are essentially universal among humans means (at least
within the realm of science) that they must have evolutionary roots. However,
some people have and do overcome these two biological predispositions by
engaging in such special practices as meditation and forms of inquiry. The
theory seeks to specify how all this works in more detail and a way that allows
the predictions to be studied.
………………………………………………………………………………………………
Monday, October 19, 2015
Reviews by me for two new books:
Culadasa (John Yates) and Matthew Immergut, The Mind Illuminated: A Complete Mediation Guide Integrating Buddhist Wisdom and Brain Science, Dharma Treasure Press, 2015:
Culadasa (John Yates) and Matthew Immergut, The Mind Illuminated: A Complete Mediation Guide Integrating Buddhist Wisdom and Brain Science, Dharma Treasure Press, 2015:
“This book does an outstanding
job of both constructing a cognitive theory of how the mind works and
presenting a detailed handbook for learning and mastering meditation. The
result is a beautiful integration of theory and practice, whose parallel
strands lead to experientially, and account for conceptually, the radical shift
in consciousness we call awakening.”
Ken McLeod, A Trackless Path: A translation and commentary of the great completion (dzogchen) teaching of Jigme Linpa's The Vision Experience of Ever=Present Good, from Longchenpa's Heart Drop Circle (in press):
"Here we have the perfect
combination – a poem by the 18th century Tibetan mystic Jigme
Lingpa’s which reveals both the potential for awakening and the expression of
full awakening , translated brilliantly but authentically by McLeod for
contemporary Westerners. The Vision Experience of the Ever-present Good
cuts through to the essence of awakening in barely ten pages of poetry, leaving
a beautiful, almost scientific theory shimmering within. McLeod’s commentary
then draws out the subtle implications of each verse with consummate clarity,
giving us piercing glimpses of what awakening is like and making unavoidable
Jigme Lingpa’s lessons for how we should practice and how we should live our
lives, in order to learn about awakening for ourselves directly."
Still working on the theoretical model of ordinary and awakened awareness (or mind, or consciousness). It is coming along great, but keeps developing more implications that need to be dealt with.
Saturday, May 23, 2015
Advance copies of Realizing Awakened Consciousness are now available at 30% discount directly from Columbia University Press:
An abridged version of chapter 9 (the interview with Pat Enkyo O'Hara) is posted on the Tricycle Magazine blog:
http://cup.columbia.edu/book/realizing-awakened-consciousness/9780231170758 In the Promo Code space, enter BOYREA |
An abridged version of chapter 9 (the interview with Pat Enkyo O'Hara) is posted on the Tricycle Magazine blog:
http://www.tricycle.com/blog/you-yourself-are-oatmeal |
Features of the awakening experience
NOTE: For research which supports and complements this paper, see Jeffery A. Martin,
"A Continuum of Persistent Non-Symbolic Experiences in Adults," www.DrJefferyMartin.com.
"A Continuum of Persistent Non-Symbolic Experiences in Adults," www.DrJefferyMartin.com.
What Buddhist Teachers Say About Their Awakening
Experiences
Richard
P. Boyle
This
article is adapted from Realizing
Awakened Consciousness: Interviews with Buddhist Teachers and a New Perspective
on the Mind, Columbia University Press, June 9, 2015. (http://cup.columbia.edu/book//9780231170741)
The project began when
eleven Buddhist teachers agreed to tell me their path stories – how they got
started, what their training and practice involved, and what they had learned
(especially through insight experiences). The interviews, with Shinzen Young,
John Tarrant, Ken McLeod, Ajahn Amaro, Martine Batchelor, Shaila Catherine, Gil
Fronsdal, Stephen Batchelor, Pat Enkyo O’Hara, Bernie Glassman and Joseph
Goldstein, were rich in many ways. Here I concentrate on their descriptions of
“awakening” experiences.
Awakening, of course,
is a loaded term, controversial and with emotional implications, so I should
first clear the ground a bit with some definitions.
· The focus
was on how awareness is modified during an insight experience, where the
contents of awareness could include sensory perception, feelings, or inner
speech.
· I call
awakening a reality experience because
while the contents of awareness do not change there is a shift in perspective
and a pervasive feeling of being more in touch with the real world. This differs
from mystical experience, in which
something extra is added to the contents of awareness, and spiritual experience, in which feelings of loving and being loved predominate.
· An awakening
experience is usually temporary, but leaves a strong urge to work hard on one’s
practice and oneself in order to make what was learned a more pervasive part of
one’s life.
Note that by
concentrating on awakened awareness, the term enlightenment is left open – it could be reserved for more
complete, permanent, and ultimate states, or refer to the rational
enlightenment of Immanuel Kant and the Age of Reason.
Awakening seldom
happens without preparation. The preparation reported in the interviews concentrated,
first, on quieting the mind until silence prevailed and inner speech occurred
only rarely, and second, on letting go of attachments to desires, habits, and
ideas. Significant progress in developing these two qualities seems to be, if
not a necessary condition, at least very helpful for awakening. Something Jack Kornfield
once said about silence illustrates this well:
"It
is like going from the windswept, weather-filled atmosphere, getting to the
surface of the ocean and then dropping down below the level of the water, like
a scuba diver, into a completely silent and different dimension. While there
are some reflections that might go by, it is a completely different state of
consciousness.” (Shankman, The
Experience of Samadhi: An In-depth Exploration of Buddhist Meditation,
p.116)
Similarly, letting go of
conditionings can lead to peace and equanimity even as the world one has been
living in seems less and less real.
The reality experiences
to be considered next begin as this preparation deepens. They were often
reported to occur in parallel, symbiotically, as in Joseph Goldstein’s quote
from the 12th-century Korean Zen master Chinul, “sudden insight, gradual
cultivation.” For example, meditators often report an experience in which the
perceptual content of their conscious awareness becomes distinctly more vivid,
and is reinforced in their efforts to explore this by further embracing
silence.
My analytic method
consisted of sorting the experiences described in the interviews into categories
on the basis of similarity. These were qualitative judgments and necessarily
subjective. I have tried to make my decisions explicit so that others could
examine them and reach their own conclusions. I also sent my conclusions back
to the teachers, asking them to correct or comment on my shortcomings.
No Reification.
The
first group of quotes express the fundamental Buddhist concept of
non-attachment, but I am going to define this is a somewhat different way. Humans
construct ideas using language, which we invented (animals get along fine
without it). Verbally communicated ideas become part of group culture, adding
enormously to the evolutionary success humans have enjoyed. A funny thing
happened during this evolutionary process, however – we began to accept ideas not only as useful
constructions but as principles not to be questioned, not as just one
alternative among many possible ways of representing the world but the way
things really are and should be. This is especially true for ideas about the
self and the social reality in which the self lives. To believe that an idea is
real for reasons that go beyond the context in which we invented it is to reify
it. Suddenly we have emotional attachments reinforcing the culture of the group
and the social reality of its members. So this first group of descriptions of
awakened awareness will be called No
Reification.
Martine
Batchelor describes a preliminary version of de-reification, which occurred
during her years in a Korean Zen monastery:
“My domestic responsibility was to clean the
communal bathroom. I would do this chore at four o’clock every afternoon. At
the same time, though, another nun would appear and proceed to wash herself
before performing an afternoon ceremony at which she had to officiate. This
went on for several weeks and I began to feel extremely resentful. Then one day
I went down at four o’clock, and it suddenly didn’t matter any more that she
was there washing herself. It was my time to clean and her time to wash. How wonderful it felt to be free of
resentment! Although a small incident, it was somehow very meaningful to me. Without
my intentionally forcing any changes, it dissolved the grasping and attachments
that gave rise to the irritation.” (Women in Korean Zen, p. 41)
Social
reality provides us with scripts that tell us how important our efforts are and
when we should feel irritated. When we become less attached to those ideas life
becomes easier.
Letting
go of social reality can take more subtle forms. Here Gil Fronsdal describes an
experience that occurred fairly early in his path, during a sesshin:
“We
would remain in our meditation posture while servers brought us tea and a
cookie. I received the tea and held the cup in my hands. As I lifted the cup to
my lips and the tea water went into my mouth, the world stopped! This stopping
was a remarkable experience for me that I have never been able to adequately
convey in words. Part of the experience was my mind having the unusual thought,
‘As the tea touches my tongue, I stop the sip.’ I was quite surprised that in
the words and in the experience there was no self. Without any of my usual
self-referencing it was as if everything stood still.”
What
was involved in Fronsdal’s sensation that the world stopped? Start with the
idea that ordinary awareness is structured by social reality, which flows along
over time like the script of a movie. When social reality is de-reified and the
mind is silent, the script of the moment loses its hold and our perceptual
experience of the moment takes over. A moment has no time dimension, and our
usual awareness seems to stop, to stand still. Without the scripts and drama of
social reality the perceptual world just is, quietly.
John Tarrant
also mentioned a moment during a sesshin when time stood still: “That’s when
everything stopped . . . I started just
laughing. Then everything seemed filled with light, and all the people seemed
wonderful.” And later: “Then I thought, ‘Oh, that’s in a way how I’ve always
experienced reality, as sort of a flash that shifts’.”
Although none of the
interviews mention this word, this experience of a “stopping” of awareness
seems similar to what is called in the Buddhist literature “cessation” or Nirodha.
A somewhat different kind of
experience of No Reification, described by Shaila Catherine, lasted over a much
longer period of time:
“Everything
appeared as just concepts representing dynamic processes or changing things. I
knew what my social responsibilities, commitments and duties included, and I
performed family and work tasks effectively. I could function well, because the
concepts were clear. But each moment of seeing, hearing, feeling, and tasting
was known right in the moment of contact, as ephemeral and completely devoid of
any reference to me. It was a surprisingly different way of being in the world.
I felt light, buoyant and unperturbed by any event.”
The scripts and role responsibilities of
everyday life were still understood clearly, but as impersonal concepts without
emotional attachment to the self.
A few days after interviewing Catherine and
three other teachers in the San Francisco area, I had an awakening experience
myself which resembles hers in suddenly feeling freed of all attachments to
social reality (thousands of attachments, like Gulliver tied down by the
Lilliputians). About ten seconds into that experience a voice in my (sociologist’s)
head said, “So that’s what they mean by nothingness
– no social reality.” Which was not quite true, of course - I still knew all
about social reality, it simply was no longer reified.
Summary. I use No reification and No emotional
attachments to social reality or the self as equivalent, but prefer No reification as the label. Letting go
of emotional attachments implies that the attachments can be “de-grasped” of
one at a time until none are left. Letting go is certainly a critical part of
the work one does to prepare for awakening, but the hypothesis advanced here is
that when awakening happens all remaining emotional attachments are removed, in
one sweep. No reification says that
the world of social reality no longer feels real – its emotional basis for ontological
support has vanished, and what remains is just living in the world as it is. We
feel a sense of freedom and lightness, peace and equanimity.
No Separation.
I begin with this
example from Shinzen Young’s interview:
“I put down
the cushion and sat down, and the instant I sat down, the koan was there: ‘Who
am I?’ Then suddenly there was no boundary to me at all. I was so shocked I
actually got up. And there was still no boundary to me. I was walking around,
looking at things, and there was no border between me and anything else...
there was a kind of intimacy between inside and outside . . . There was just no
boundary separating me and what was around me.”
A similar experience was reported by Enkyo
O’Hara:
“This [experience] was a kind of opening of
compassion. What it was, was the dropping of the distance between me and the
other, which one could say is the experience of awakening, when you realize
there is no wall between you and the other. The opening of compassion just
dissolved that sense of separation…”
My interpretation is that ordinary awareness is
organized from the perspective of the self as protagonist, which is assumed to
operate in the world as an autonomous actor. It is thus set apart from people
and objects in its environment, and appears to itself to be separated. When we
awaken to the fact that this construction is artificial (that is, when the self
is dereified), we see that we are actually just a part of what is going on and
not separate from it. When we stop seeing things from the perspective of a self
separated from other people, we instantly feel closer to them. Realizing the
illusory nature of the separated self, we no longer need to protect it, which
opens up a greater sense of empathy and compassion for others.
When I
asked John Tarrant, “What is life like for you now compared with before you
left Australia?” his answer also had to do with being free of walls:
“Well, I had so much
going on in my mind then. The simplest way to put it is, I was caught. I would
have moments of freedom, and huge amounts of non-freedom. I mean one easy way
to describe ‘being present’ is in terms of the interior decoration model. It’s
like you’re in prison when you’re trying to just paint the walls rather than
kick them down. Even if you’re trying to kick down the walls you’re still in
prison. You can’t find any walls when you’re free.”
Tarrant expresses the same idea without
specifically referring to the self: Social reality brings with it barriers that
not only separate us from what is going on around us but prevent us from living
life freely, as it can be lived when the walls disappear.
Ajahn
Amaro also talked about eliminating walls or boundaries. He relates this
experience to a specific aspect of self, the self that cares about performing
well in the world of social reality. His story begins when, after many years of
practice, he began to feel dull and constrained, as if trapped in a little gray
box. Then he tried meditating on a classic question Buddhism uses for
investigating the self: “Who Am I?”
“What happened was that
the walls of the little gray box just fell open. It was like suddenly being in
a field of flowers, and warm sunlight: ‘Oh, this is different. It’s a whole
different atmosphere.’ I’d had that experience early on, about how the inflated
sense of self and ambition and competition can take over, but I’d never
realized how insidious, pervasive an effect this more subtle kind of self, this
‘me, the doer’ can have… the influence of that presence had been invisible,
like gravity – you didn’t even notice it was there.”
These
four teachers all mention a disappearance of barriers, boundaries or walls that
had previously closed them in and created a sense of separation. They all point
to the same cause - ideas of self and its relation to others that are heavily reified.
Here we have another way in which awakening does not add anything to awareness but simply removes the feeling of separation which attachments to the cultural
construction of self has imposed.
I will
also note the awakening experience described by James Austin, a neurologist,
author, and long-time Zen student. He had this particular experience while
standing on the surface platform of a London subway station:
“The
scene was transformed... There was no viewer. Every familiar psychic sense that
“I” was viewing this scene had vanished. A fresh, new awareness perceived the
whole scene impersonally with the cool, clinical detachment of an anonymous
mirror, not pausing to register the paradox that no I-Me-Mine was doing the viewing.”
The
sudden shift in perspective, whereby he is no longer the central actor but
simply one part of what is going on around him, is familiar. Austin calls this
an allocentric (other-centered) perspective, in contrast with the egocentric
perspective of ordinary consciousness. In addition, though, the phrase “cool,
clinical detachment” suggests dereification of social reality.
Summary. Awakened
consciousness arises from perceiving the environment as a whole system, with
the self as simply one part of it. The experience is distinctly different from
the perspective of a self that stands apart from the rest of the system. In
awakened awareness we experience ourselves as one part of what is going on
around us, not as the director or principal actor in that system, and not
separate from it. As a consequence, we feel more intimately involved in our
environment, freer, more connected with what is going on and more sensitive to the
existence and feelings of those around us.
Not knowing.
Ken McLeod reported having this conversation
with an old friend, during which the friend asked him:
“‘Ken,
what’s life like for you these days?’ I replied, ‘Well, imagine that you’re
walking over the Grand Canyon.’ He said, ‘Walking into the Grand Canyon?’ ‘No, over the Grand Canyon.’ Now, it’s not
the Wile E. Coyote thing, where if you look down you start to fall. You just
[walk] – and you’re not sure what’s up, what’s down, what’s forward, what’s
back. That’s what life is for me today.”
McLeod
talks about proceeding through life without any conscious expectation or
concern for what is going to happen next. Consider the similarity of this with what
Bernie Glassman says about not knowing:
“Koan
study is set up to try to get you to experience . . . the state of not knowing,
the state of complete openness, of being completely open to everything. ‘Not
knowing’ is an essential part of Zen training – getting you to experience what
we call the sauce from which everything comes. It’s a state where there are no
attachments to any of your conditionings.”
“No attachments to any of your conditionings”
means, in the language used here, no reification of the self and social reality,
so Not knowing includes No reification. But something more is
added, a dynamic quality that includes allowing “the sauce from which
everything comes” to take over. The combination produces a new kind of
experience.
Stephen
Batchelor describes his version vividly:
“All
of a sudden I found myself plunged into the intense, unraveling cascade of life
itself. That opaque and sluggish sense of myself, which invariably greeted me
each time I closed my eyes to meditate, had given way to something
extraordinarily rich and fluid. It was as though someone had released a brake
that had been preventing a motor from turning and suddenly the whole vehicle
sprang into throbbing life. Yet it was utterly silent and still. I was
collapsing and disintegrating, yet simultaneously emerging and reconstituting.
There was an unmistakable sense of proceeding along a trajectory, but without
any actual movement at all.” (Confession
of a Buddhist Atheist, pp. 29-30)
Stephen goes on to talk about how fluid and
dynamic this way of living feels, and like Glassman he points out how
reification of the self stands in the way of letting one slip into not knowing.
Robert Forman calls this “non-resistance” and compares it with learning a
secret: “There’s a buoyancy to life in knowing the secret, a secret you did not
know you did not know, a lightness beneath your breath… You come to carry an
unbidden translucence.” (Enlightenment
Ain’t What It’s Cracked Up To Be, p. 196)
Summary: Not
knowing requires letting go of, de-reifying, the self of social reality, which
says that we act on the basis of conscious awareness. The notion that we are
rational decision-makers is replaced by fully accepting that our actions emerge
at each moment directly from unconscious processing. What we are aware of and
what we find ourselves doing in each moment emerge together as our brains and
bodies interact with our environment. Without self-consciousness life feels
fluid and dynamic, delicious and relaxed.
Concluding:
I want
to emphasize that these three properties of awakened awareness are tentative.
They were induced by one person (me) from interviews with eleven Buddhist
teachers and one scientist, a few accounts published elsewhere, and my own
experience. One pressing need, therefore, is to expand the sample size and get
comments and analysis from other people. Readers who
have had experiences which fit or do not fit into these categories are invited
to email me about them at boylemmx@gmail.com. A design for further research is posted on https://dana.io/realizing-awakened-consciousness.
Finally, while scientists do this kind of thing because we love
doing it, others may ask what the point is. My answer is that there are the
beginnings of a scientific theory of awakening here, which may or may not help
people who are on a path toward awakening. What I would argue is that
integrating research on awakening with the scientific study of consciousness
generally will attract the attention of non-Buddhists who believe in science. Just
as research has done with meditation, research on awakening may help dissolve the
walls which presently separate it from other topics in mainstream
culture. After all, the Buddha always maintained that awakening is part of the
natural world, available to everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)